LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With QuoteObama HAS been completely transparent from the beginning.
A lot of us could see right through him, but not enough of us voted to keep him out.
"...These negotiations will be on CSPAN..."
Barrack Obama, 2008
"Aww yaw"
Blind Mellon Chittlin
Obama HAS been completely transparent from the beginning.
A lot of us could see right through him, but not enough of us voted to keep him out.
The choice was Obama or "youbetcha".
Yes, the people spoke.
Thanks for your comment Devil. We can always rely on you for your incisive commentary. You remind me of the 2d grader who's mean to the pretty girl in his class not because he doesn't like her, but because he is smitten with her. And I don't blame you. Sarah Palin is hot. She's no Joy Behar, but you gotta admit Sarah is easy on the eyes. But, this thread isn't about your obsession with Sarah Palin, it's about the promise of transparency from President Obama.Originally Posted by Diablo
Maybe you can explain why negotiations on the health care bill will not be televised on CSPAN as promised repeatedly by candidate Obama. The Obama administration is avoiding the question like the swine flu epidemic than never happened.
Nobody should be surprised by the ineptitude of this administration, but many of the folks who voted for Obama are. And that in itself if pretty frightening.
In the real world, people that make good decisions, and work hard are rewarded. In the political world, you merely have to be percieved as one who has great ideas. I never expected much from a fellow who's job experience as a community organizer, (extorting money from others), and public office, (170 days in the senate, with "present" being his main vote). I found it ironic that the press continually opined that the #2 on the GOP team was not ready to be president, but never questioned the experience or ability of the DEM #1. They mock the girl for attending college as she could afford to, but refuse to release the grades from the affirmative action scholar.
Looks like we got what we deserved!
Sure can. Negotiations were not needed with the Republicans because they are the "party of no". They don't negotiate in good faith, and they have no interest in passing any bill that Obama wants to push. Blame the Republicans, not Obama. Since the Republicans don't want to negotiate, and really don't want ANY bills to pass, and they don't have enough votes to stop a bill, all that is left for them to do is whine about how "unfair the process is", or "how secretive the process is", or "how it's not transparent like they promised it would be". It's called "sour grapes".
If you don't like Obama in office, your party shouldn't have screwed the country over with 8 years of Bush, told McCain that Lieberman couldn't be his VP running mate, and at the last minute foisted a totally clueless Palin on the ticket. If the Republicans are dumb enough to stick Palin on the ticket in 2012, you can bet there will be four more years of Obama. Extensive interviews with McCain's campaign staff showed that Palin didn't understand anything about WW1, WW2, the Korean war, and believed Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11. A majority of voters in the last election realized she was woefully unprepared for the office - even before these recent insider revelations.
I don't think you're keeping up with current affairs. The republicans have not been in on any of the decision processes on either the house, or the senate version of the "Health Care" boondogle. The "most transparent" congressional democrats have spent all their time behind closed doors making deals to the detriment of us citizens.
Pelosi knows that many of her people will lose their seat in the next election, and has brought in lobbyists who promised them future employment for their votes.
Calling what is being done to us Health Care Reform, is like calling the tax code, the Wealth Protection Act. None of it will affect us in a positive way, our insurance costs will go up, and people will still not be covered by an insurance plan. Government will have the ability to force us to pay for something we do not want or need, with the IRS at their disposal to force us to comply.
The good news is that a majority of Americans want nothing to do with this mess, and even some of the democrats are beginning to have a backbone.
..."real" transparency only has useful meaning during wet T-shirt contests.
...and the Devil said: "...yes, but it's a DRY heat!"
First off I'm not a Republican, and I don't speak for them. But let's clarify something here. It's not that the Rep's won't negotiate or don't want any bills to pass, it's just that they realize what the Dem's are up to is no good for any of us. There are some very simple market based approaches that could be taken that would effect real reform for health care in this country, and those things would get Rep support. But real reform is not really the goal here. If you believe that it is you're being incredibly gullible and naive. This is all about control, it's about growing the power of the federal govm't, it's about attacking the free market and reducing individual liberty. That is the goal. Face it, Dem's are the antithesis of liberty and individual rights. And that's what this so called reform is all about, the removal and restriction of individual rights, more loss of liberty. And the growth of Federal power and control
They are doing it behind closed doors because they are like cockroaches that are afraid of the light. They know that what they are doing would never be accepted by the people, so they have to hide it, then they'll use the press to sell it to the people. Only this time the people aren't buying.
