Jump to content
Robert.CFRN Robert.CFRN (Member)

Conservative nurses

Politics   (38,439 Views 504 Comments)
2,054 Visitors; 72 Posts
If you find this topic helpful leave a comment.

You are reading page 15 of Conservative nurses. If you want to start from the beginning Go to First Page.

Politically, I consider myself:

  1. 1. Politically, I consider myself:

    • Socialist
      25
    • Liberal
      129
    • Moderate
      47
    • Conservative
      89
    • Libertarian
      30

320 members have participated

Personally, I hate the use of labels to pigeonhole myself in one school of thought or the other. In some areas, I could be viewed as very liberal, in other areas, very conservative, and in some moderate. What I believe is based on my experiences and many of my views have changed over the years.

 

I do believe in equal opportunity for everyone, however, I do not believe that is what is happening. I totally disagree that the government forces anyone to play the victim role. Yes, dedication and hard work should be able to get you ahead in life. Unfortunately, in today's economy, this is just not happening. With the tremendous loss of good paying jobs, and the replacement with less well paying jobs, hard work just doesn't get you as far as it used to. Also, with the skyrocketing cost of college tuition, too many people are already far into debt before they even start. Unless you make under 40,000./yr as a family, you will not qualify for grants or assistance for college. And unless you have the money to pay for all college expenses, you will need some sort of student loan. So for many, the choice is go to college and acquire massive debt, or go out into the workforce and hope you can earn enough to survive and maybe go to college later in life. I should add, the government will continue to use your parents income as guideline for federal and state aid up til the age 24, unless you are married, have a baby or are in the military. If your parents are extremely poor you can go to college on grants. If your parents are extremely wealthy, they can pay for it. So while the opportunity to go to college exists for everyone, is is really equal?

 

My thoughts on social safety net programs are this....they are meant to be safety nets. That means they are there to catch folks who have fallen on hard times and need some assistance to get by. I do not believe that they were ever meant or should ever be a way of life. There are too many people out there who really need these programs and it just boils my blood when I see abuses in the system. Now granted I work in an area that is prone to abuse, so I probably see a disproportionate amount of it. I also do not believe that just because I see quite a bit of abuse, does not mean that the system is prevalent with it. Still, when I see Medicaid recipients taking an ambulance to the ER, signing in and then leaving AMA just because they wanted to get to an other part of the city, I see red. Or when I hear a young girl tell her friend, who just found out she is pregnant, "Good, now you can get a check.", I want to scream. On the other hand, I have complete sympathy for those that have lost their jobs and are just trying to put a roof over their head or feed their families. Or those moms who are divorced or finally got the courage to leave an abusive relationship. That is what "safety net" means.

 

I also believe that the government has responsibility to protect the governed. If this means establishing rules and regulations that keep the majority of the populace safe, then the government is doing it's job. This includes rules and regulations in the workplace to keep workers safe and working conditions safe. It means rules to keep businesses from exploiting it's work force. It means creating rules and regulations so that products are safe for the consumer. I do have a problem with government intrusion on private life as long as what you are doing is not a danger to others.

 

As far as the ACA, I have seen no evidence to date of it in action. So far the majority of patients coming through the ER continue to be "self pay", (euphemism for no insurance). The numbers have not changed between December 31, 2012 and January 1, 2014. My life and my insurance have not been affected at all. I will reserve judgement until I see the full effects of the ACA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree that it is the responsibility of the person "in charge" to know what is going on and to answer for the actions of the staff they employ. That is certainly the case for every nurse manager, boss or business owner I've ever known.

How do you reconcile this belief with Obama's repeated claims that he "didn't know" about aspects of Obamacare, Fast & Furious, Benghazi, etc.?

First, I do not have to reconcile anything about Obama. I do recall seeing him state that he took responsibility for things that happened on his watch. I really don't have time to google it, but if you cannot find it, let me know and I will look. Of course there had been times when people in charge did not know every aspect of what is going on. The difference is that regardless of what they did or did not know, they take responsibility. Cruz has never taken responsibility for his continued waste of tax payer funds with his shenanigans. Christie does not take any responsibility. Rand Paul just steals others work.

Truthfully it is tiresome to watch the conservatives continue to scream Benghazi. Where was the outrage when so many in embassies lost their lives under other administrations. Oh, yeah. Saint Bush. St. Ronnie. St GHWB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you reconcile this belief with Obama's repeated claims that he "didn't know" about aspects of Obamacare, Fast & Furious, Benghazi, etc.?

