Yet another excellent progressive move by Obama, that "progressives" obviously chose to ignore

[impik]

Repealing a 21-year-old ban on federal financing for programs that supply clean needles to drug addicts. 21-years-old ban. And on that day, "progressives" voice wasn't heard. Facts are a bitch, i know.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/26/opinion/26sat3.html?th&emc=th

[EFerrari]

1. This was an excellent move and there were at least three threads here

about this story last week.

[atreides1]

2. Right

And lifting this ban makes up for everything? Give me a fucking break.

Great program but not all 300 million Americans are drug addicts so this really is nothing more then a drop in the bucket.

[FrenchieCat]

4. Every drop in the bucket adds up,

but only to those who are paying attention and are counting;
not only counting what they see as the not so good,
but seeing and commenting on the good as well.

[thunder rising]

15. Hey buddy you need to look at it this way. when you end up on the street ...sober sucks.

And we're all heading for the streets. Our jobs taken by much more intelligent guest workers (that happen to work for 1/2 of what you expected). It's a bright future for cardboard real estate.

[Zynx]

25. If you believe he has done nothing else right you are actually probably insane.

The reason is that you would then have an inability to perceive reality.

[tranche]

38. Couldnt' the same thing be said about gay marriage?

[Forkboy]

50. No, but it helps.

[boppers]

3. Needles, good.

Perhaps the wealthy didn't get subsidized, and thus, the internet progressives didn't see the benefit.

[Sapphocrat]

5. Yay.

Meanwhile, my marriage is still "invalid" in 45 states and unrecognized by the federal government (read: IRS; guess what that means?), my wife and I are trying to decide how the fuck we're going to pay for health insurance we cannot afford (oh, and about that marriage thing again -- you think we're going to get the "family rate"?)...

Meanwhile, I don't shoot up, I never have, and I never will, so I should give a flying fuck about clean-needle programs... why, exactly? Go ahead, call me selfish, call me anything you want, but the bottom line is: I'm getting penalized for two things I never had any control over: being born gay, and simply being born.

And I'm supposed to forgive Barry everything for making things a tad easier for people who make the choice to shoot poison into their veins?

Sorry, bud. I'm all out of liberal "compassion" these days.

Flame the fuck away, DUers. I do not care.

[FrenchieCat]

7. It's ok. You don't have to give a flying fuck about others.

No one is going to force you to.
Liberal Compassion cannot be forced,
I don't think.

[Sapphocrat]

10. I used to care at my own expense.

I used to believe I was somehow morally obligated to do that. And then I realized that was nothing but imaginary Catholic guilt working on me.

You take it up the ass your entire life with no legal recourse whatsoever for, say, 40, 50 years, and then get back to me.

And, Frenchie? Don't lecture me about compassion. You and I both know how much compassion you have for LGBTs.

[quaker bill]

20. No one cares

"at their own expense". This is simply not possible. Caring is simply beneficial regardless of whether or not one directly benefits. One does not care for one thing at the expense of another. It is not a moral obligation or duty to care. It is simply a positive frame of mind and good for the overall mental hygene.

[Sapphocrat]

46. Maybe this will make more sense to you.

"Caring at my own expense" means holding my nose and voting for people who clearly do not place my best interests anywhere near the top of their list of priorities, and often not on the list at all, but doing so for the greater (perceived) good, and to avoid the worse of two evils.

"Caring at my own expense" means voting for school bonds when I don't have children, and when I know my personal income tax may rise, solely for the greater good -- because I know investing in education and opening up new opportunities for kids is not only the right thing to do, but benefits society as a whole... even if I won't live to see those benefits.

"Caring at my own expense" means dutifully putting out the cans and bottles every recycling day, not because the law says I have to (it doesn't, and I don't), but because I know my city needs the extra funds that come from recycling -- when I'd better serve myself by cashing in those bottles and cans on my own and pocketing the change.

