 
Flanders_field
Member
Username: Flanders_field
Post Number: 1848
Registered: 01-2008
| | Posted on Saturday, March 21, 2009 - 9:09 pm: |    |
Latest Gallup polls updated daily on a three day rolling average, indicate a slight uptick in President Obama's approval ratings, and a corresponding downtick in his disapproval ratings:
Obama Job Approval
Apparently his appearance on the Tonight show did not harm, and in fact may have boosted the public's positive opinion of him, gaffe notwithstanding. |
Gibran
Member
Username: Gibran
Post Number: 4615
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, March 21, 2009 - 9:45 pm: | |
while I disagree with how Obama portrayed his bowling ability.. I have to agree with most posters that it is the actions that speak louder...his budget included funding for people with disabilities under the RSA re-authorization... His mistake will increase visibility for people with developmental disabilities as they gain a voice in this debate...but rest assured those who are first to speak up have to examine what have they done to increase the quality of life for people with disabilities,,,and that is where I was so vocal about those who show up for photo opts and criticize others for mistakes when they themselves while in power to make vast changes ( like state funding etc. ) don't ...
actions speak louder than words ...I would be waging that programs for people with disability will fend better under Obama than under others. I also would be very ready to explain that 23% percent of those who are homeless have Mental Illness and are there because Mental Health programs were never fully funded...(as Gistok points out correctly).
Palin brought attention to her "actions" and if you examine her language you would understand that in the disability rights community...labels that separate are sometimes inappropriate ...people with disability live in our world too..her words are appropriate for children (all children are precious)but as people with developmental disabilities grow they become people like everyone else and should be respected, not pitied...
language needs to be examined and deemed archaic as our culture evolves...and maybe the good will come from this slip will be an open discussion on how to eliminate language of exclusion and patronizing... |
Mikeg
Member
Username: Mikeg
Post Number: 2288
Registered: 12-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, March 21, 2009 - 10:29 pm: | |
quote:....when former governor John Engler decided to close down state mental health clinics and hospitals.
This guy remembers it much differently, and he should know:
quote:C. Patrick Babcock, former mental health director under Govs. William Milliken and James Blanchard, said the mental health crisis stems from decisions made after the state began closing state psychiatric hospitals 25 years ago.
"We had in mind an effective mental health system that would serve people humanely and professionally and in the community," Babcock said. "The problem is something went drastically wrong in the process. We stopped making an investment in the community side."
Source: "Coalition tackles mental health of prisoners", Lansing State Journal, January 25, 2008. (link to excerpt)
2008 - 25 = 1983
John Engler took office on Jan. 1, 1991
Gistock isn't the only one who likes to re-write history. Here's a "time-line challenged" quote from the "Updated History of NAMI Michigan" which is the Michigan affiliate of the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill:
quote:Beginning around 1990, under Governor Engler and James Haveman, Director of the Department of Mental Health, the State began closing many of the State-operated mental health hospitals and facilities.
Engler was in office when the final and most visible closings took place but that was not around 1983 nor 1990.
Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the "truth". |
Jcole
Member
Username: Jcole
Post Number: 6158
Registered: 04-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, March 21, 2009 - 10:33 pm: | |
Engler was the one who closed the Lafayette Clinic in Detroit, much to the detriment of all those who were patients there. I wrote a letter to the then-Governor expressing my concern, and received a form letter in response telling me what a good thing it was for the state. Bull shit. |
Jimaz
Member
Username: Jimaz
Post Number: 6833
Registered: 12-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, March 21, 2009 - 10:37 pm: | |
That so much effort is being expended on this issue suggests to me that greater attacks against the president have proven, and continue to be proving, futile behind the scenes.
It seems incredulous that a Chicago politician can't be assaulted effectively with accusations greater than this.
Related: Special Olympian has tips to spare for Obama.
This could be fun.
Kolan McConiughey |
Gistok
Member
Username: Gistok
Post Number: 6241
Registered: 08-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, March 21, 2009 - 11:11 pm: | |
Mikeg...
Blaming Milliken is like blaming Eisenhower for the Vietnam quagmire...