Not being an Obama supporter I make no attempts to reconcile anything he does or says. I do notice the irony of those who gave Bush a pass for his obviously untruthful claims that he didn't know that that the USA would face a long, bloody and bitter occupation if it decided to invade Iraq no complaining about relatively minor things like you mentioned.

FYI Benghazi is a non issue and it makes those who harp about it look very much like the birthers (What happened to them?).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FYI Benghazi is a non issue and it makes those who harp about it look very much like the birthers (What happened to them?).

I would venture to guess that the families of the 4 Americans killed in service to their country (Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty and Tyrone S. Woods) would believe this to be an issue, and are concerned with "what happened to them."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 Benghazis That Occurred on Bush's Watch Without a Peep from Fox News | The Daily Banter

[h=3]May 12, 2003: 36 People Including 9 Americans Die After Terrorists Storm U.S. Compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia[/h]

http%3A%2F%2Fmedia1.policymic.com%2Fsite%2Farticles%2Fitems%2F227%2F1_image.jpg The State Department had warned of a potential strike against the Saudi days before gunmen infiltrated the Al Hamra Oasis Village and two others killing 36 people and wounding 160. This was the most devastating attack on a State Department employees to occur under Bush. The Saudi government cracked down on terrorists group but that did not prevent another attack to occur a year later in Jeddah.

This is only one of the plethora of issues with embassies under only one of the POTUSes I listed. Please show me the outrage addressed by the conservative nurses who continue to cry Benghazi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With all due respect, herring and AKY, George W. Bush is no longer in office. For the record, I didn't think much of him when he was.

I am concerned with holding the current occupant of the White House accountable for current events which impact daily lives and create precedence upon which future actions will be based, as AKY stated she is likewise concerned regarding Chris Christie and Ted Cruz.

Why do you suppose that Obama didn't learn from what you aparently believe to be errors of judgement or delberate malfeasance on the part of George W. Bush to aoid similar circumstances and happenings during his administration?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote=Jolie;7752002

Why do you suppose that Obama didn't learn from what you aparently believe to be errors of judgement or delberate malfeasance on the part of George W. Bush to aoid similar circumstances and happenings during his administration?

I believe he did. There have been 4 embassy deaths, not dozens. He is getting out of an unfunded war that he had to fund. He has made some progress with many things in spite of the obstructionists. Most notably he has cut the deficit that had been created and ignored by both Bush and all the GOP mouths.

So, where is the outrage that so many deaths happened under Bush? If there is none, as evidenced so far, then how real is this great outrage? or is it just that there are so many positives with Obama, Doubling stock market, cutting deficit - for examples, that shoddy performance and the sub-par presidency of Bush can only be challenged by histrionics

Edited by TopazLover

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the compare and contrast piece I posted regarding the 1983 beirut attack on the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut that killed 241 U.S. troops.

The world's leading military power is routinely subject to attacks by irregular forces. Enough bad guys with peashooters can blind a giant every once in awhile. Defending against all such attacks is impossible; judgment is required to defend against those deemed most likely. Sometimes that judgment is wrong. Not evil or neglectful. Just, unfortunately, wrong

Read more: The similarities--and key difference--of the Benghazi and Beirut attacks | TIME.com The similaritiesâ€"and key differenceâ€"of the Benghazi and Beirut attacks | TIME.com

I don't think it is about blame. It is about learning from the past to improve judgment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
With all due respect, herring and AKY, George W. Bush is no longer in office. For the record, I didn't think much of him when he was.

True he isn't. unfortunately the people with only limited critical thinking skills who supported him are still here. I never get tired of point out irony. Calling our Obama for something like Benghazi after Bush is like executing J walkers and setting murders free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
With all due respect, herring and AKY, George W. Bush is no longer in office. For the record, I didn't think much of him when he was.

Unfortunately, for the American people the Bush years are a bit like syphilis, we may have gotten rid of the organism, but the damage is permanent. Just ask any vet who has TBI or PTSD. Anyone who lost pensions, must continue to work way past their best years, homeless families who lost their homes to illegal activities of the banking industry. (And I do not give Obama a pass on this one at all) There are so many scars from his years that can never be healed. Ask the mother of any soldier who died so Haliburton could get richer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
×