"Caring at my own expense" means supporting a woman's right to choose, when abortion has no impact whatsoever on my life (I don't do sex with men, and, frankly, I'm close enough to menopause that even if I were to get raped, chances are I wouldn't get pregnant), and, come to think of it, has no impact whatsoever on any woman I know personally. What's more, I think abortion is murder (oh, yes, I do) -- but I remain 100% pro-choice, and will argue in favor of choice until I'm hoarse. So, there's a double whammy for me: Not only is abortion one more issue that LGBT rights have to share the stage with, but in order to maintain my pro-choice stance, I actually must put aside my own deeply held beliefs about abortion for the greater good.

If I didn't care, I wouldn't do these things. Yet, none of these things benefits me directly, and probably never will.

Make more sense now?

[quaker bill]

52. No it doesn't make sense.

Living in a better community has benefits. Voting for better schools improves residential property values, and means that the kid running the cash register where you shop will be able to count back the change accurately.

There is no expense in voting for the best candidate for any office, even if it is the choice of the lesser of evils. Voting is free.

On the better community front, it is unclear whether you would profit more from the recycling cash in your pocket, or better community services. Where I live they are closing the parks and libraries for lack of funds.

Standing for the rights of others has no expense. I am well beyond the age of reproduction and have had the option terminated surgically. I was never in favor of abortion for personal circumstances, had such ever arisen. However, I did pay for a friend's abortion for a pregnancy that was the result her being of raped. My mother was also opposed to abortion, but sought out and took a job as a nurse in a clinic, because she was sick of seeing young girls die. It was not a cost to her.

Quakers believe in "being of service". I oppose war but have no children potentially subject to the draft. This is not an expense. It makes more of me to do it.

I have been cooking for and feeding folks at a local homeless shelter for a dozen years and active in getting the shelters created before that. No one I have ever known has had use for the shelter system. I actually buy the food out of my paycheck and cook it myself. It is not an expense because I am living as more of who I am because of it.

Being of service is never a cost, it is always a benefit.

Does this make sense to you?

[Sapphocrat]

53. No, actually, it surprises me.

I thought I understood Quakers. I guess I don't.

Perhaps the difference between us is that you believe in a future payoff of some sort. I believe only in this life.

If you're right, then you win. If I'm right, then it's all been for naught.

[quaker bill]

56. Quakers traditionally

do not generally believe in an afterlife, traditional notions of heaven or hell, or salvation through works, or for that matter mystical concepts of salvation in any sense. Peace, simplicity, and integrity, and being of service, are at the core of things, all done in the here and now. We find no notion of a "future payoff" meaningful in any sense, reject such notions entirely, and have for 350 years. There is no motivated (reward seeking) self-sacrifice involved in Quaker practice as this would not bear to our sense of integrity. That which is sacred is of this world and generally found mundane to most.

One is simply made more by what one has to share freely. There is and can be no cost in this. It is the same for all who open their eyes to it.

You seem to have a very parochial notion of self interest that is unfortunately not uncommon to this puritan based society. Republicans prosper on this notion of parochial self-interest and "rugged individualism" which is why opposition to taxes is an article of faith for them.

[Sapphocrat]

57. I don't like your implication at all.

I find it suspect, and I find your tone surprisingly -- and dismayingly -- judgmental, self-righteous, and unfair.

I don't think you and I have any chance at a two-way dialogue. You fail to understand me, because, I believe, of preconceived notions which were set in stone for you well before your first reply to me.

I'll leave it at this: If you are at all representative of the Society of Friends, then I have a lot of re-evaluation to do of the Quakers.

You leave me with a bad taste, and much suspicion.

[thunder rising]

16. Being born the child of the greatest flatulation (the boomers) who are determined sink this country

is reason enough to feel punished for being born.

Recall all those bumper stickers on the BIG assed motor homes "I'm spending my children's inheritance." That was and still more true than they ever imagined.