There's plenty of blame to go around on both sides of the aisle... but let's give everyone their fair share... |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 19564
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, March 21, 2009 - 11:18 pm: | |
Those polls reflect the brief respite evident in the stock market. |
Jams
Member
Username: Jams
Post Number: 7932
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 21, 2009 - 11:27 pm: | |
OK, right, sure, etc. |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 19567
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, March 21, 2009 - 11:38 pm: | |
Watch them over time, you will see. |
Jams
Member
Username: Jams
Post Number: 7934
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 21, 2009 - 11:56 pm: | |
OK, sure, right, etc. |
Mikeg
Member
Username: Mikeg
Post Number: 2289
Registered: 12-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, March 22, 2009 - 9:00 am: | |
quote:
Blaming Milliken is like blaming Eisenhower for the Vietnam quagmire..
How's Milliken to blame? He was not in office on Jan. 1, 1983, James Blanchard was.
An honest allocation of blame would read something like this:
Governor James Blanchard (D) and his administration, along with the Michigan Legislature, began the dismantling of the state's mental health system in the mid-1980s and John Engler (R) delivered the "coup de grace" in 1992.
Curiously, the NAMI Michigan group in their attempt to lay all the blame on Engler, forgot to "scrub" this sentence on their history web page:
quote:"Hank Spitzig testified before Representative Joseph Young, Sr., and the House Appropriations Subcommittee regarding proposed budget reductions in mental health for the fiscal year 1986-1987." |
Danny
Member
Username: Danny
Post Number: 4569
Registered: 02-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, March 22, 2009 - 9:31 am: | |
You all folks voted a black president to lead the free world against un-American principalities so DEAL WITH IT! He knows that every word he says will impact his political career.
You just have to be patient with Obama. He's only being president for 12 weeks and you all think that he is NO hope for this nation; just a "house negro" and a political performer. |
Rjk
Member
Username: Rjk
Post Number: 1267
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 22, 2009 - 9:42 am: | |
I have a cousin who suffers from severe mental illness who spent time in Lafayette Clinic and the hospital out in Pontiac among many other hospitals. Let me tell you, those places were dumps that should have been closed. You couldn't walk through the Pontiac hospital without thinking of "One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest." I first started observing this when Blanchard was governor. By no means am I saying that it's the fault of Blanchard, but blaming this states mental health problems on Engler is just foolish.
There's plenty of blame to go around but some people refuse to see it because of their partisan politics.
Democrats could control the governoship for the next twenty years and some of you people will still be blaming Engler. |
Mikeg
Member
Username: Mikeg
Post Number: 2293
Registered: 12-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, March 22, 2009 - 10:08 am: | |
quote:Democrats could control the governoship for the next twenty years and some of you people will still be blaming Engler.
I agree with the sentiments you expressed regarding allocation of blame for the changes in the state's mental health system.
However in the future, having a more complete Internet "paper trail" will make it much more difficult for rabid partisans to re-write history. Compared to Engler, there is very little out there on the role of the Blanchard Administration and the State Legislature in this chapter of the state mental health system's history. |
Det_ard
Member
Username: Det_ard
Post Number: 53
Registered: 02-2009
| | Posted on Sunday, March 22, 2009 - 12:12 pm: | |
The policy of deinstitutionalization was underway across the country well before Engler, as Jiminnm states. Progressives and others considered it the humane thing to do.
Now we hear all this revisionist history about evil John Engler. Never mind that Blanchard was in office for much of it, and that Granholm could have done something in her now over-long administration to correct whatever she saw as a problem.
That so many on the other side willing or unthinkingly ignore this fact and promote their own distorted mythology is telling.
Here's what actually transpired.
|
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 3792
Registered: 06-2008
| | Posted on Sunday, March 22, 2009 - 12:55 pm: | |
"What if the Obama is criticized for taking too much time off, for example, and he self-deprecatingly, laughingly, offhandedly says "I guess I'm just your typical lazy nig___." That's OK as well? "
It would be a little disappointing, indeed, but it certainly would not make me more likely to support a party whose policies I disagree with. Why should it?
Do you really think Obama's supporters would cast their votes in a way that sends our soldiers off to fight pointless wars, gives tax cuts to the wealthy, and keeps working class Americans from obtaining adequate health care because of some comments made by one individual?
And BTW, it made surprise you to learn that Obama already made a similar comment to the one in your hypo. During the campaign, he was late to a campaign stop in Las Vegas, so he opened his remarks with a joke by saying that he was intentionally a little late in order to prove his "blackness". Some thought it was funny, some thought it was tasteless. But the fallout among his supporters? Zilch. Why? Because we agree with his politics.
The right is not going to gain any support by trying to smear the character of a respectable man who has the pulse of the working class, not while the country is in the shape it's in. Instead, they should be focused on figuring out why the American people fired their asses in the first place and making corrections accordingly. |
Flanders_field
Member
Username: Flanders_field
Post Number: 1851
Registered: 01-2008
| | Posted on Sunday, March 22, 2009 - 1:26 pm: | |
quote:Instead, they should be focused on figuring out why the American people fired their asses
After reading the comments from the RW on the more national forums of Townhall, and Free Republic, its because of RINOs and CINOs like Kathleen Parker, Colin Powell, Sen Chuck Hagel, ect.. and of course the MSM and their biased attacks on poor little Sarah Palin. Wow, do they ever hate Parker and her column on Townhall!! I really look forward to a new column by her every week just to read their comments. |
D_mcc
Member
Username: D_mcc
Post Number: 1754
Registered: 12-2007
| | Posted on Sunday, March 22, 2009 - 1:39 pm: | |
I'm sorry...first and foremost the president is a PERSON...People...make mistakes, As I stated before...if this little gaffe is his biggest mistake, let us all rejoice |
Mikeg
Member
Username: Mikeg
Post Number: 2294
Registered: 12-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, March 22, 2009 - 2:48 pm: | |
quote:I'm sorry...first and foremost the president is a PERSON
So true, but that didn't keep GWB's political enemies from characterizing him as a sub-human primate.
Without his teleprompter, the silver-tongued Obama has been a veritable gaffe machine:
During the Jan. 5, 2008 debate:
quote:"You're likable enough, Hillary."
Eighty miles and one state away in Sioux Falls, South Dakota:
quote:"Thank you, Sioux City."
In Sunrise, FL
quote:"How's it going Sunshine?"
In San Francisco, CA, explaining his inability to connect with PA voters,
quote:"They cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
Regarding his white grandmother:
quote:"....a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe."
quote:"But she is a typical white person who, uh, if she sees somebody on the street that she doesn't know there's a reaction that's been been bred into our experiences..."
Just days after he was elected:
quote:"I didn't want to get into a Nancy Reagan thing about, you know, doing any seances."
And now,
quote:"It's like - it was like Special Olympics or something,"
Sure, some of them are trivial, but others reveal an unsavory trace of elitism and arrogance. |
Gistok
Member
Username: Gistok
Post Number: 6245
Registered: 08-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, March 22, 2009 - 3:06 pm: | |
quote:However in the future, having a more complete Internet "paper trail" will make it much more difficult for rabid partisans to re-write history. Compared to Engler, there is very little out there on the role of the Blanchard Administration and the State Legislature in this chapter of the state mental health system's history.
... and anyone want to guess who the Senate Majority Leader during Blanchard's tenure was... John Engler...
Yes, there is enough blame to go around for both political parties. Blanchard's involvement was from 1983-91. Engler's involvement was from 1983-2003 (he was elected Senate Majority Leader in 1984). |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 3793
Registered: 06-2008
| | Posted on Sunday, March 22, 2009 - 3:10 pm: | |
"So true, but that didn't keep GWB's political enemies from characterizing him as a sub-human primate."
Nobody here is questioning the appropriateness of people using a person's remarks to gain a political advantage. That's all part of the game. Many of us just don't expect it to score the right any points in this case.
"Sure, some of them are trivial, but others reveal an unsavory trace of elitism and arrogance."
And yet we still support him. Go figure. Over 2/3 of the country gives Obama their approval right now. Again, the right is going to need to come up with something better than character assassination to compete with this guy. |
D_mcc
Member
Username: D_mcc
Post Number: 1755
Registered: 12-2007
| | Posted on Sunday, March 22, 2009 - 3:15 pm: | |
I didn't dislike Bush because of his misspeaking, I would say that was based on more of his policies and defiance of international law |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 19582
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, March 22, 2009 - 4:10 pm: | |
International law was not defied, and if it were, our sovereignty supersedes it. |
Gibran
Member
Username: Gibran
Post Number: 4617
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Sunday, March 22, 2009 - 5:29 pm: | |
how many dictators have that attitude.... |
1kielsondrive
Member
Username: 1kielsondrive
Post Number: 1115
Registered: 08-2008
| | Posted on Sunday, March 22, 2009 - 11:37 pm: | |
My sister was a Special Olympian. She's bright, engaging, talkative, works 2 days per week, has pets, lives in her own apartment and is the host to our family gatherings. She wasn't a bit upset about President Obama's remarks. In fact she likes and supports him. |
Jimaz
Member
Username: Jimaz
Post Number: 6835
Registered: 12-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, March 22, 2009 - 11:39 pm: | |
Det_ard, why did you neglect to respond to my above question?quote:Det_ard, just to clear away a detail that may only appear to be related, could you explain why you chose that particular username?