As far as the next Pres election, I think Obama will be lucky if he even makes 4 years without the people rising up and riding him out of DC on a rail tarred and feathered. His is shaping up to be the worst Presidency of all time. It's looking like he's going to make Jimmy Carter look like a freakin genius.
What do you get when you cross Jimmy Carter w/ Hugo Chavez? Barack Obama.
How about this now? A deal made behind closed doors with union leaders bought off their support, in exchange union members won't have their health insurance taxed, while others that do get so called "Cadillac" plans will. How's that for fairness? How do you except certain citizens from a tax, just because they belong to a union? Can you somehow rationalize that? This refrom treads all over the Constitution. But the socialists in control don't seem to mind, and liberal apologists don't seem to care. This whole thing is just sickening.
Joe Biden update: He meets on transparency today. But the meeting is closed | Top of the Ticket | Los Angeles Times
Joe Biden update: He meets on transparency today. But the meeting is closed.....Unsubstantiated rumors that Vice President Joe Biden had suddenly gone a little loopy and ordered some of his official meetings opened to at least cursory public or media attention were just that -- unsubstantiated rumors.
From that conservative trash paper, THE LA TIMES!!
I don't see the evidence that you do when you say the Dems are for restricting individual rights and loss of liberty. It was the conservatives who opposed the rights of women to vote in this country, conservatives who opposed the granting of civil rights to blacks in this country, conservatives that gave us the Patriot act where the government has access to all your e-mail and google searches without the need for a search warrant. The conservatives like to pretend they are for individual liberty with their mantra about "state's rights" when it suits their political agenda. Conservatives are the ones that oppose reproductive rights for women. Conservatives are the ones that kept laws on the books that put gays in jail for having sex with each other. The only area where one could argue that Dems are trying to restrict individual rights is gun ownership. However, you could also argue that gun laws are trying to protect the innocent victims of the gun owner - to protect their pursuit of life.
Lets keep the facts straight!
Actually the Republican party went on record in 1896 supporting women's voting rights. Another,(aparantly), little known fact, the first woman elected to congress was a Republican.
Although Mr. Lincoln was credited with freeing the slaves, he didn't. His proclamation only covered the states that were in insurection, and not the northern states. But shortly after the war, the Republicans gave us the 14th amendent,(giving blacks equal rights under the constitution).
I guess you also never saw the pictures of that flaming liberal Charlton Heston, marching with the black,(and white), folks down south, which led to the 1964 civil rights act. If you read the history of that bill, you'll realize that the Republicans, were instrumental in passing it, not the Democrats. Even Barry Goldwater was in favor except Title ll, which he felt was not the governments business,(personal freedom).
As far as abortion, and the sodomy issues go, I don't think anyone is in favor of promoting them, most conservatives don't want their money spent on things that they disagree with, as I suspect do liberals.
Then you are blinded by partisanship and you're not looking at things realistically or pragmatically. If a person is REQUIRED to buy insurance, or face fines and improsonment, that is a loss of liberty. The person is no longer free to purchase insurance or not depending on whether he wants, desires or needs to. The choice is taken away (freedom of choice, huh?) If a person is forced to pay taxes to support health insurance for someone else, his liberty is reduced. Paying those taxes is not a choice, he can't just not pay them if he doesn't want to, he has to; that is a reduction or retriction on liberty.I don't see the evidence that you do when you say the Dems are for restricting individual rights and loss of liberty.
The bill is what, 1200 pages long? That's 1200 pages full of restrictions on liberty. If the Patriot act bothers you, you should be 100 time more angry about this bill, because your privacy is going to be much more invaded. EVERYTHING about your personal health and well being, as well as your financial well being, your bank accounts, your pensions and IRA's and 401k's, will be available to a public bureaucracy that will make decisions about what health care you should be given or not and how much you'll be expected to pay for it. That is part of the bill.