[Sapphocrat]

18. What a nasty, offensive, and illogical thing to say.

You should be ashamed of yourself. Especially if your motive is nothing but to get a rise out of me.

Sadly, your ageism only makes you sound like a child. And a spoiled one at that.

If there is anything wrong with the circumstance of your birth, it is that your parents have not yet taught you the meaning of the word "fallacy."

How old are you, anyway? Has your age hit double digits yet?

[NMMNG]

19. Children of Baby Boomers are denied their civil rights?

That's news to me. Maybe you could fill me in on that one

[Warren Stupidity]

27. The big assed motor homes set were mostly not boomers but instead the previous cohort.

But carry on.

[KrR]

28. So anyone not GLBT

shouldn't care about you i guess?

[Sapphocrat]

42. Very few do now. n/t

[Flaneur]

40. Okay, you're selfish...and short-sighted about needles.

Needle exchange programs reduce the spread of HIV/AIDS, Hep C, and other bloodborne diseases. They also provide addicts with the opportunity to connect with various social services and maybe pull themselves out of the gutter. That reduces social costs that all of us bear.

I do, however, understand your frustration with being a second-class citizen.

[Sapphocrat]

43. Funny thing is...

...I've always been in favor of needle exchange programs, for all the reasons you describe.

What seems to sail right over everyone's head is the way the OP makes it sound as if something Obama should have done anyway should make up for everything he's done badly, wrong, or not at all.

You know, I was pretty surprised -- and more than pleased -- when Bush signed PEPFAR in 2008. It comes to mind because that was the only thing he ever did right -- ever -- and in my eyes, it was a pretty big thing.

But PEPFAR will never make up for everything else he did. Ever.

Now every time Obama does something that is (or should be) expected of him, such as signing on to needle exchanges, or opening up stem cell lines, there's a chorus of "See! Look how wonderful he is!" Those things are wonderful indeed, but I'm deathly tired of standout moments in his presidency being used if they defined his presidency -- and somehow compensate for FISA, DADT, DOMA, his AIPAC speech, his West Point speech, Afghanistan, Rick Warren, Donnie McClurkin, the bank bailout, the GM bailout, the triangulating, the hedging, the outright lying, and -- number one on the Hit Parade -- the big, fat Christmas present to the insurance industry, and the big, fat goose egg the rest of us got.

That's the point.

I'm tired of people constantly trying to shame me for wanting what I need and not getting it because of who I am (as opposed to saving heroin addicts from the consequences of something they chose to do) -- and then being told I'm "choosing" to "ignore" this fabulous accomplishment of Obama's when it's something he shouldn't get extra Brownie points for. He's a flipping Democrat (or so I'm told), and OKing a needle exchange should be taken for granted as something any decent Democrat would do.

It should be. But you'd think Obama just found the cure for cancer. He didn't. All he did was his job.

And it doesn't begin to make up for everything else.

[Prism]

6. Why not be happy?

I'll never understand how people who get precisely what they want can continue being bitter about absolutely everything.

The President won! His corporate-care will get a nice big signing ceremony. A bow may be involved.

But, no, it's not a win unless people are bitching out the Left to everyone's exhaustion.

Good grief, happy people who are actually pleased about things do not behave this way.

And, as noted above, the needle program was actually discussed numerous times here already. It's nice. It doesn't begin to undo the great damage being inflicted on the middle class by this administration, but, uhm, nice nonetheless.

[FrenchieCat]

8. I found two threads.

one with 9 replies and one with 11 on this forum.

That's pretty low by any standards.

Obama's bowing got way more!

[Prism]

11. Does anyone actually care?

Honestly. It's a needle exchange. Unless you're a smack addict, it's not exactly pertinent to what's going on with you. It's a positive thing, and I'm not diminishing it in any way.

But in the scheme of things, how much discussion would you like about this rather minor thing?

I think you should write an OP about Jane Hamsher allying with Courtney Love to make heroin our national drug.

It might get a bit more traction.

[NMMNG]

14. ....

:spray:

I think you should write an OP about Jane Hamsher allying with Courtney Love to make heroin our national drug.


Yeah, because our Friends and our enemies are shooting up together....or something like that.

[pokercat999]

9. When calling a penalty on himself for accidentally moving

his ball, golfing great Bobby Jones was heralded by the press. He commented, that was like being honored for not robbing banks.

You don't get accolades for doing your everyday job! How many of bush's executive orders has Obama overturned?

[Sapphocrat]

12. I wish I could rec your post. n/t

[MattSh]

13. Well, if he wanted praise...

he wouldn't have done this so close to Christmas.

But of course, he wanted to do the right thing, but did it now in the hope the right wing screamers wouldn't notice.

He's more concerned about what the right wing screamers will say, and to hell with "his base".

[DisgustedInMN]

17. Ignore?

Why would Progressives (nice childish attempt at a dig with the parenthesizes, btw) ignore something that has absolutely no affect on them, as a myriad of other false promises, used to get their votes and support are left out in the cold. Keep right on taking cheap potshots at us "progressives" and see how that works out for you in the midterms and worse yet, when Mr Corporate is a one termer.

[TheKentuckian]

21. Yippee!!!! But that doesn't make me happier about force feeding the American

people into a predatory monopoly, wasting blood and treasure on the defense of far away gravel, or failing to go at Wall Street hammer and tongs.

[tbyg52]

22. Yes, that is good.

As are some other things he has done. Doesn't mean I should shut up about the not-so-good. Oh, and I don't like "shut up" posts, which I believe this is.

[rateyes]

23. Progressives in quotation marks---hmm.

What are you trying to say about us?

[donco6]

24. Well, I'm glad to see SOMEONE's finally getting their pony.

And if it can't be me, a fine, upstanding taxpaying citizen, then a drug addict is the next best thing.

On edit, $pelling.

[NMMNG]

47. Well, we could all take up heroin

Then if nothing else we could say we'd finally benefited from one of Obama's decisions. :sarcasm:

[Warren Stupidity]

26. If your attempt was to help build support for Obama here

then jabbing your finger in our eyes to 'get our attention' is really not a good way to go about it.

It is indeed good news that the ban was repealed. Nobody here that I know of is claiming that Obama has done nothing progressive in the last year. It just isn't a very long list, and that other list is rather discouraging.

[bigwillq]

29. Unrec

for adding a bit of snark to this post. You choose to turn it into a negative thread, which makes you no better than some of the gloom-and-doom posters.

[Bluenorthwest]

30. well as a person who has worked to get that repeal for as long

as it stood, I celebrate the news. I also am aware that they announced it when they did because they did not want a big uproar about it. Don't want controversy from fools to put him on the spot on this one, for it is about life and death not just of users but of their unwitting spouses and partners.
I'd go on and on about how good this is, except that the OP is so snarky and divisive that it makes this good news into a weapon of petty politics.
Thousands of people worked for decades to achieve this. Obama did his part. Such hard won victories should not be used as political fodder. Those who actually care about the issue think of all those lost years, and the infection rates in minority communities that reflect those years. So it is news that is both bitter and sweet, for it is now the law, but it is too late for hundreds of thousands of people. So that's the fullest view. It is good. It is late. But he did sign it. I expected that he would. I am glad that he did.

[goclark]

32. I appreciate your thoughts

So many will be helped by this.

[Arkansas Granny]

31. It wasn't ignored, it just didn't get the level of attention that

you might have wished for.

[burning rain]

33. Good move.

It's a win-win from a conservative Democrat's point of view. It gives the libs a bit of satisfaction while doing nothing to offend the fiscal conservative constituencies.

[paulk]

34. silly attack on "progressives"

a childish attempt to divide the Democratic coalition

I sometimes wonder who you shills are really working for...

actually, it seems obvious

[depakid]

45. That's one reason why the OP lacks credibility in his or her opinion posts

Unnecessary spin and juvenile barbs belie a shallow agenda that's quite independent of facts and analysis on any given issue.

[roody]

35. I am glad that Obama is not a total loss.

[levander]

36. Let's convert prisons into utilitarian drug rehab centers...

You can't make them too pleasant. Otherwise, everyone will become a recovering drug addict, hampering for all the free, cushy rehab services. But, our prisons are stock full of non-violent drug crimes anyway. So, let's just make most of the prisons drug rehab facilities. It'll still be like prison, just everybody will be undergoing programs to get them off drugs.

And, if they misbehave on the program, just send them back to a regular old-fashioned prison. If they're not gonna work on their addictions, get them away from the people who do want to work on it.

If people want to get themselves off drugs, they should be able to check themselves into these drug-rehab prisons. Would save money on having to hunt them down. But, we gotta be careful. It can't be like a vacation for them. It's gotta be like prison, only with the other goal being getting them off drugs.

[Flaneur]

41. How about treatment on demand instead of fucking prisons?

[levander]

49. What I described was an on-demand system...

My proposal was that you could turn yourself in. That is on-demand.

It'd be like a prison because you don't want to make it this easy hand-out. If it's like the spas people pay serious money for to get off drugs, then all the sudden, every addict wants to get off drugs. Or, wants to get off at least long enough till he can get his vacation at the spa started.

[dana_b]

37. you know

you could have just said "hey - look at this cool move Obama has made with the needle exchange policy" and I would agree - 100% because it is a cool move. But to slam the progressives while doing so just makes you look like a dick.

[Flaneur]

39. Dems in Congress deserve the credit for this. All Obama did was sign the bill.

Still, it's a good thing.

[depakid]

44. The administration delayed funding in its budget last May, but has been supportive

on the issue (as any rational person would) for quite some time.

The programs have PROVEN to be effective in other nations- saving countless lives and slowing the spread of blood born diseases, such as HIV and Hep B & C.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

48. Should we counter this progressive move with a not so progressive one?

US removes $400b cap on aid to Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac
By J.W. Elphinstone
Associated Press / December 25, 2009

NEW YORK - The Treasury Department has removed the $400 billion financial cap on how much money it will provide to the beleaguered mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, a step taken to keep the companies from failing.

So far, taxpayers have shelled out $111 billion to the pair.

Yesterday, Treasury officials said the cap would be replaced with a flexible formula. The goal is to ensure the two agencies can stand behind the billions of dollars in mortgage-backed securities they sell to investors.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac provide vital liquidity to the mortgage industry by purchasing home loans from lenders and selling them to investors. Together, they own or guarantee almost 31 million home loans worth about $5.5 trillion, or about half of all mortgages.

Without government aid, the firms would have gone broke, leaving millions of people unable to get a mortgage.

The biggest headwind facing the housing recovery has been the rise in foreclosures amid high unemployment. The Treasury’s latest move could allow Fannie and Freddie to play a bigger role in restructuring mortgages for troubled borrowers.

The news follows the announcement Thursday that Fannie’s and Freddie’s chief executives could be paid as much as $6 million for 2009, despite the companies’ dismal performances this year.

Fannie’s CEO, Michael Williams, and Freddie CEO Charles “Ed’’ Haldeman Jr. each will receive $900,000 in salary, $3.1 million in deferred payments next year, and another $2 million if they meet certain performance goals, according to documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2009/12/25/us_removes_400b_cap_on_aid_to_fannie_mae_freddie_mac/

On Christmas Eve, no less. Merry Christmas taxpayers!

[Forkboy]

51. Your attitude tells me you care more for scoring political points than the issue itself.

I'm giving a K&R anyways because I think it's a good thing that needs to be done.

[NashVegas]

54. Wow, That's Great. I'm So Glad Drug Addicts Can Have Clean Needles. Now, Can I Have My Country Back?

[vaberella]

55. I'm a little late to rec. I didn't hear about it until now. n/t