Thanks. |
Det_ard
Member
Username: Det_ard
Post Number: 54
Registered: 02-2009
| | Posted on Monday, March 23, 2009 - 9:57 am: | |
My initials are A.R.D. When I signed up they were capitalized. I guess the software reduces everything after the first letter to lower case. The Det part is obvious.
BTW, anyone who wants to help with the developmentally disabled, check out Angel's Place. They're a local group of Christian homes for adults with developmental disabilities. They offer a very caring environment in a small group setting. Typically they have three or four developmentally disabled adults living with a caretaker (a "retired" nun in my experience) in a single family home. The homes are located in regular suburban subdivisions. Their quality of life is high compared to a more institutional environment. I just saw some of the ladies yesterday because they take swim lessons at the same place my kids take lessons.
You can cook them a meal, help take them out some where for an outing, donate money, help with house maintenance and/or help with their yearly picnic or other events. Our family has gotten to know the residents at a couple of the houses close to us and they're great people.
http://www.angelsplace.com/ |
Rb336
Member
Username: Rb336
Post Number: 8742
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Monday, March 23, 2009 - 10:34 am: | |
"International law was not defied, and if it were, our sovereignty supersedes it"
ahh, bats. when we sign a treaty, it becomes the supreme law of the land, except for the constitution |
_sj_
Member
Username: _sj_
Post Number: 1737
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 23, 2009 - 10:46 am: | |
quote:My sister was a Special Olympian. She's bright, engaging, talkative, works 2 days per week, has pets, lives in her own apartment and is the host to our family gatherings. She wasn't a bit upset about President Obama's remarks. In fact she likes and supports him.
Good for her, but IMO you should be upset for her. All we do in this country is just move from defenseless group to another. |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 3798
Registered: 06-2008
| | Posted on Monday, March 23, 2009 - 11:02 am: | |
"ahh, bats. when we sign a treaty, it becomes the supreme law of the land, except for the constitution"
You have it half right. The constitution is the supreme law of the land, but treaties have the same status as federal statutes, so they are superseded by the constitution.
If a president claims that a certain interpretation of a treaty conflicts with his constitutional powers, but the voters disagree with his interpretation, the proper way to contest that argument is not to allege that the President is bound by international law. Rather, the proper way is to settle the dispute through the political process, by electing a president who agrees with the voters' interpretation, which is what the American people just did. |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 19607
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Monday, March 23, 2009 - 3:46 pm: | |
Thejesus?? You agree with me? Will wonders never cease? |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 3801
Registered: 06-2008
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 24, 2009 - 1:36 pm: | |
This isn't an issue of agreement or disagreement, Bats. I was responding to an incorrect statement of the law. Your far right political views are not relevant to my response. |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 19627
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 24, 2009 - 4:57 pm: | |
Conservatives rely on rational thought, so...under close inspection, when discussing scientific and legal issues, the conservatives usually come out on the winning side. |
Flanders_field
Member
Username: Flanders_field
Post Number: 1857
Registered: 01-2008
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 24, 2009 - 6:18 pm: | |
Many people who consider themselves conservative, rely on the Bible when discussing scientific issues, especially those involving creationism vs evolution or pro-choice vs pro-life, for example. So apparently only their belief in God and the bible is what they rely upon when they discuss certain scientific issues, and not any so-called rational thoughts of their own or others. |
Gibran
Member
Username: Gibran
Post Number: 4619
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 24, 2009 - 9:40 pm: | |
cc that is an absolute ... and so unscientific |
Detroitej72
Member
Username: Detroitej72
Post Number: 1382
Registered: 05-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 24, 2009 - 10:00 pm: | |
Bat's quote:Conservatives rely on rational thought
______________________________ ____________________
Yeh, Ann "harpies"Coulter is pretty rational, as is Rush(I hope he fails)Limbaugh, Hannitey, Beck, etc...
Bats again: when discussing scientific and legal issues, the conservatives usually come out on the winning side.
______________________________ ____________________
Funny how most neo-cons still believe in Creationism, that's not a strong case for science, now is it?
I could go on, but I'll give Bats some mercy... |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 19693
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Friday, March 27, 2009 - 1:11 am: | |
Creationism, when viewed as religion must be viewed, as symbolism, is plausible and fits with evolution.
All of those names listed are examples of people expressing mostly rational arguments. Notice that you dropped some names, but no examples of irrational arguments made by them...weak.
Mercy? For me? You are kidding yourself. |
Rb336
Member
Username: Rb336
Post Number: 8770
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Friday, March 27, 2009 - 8:26 am: | |
funny, bats. show me one of their "rational" arguments, then explain how it is "rational" since you obviously have a different definition of the term than virtually everyone else in the English-speaking world |
Sirrealone
Member
Username: Sirrealone
Post Number: 278
Registered: 01-2007
| | Posted on Friday, March 27, 2009 - 12:49 pm: | |
(tongue in cheek)
Independent Investigation:
Special Olympics Fixed
Many 'Winners' Found to Have Lost Badly
http://www.theonion.com/conten t/node/50102 |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 19714
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, March 28, 2009 - 1:06 am: | |
Whose arguments?
Well, just off the top of my head then. Sean Hannity pushing for domestic energy as a real world solution to the impotence of the US to play a role in energy prices. By having a significant role in the supply, we would gain a good measure of control in the process. Liberals continue to lamely restrict domestic energy usage and push premature, not market driven alternates to the benefit of themselves and their friends (Al Gore and the like). They do so by limiting individual property rights.
How's that for a rational argument? |
Jams
Member
Username: Jams
Post Number: 7983
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 28, 2009 - 8:46 am: | |
Not very good. |
Bigb23
Member
Username: Bigb23
Post Number: 4346
Registered: 11-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, March 28, 2009 - 8:57 am: | |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 19714
Registered: 11-2006
That explains alot. |
20043_stotter
Member
Username: 20043_stotter
Post Number: 861
Registered: 03-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, March 28, 2009 - 9:25 am: | |
That post exposes compromised intelligence at the very least. |
20043_stotter
Member
Username: 20043_stotter
Post Number: 862
Registered: 03-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, March 28, 2009 - 9:27 am: | |
Not your post Bigb23, you know who I mean. |
3rdworldcity
Member
Username: 3rdworldcity
Post Number: 1388
Registered: 01-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, March 28, 2009 - 8:00 pm: | |
Ccbatson, your post regarding the Liberal's domestic energy policy and personal property rights is a very rational argument. That's why few on here will comprehend it. (Thank God the Libs have those views on energy and are in control of Congress. More money for selfish old me.) |
3rdworldcity
Member
Username: 3rdworldcity
Post Number: 1389
Registered: 01-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, March 28, 2009 - 8:24 pm: | |
Detroitej72: I'm far from being a neo-con and I believe in Creationism. As a person in the oil business, I spend a lot of time in the geological past and I also believe in evolution. No thinking person should have to argue that the facts (not, theories) are mutually exclusive.
Oh, you'll be glad to know that our Texas Board of Education has voted yesterday to approve a science curriculum which permits teachers and textbooks to raise questions about evolution. I don't agree that they should have put it that way. What the vote yesterday does is permit Creationism and evolution to be taught and criticized academically, as they should be. The impact will be great, according to many, because TX is the largest customer for textbooks in the country, and publishers generally reproduce TX textbooks to be sold throughout the country.
I recently read (or tried to read) a book on the "big bang" theory. I believe the theory is preposterous as can be (or at least the concept is not humanly comprehensible), but I guess the universe could have started with a mass the size of a pea (that's the theory.) Who/what created the pea sized mass? A "first cause uncaused?" |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 19726
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, March 28, 2009 - 11:35 pm: | |
I rest my case...not a single coherent argument in opposition to the one conservative rational argument example that I presented above (paraphrased from Sean Hannity...I can't take credit, but do agree strongly). |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 19727
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, March 28, 2009 - 11:37 pm: | |
3rdworld...don't be so quick to dismiss the astrophysics theories of the big bang and the like. Even if accepted, as you already point out, symbolic religious explanations (ie creationism) can fit with the science. |
New threads cannot be started on this page. The threads above are previous posts made to this thread.