Are you required to buy auto insurance for your car? You're not living alone on a desert island with total freedom to make all your own choices. You can't choose not to pay your taxes. It's not like the United States is just some land with a bunch of people living on it with no relationship or responsibility to each other. That's what societies are all about - deciding what things are in the common good to support with taxes. During the Vietnam war, if you opposed the war and decided not to pay your taxes, you either had your wages garnished or you went to jail. They also had drafts during WW2, the Korean war and Vietnam. The average joe doesn't get to decide by himself that he's not going to go in the army when the government says he has to fight in a war. Yes, it's loss of individual liberty. But, in support of the common good of society. No society or country has total individual freedom. Mandatory health insurance is a way to spread the costs of health insurance to the whole society. Today, when someone takes an ambulance ride to the hospital because of some grave illness, the hospital has to treat that patient even if they don't have insurance. So today, I'm already paying for the uninsured with my higher premiums. Mandatory health insurance will work towards solving that problem.
It's still a restriction on freedom and liberty, you as much agreed to that. But you also tried to compare it to the restriction on freedom of say the draft. The govm't has a Constitutional requirment to provide for the security of the nation, it has no such mandate for health care. Even so, you'll note that there is no draft now and there hasn't been 30 years. It's kind of a strawman argument. I don't belive there is any rational way to make an equivilancy between the two.
Re auto insurance, I am not required to buy a car, I am not required to drive. There is a stipulation that if I want to own and drive a car I must also have liability insurance in case my operation of that car results in damages to someone else, OR have the ability to be self insured. Besides, that is a STATE requirement, not a FEDERAL requirement. You'll remember that the powers and responsibilities of the Fed's is ENUMERATED in the Constitution. All resposibilities and powers not specifically enumerated in the Constitution are retained unto the States and the People. Again, there is no corelation between my State requiring me to have auto liability insurance if I want to operate a vehicle (which is a priviledge, not a right), and the Federal Govm't requirimg me to have health insurance, with not provision for self insurance. There is no equivilancy between the two.
Taxes, the Constitution originally allowed for the collection of taxes to support the limited role of the Federal gom't, then it was ammended to allow for the collection of an income tax. It has been argued by some that this is still unconstitutional, or that wages are not income, but so far the courts have upheld the tax. But the point is, when they wanted to collect the tax they amended the Contitution to do it. The Dem's have not bothered to try to amend the Constitution, to hell with that. They think they can just decree whatever the hell they want to, and we, the poor serf's will have to obey them. They act if they are royalty, above the Constitution.
When the hospital HAS to provide services to someone who can't pay for them, when the law requires them to do so, THAT is another infringement on the rights of the people. You should find that abhorrent. It is the govm't telling a private business what they HAVE TO DO, with no compensation I might add. That is an immoral taking of the private property of the owners of that business. You just add fuel to my argument with that point.
Look, as I've already pointed out there are plenty of things the govm't could do to improve the level of health care in this country, that would not restrict the rights of the people. In fact, if they would just get out of the way and increase freedom they would do much more good. You're being sold a bill of goods, something that will cost you more money, that will restrict your rights, and will NOT improve the situation one bit, it will only make things worse. If you think health care is expensive now, just wait until it is free. Your level of service will go down, your costs will go up, your privacy will be invaded, a bureaucracy will make your health care decisions, and it is all being sold to you as an improvement. If you buy that you're incredibly gullible, and a sucker that PT Barnum would have loved to have met.
Next time you're in the DMV, or any govm't office (ever dealt with a social security office? City hall?) look around you and ask yourself, are these the people you want in charge of your health care? If you answer yes, I say you're crazy.
Devil. You are either willfully ignorant or really naive.
I am amazed as I read your reply. Please, name one government run program in recent history that has not turned into an ever expanding, inefficient and very expensive bureaucratic nightmare. Your statement about the "spreading the cost" is synomymous with "share the wealth", and you seem fine with that, and that is disturbing to people who have even a remote knowledge of history. I'm taking a course in contemporary Russian history right now. The Russian's move toward soviet communism is not identical to the current political trends in the U.S. right now, but there are plenty of disturbing similarities. The constant rant from the Obama administration against business, the banking industry, the wealthy, conservatives and Judeo/Christian beliefs is disturbing to anyone who is paying attention. But like so many liberals, you aren't paying attention.
Manhattan Project.
We may not agree on politics, but I love your sense of humor!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks