What is BO really up to?

Are you an American , do you live and see the difference in our country ? Whether a man was Military or not cuts no butter here. If he is a radical hate feeding minister that is what he is.Andy Stern is in the White house a few times a month. What is his position New world economy advisor ?Van Jones was and is a Communist working now with the George Soros think tank. What do you think they do ?Israel has been held back on several occassions to by a friend ( America ) asking them to.
Obama has no experience in International problems. If he continues to deride them they will quickly solve the problem if they think there will be no help.
Pep

 

So what's so baseless? Every, every, public opinion poll shows the people are against BO's plan- not an opinion, but a fact. Even with the effort he has put forth, BO is struggling to get members f his own party to go along with him- not an opinion, but a fact. Just to get some of his own party members on board he has cut some possibly corrupt but defintely unprecedented deals...Nelson? Landrieu? The congressman whose brother was appointed a Federal Judge on the same day BO summoned him to the WH to "discuss" Obamacare? Opinions? Nope, facts!

You want a less expensive, less obtrusive idea? Here's a few examples of what I've been saying for years:

1) Sever all connections between health insurance & your place of employment, open the system to competition & watch how quickly premiums decrease
2) Offer tax breaks for folks who save money to cover their own health care expenses
3) Create a "risk pool" for people with pre-existing conditions & have those people & insurance companies fund it
4) Give insurance companies the option of assuming part of the cost of the "risk pool" or accepting some of the those people

These are just a few of my ideas.....

 

Jack you were doing so well for a while, what happened? You don't even have a specific complaint, just a tirade of name calling.

When you talk about zero integrity, let's talk death panels, fear mongering the elderly, and census looking literature mailed out by Republicans. Any reputable source can list the litany of lies and distortions put out by the GOP during this health care debate and they are numerous. The OP lists several of these lies including one that is in direct conflict with the CBO report which I posted. Jaaaaaack! What’s goin' on buddy? Have you started buying into the lies of the GOP again? You know better than that.

 

Is it such an alien concept to you far left libs that people can actually have their own ideas & beliefs- ideas & beliefs that are shaped over time, by experience and aren't influenced by the media?? I realize the far left fringe is an idelogically exact movement & you have to follow the marching orders of the elite leaders of the movement but I can assure you that you make up a very small segment of the population.
I find it funny when I get accused of repeating Republican talking points...I wish I had the time to watch the shows or listen to the radio!! What with work, the kids activities & my other obligations I usually find myself out the door by 8:00 or 9:00am and not home until late. How do you find the time to do what you do & still monitor what the RNC, Rush and the Fox broadcasters are saying?

 

You may be an independent but you sure buy into the lies the Right wingers are selling. Why don't you just confess to being a life-long GOP'er and we can both be honest?

 

Point out 1 single lie, I dare you! Please direct me to anything I posted that is in conflict with any CBO report?

 

Obviously!

 

Why do you need a leader to tell you what to think? Why not live, learn, study, observe, etc & form your own opinions? As long as you despise everyone who is more successful than you & side with the whackos who share your distain for prosperity, effort & hard work you will never improve your lot in life. As long as you think bringing everyone down to your level is better than rising up to theirs you will remain in the squallor & misery in which you currently find yourself.

 

You clearly know nothing about the CBO. You should just stop here and go back to ranting about being a better American than the rest of us. I don't buy into "levels of Americanism". I think that type of ideology simply divides the country.

Proverb 17:7 "Arrogant lips are unsuited to a fool--how much worse lying lips to a ruler!" How much more arrogant can you be than to think you are a better American than the rest of us.

 

OK

What is BO really up to?

It sure looks like BO is going to shove his vision for healthcare down our throats, doesn't it? You mean the agenda he got elected on? I sure hope he keeps this campaign promise.

In view of the opposition from the public, Actually the public is evenly split and is vastly in favor of health care reform once the bill is broken down and explained to them. The opposition is mostly due to Republican lies being spread.

businesses, Which businesses? The insurance companies? Duh!

Conservatives There’s a mind bender!

and even his own party, People in the Democratic Party that think that this bill doesn’t go far enough.

you gotta wonder why. I don’t gotta wonder why. People are dying and going broke all over the country because of lack of health insurance and the insurance companies are posting record profits and raising rates 2, 3, 4 times faster than eve college tuition rates. I don’t gotta wonder anything.

What's it it for him? Must be political capital since he has been attacked relentlessly by the Right.

Why is he trying to so drastically change our nation? Again! Because our health care system is broken. That is what a president is supposed to do.
There are numerous alternative plans that are less expensive Really! Name one!

and less obtrusuive I think you mean “intrusive”.

while still helping the needy among us, not to mention the fact that we have other far more pressing issues we are dealing with. Well if you had cancer and your insurance company just dropped you, you might find this issue the most pressing.

It just makes me wonder. I’m sure it does and so do random shiny objects I’m sure.

I wouldn’t normally be this sarcastic but the entire post is just so obtuse.

 

Just for a little perspective on the eve of the health care bill passage....

Legislative history of Medicare Part D

The bill was debated and negotiated for nearly six years in Congress, and finally passed amid unusual circumstances. Several times in the legislative process the bill had appeared to have failed, but each time was saved when a couple of Congressmen and Senators switched positions on the bill.
The bill was introduced in the House of Representatives early on June 25, 2003 as H.R. 1, sponsored by Speaker Dennis Hastert. All that day and the next the bill was debated, and it was apparent that the bill would be very divisive. In the early morning of June 27, a floor vote was taken. After the initial electronic vote, the count stood at 214 yeas, 218 nays.
Three Republican representatives then changed their votes. One opponent of the bill, Ernest J. Istook, Jr. (R-OK-5), changed his vote to "present" upon being told that C.W. Bill Young (R-FL-10), who was absent due to a death in the family, would have voted "aye" if he had been present. Next, Republicans Butch Otter (ID-1) and Jo Ann Emerson (MO-8) switched their vote to "aye" under pressure from the party leadership. The bill passed by one vote, 216-215.
On June 26, the Senate passed its version of the bill, 76-21. The bills were unified in conference, and on November 21, the bill came back to the House for approval.
The bill came to a vote at 3 a.m. on November 22. After 45 minutes, the bill was losing, 219-215, with David Wu (D-OR-1) not voting. Speaker Dennis Hastert and Majority Leader Tom DeLay sought to convince some of dissenting Republicans to switch their votes, as they had in June. Istook, who had always been a wavering vote, consented quickly, producing a 218-216 tally. In a highly unusual move, the House leadership held the vote open for hours as they sought two more votes. Then-Representative Nick Smith (R-MI) claimed he was offered campaign funds for his son, who was running to replace him, in return for a change in his vote from "nay" to "yea." After controversy ensued, Smith clarified no explicit offer of campaign funds was made, but that that he was offered "substantial and aggressive campaign support" which he had assumed included financial support.
About 5:50 a.m., convinced Otter and Trent Franks (AZ-2) to switch their votes. With passage assured, Wu voted yea as well, and Democrats Calvin M. Dooley (CA-20), Jim Marshall (GA-3) and David Scott (GA-13) changed their votes to the affirmative. But Brad Miller (D-NC-13), and then, Republican John Culberson (TX-7), reversed their votes from "yea" to "nay". The bill passed 220-215.
The Democrats cried foul, and Bill Thomas, the Republican chairman of the Ways and Means committee, challenged the result in a gesture to satisfy the concerns of the minority. He subsequently voted to table his own challenge; the tally to table was 210 ayes, 193 noes.
The Senate's consideration of the conference report was somewhat less heated, as cloture on it was invoked by a vote of 70-29. However, a budget point of order raised by Tom Daschle, and voted on. As 60 votes were necessary to override it, the challenge was actually considered to have a credible chance of passing.
For several minutes, the vote total was stuck at 58-39, until Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Trent Lott (R-MS), and Ron Wyden (D-OR) voted in quick succession in favor to pass the vote 61-39. The bill itself was finally passed 54-44 on November 25, 2003, and was signed into law by the President on December 8.

 

I guess you're at least trying to rationalize this fiasco.
Have you missed the "deals" he made to attempt to purchase the votes of a few members of his party.
Have you missed the fact that he is having difficulty getting the support of enough members of his own party to shove this on us.
Did you notice that BO & the libs are taking extraordinary measures to get this passed?

I gotta ask you, if this is such a good piece of legislaition, if it is so good for the country why wasn't a bill simply drawn up, presented to the people, debated in the open & voted into law? Remember BO's promise to debate it openly, on C-Span? What do you think about that campaign promise that wasn't kept? Why shove it down our throats (or up our....), why all the underhanded dealings? Why should BO have to resort to using (exploiting?) obscure process measures to get it voted on? Why have the Chicago thugs, Emanuel & Axelrod, stong arming members of Congress?

Why does Obamacare have to force everyone into the program?

 

Nothing in this legislative process hasn't already been done in the past. Your belief in the novelty of the process is mislaid. See my post above on Medicare Part D for some perspective. The Republicans want to portray this as unheard of but being the minority party for so many years, they have stooped to or invented every one of these tactics. Why should the Democrats do anything less in the face of stonewalling obstructionism?

Obama has reached out to the Republicans so many times and even included their ideas only to have them vote against the bill unanimously anyway. My wife was in Washington DC recently and was talking to a house member who told her that Republicans are completely unwilling to participate in the process. They don't have the courage, or foolishness, to shut down the government again so they are just not playing ball. The Congress is doing what it has to do to pass its agenda. When the Republicans can't talk about substance, they talk about process.

 

What are you, a parrot? That exact same quote came out of Nancy Pelosi's mouth yesterday!!!!!!!! I hope you never again accuse a member of spewing partisan talking points, you hypocrite.

And you're dead wrong about "process". "Reconcilliation" has never been used for legisaltion of this magnitude- never. Now they are discussing "deeming"? Really? Do you know what this is? It's a way of voting for a bill without actually voting on it...it allows the libs to pass the measure without anyone being held accountable come election time. Apparently "deeming" (and it hasn't been used since 1903 if I remember correctly) allows Congress to "deem" a meaure passed, without voting on it if they can get enough members to agree. What?

 

LOL Pep is that the best response you can come up with, I am not a American so I dont understand I quite possibly see it a lot clearer than you what is going on in your country, most of you here are so polarized you find it hard to see beyond what your political views dictate.
How often does the Rev wright visit the White house Pep? Oh and regardless to what he might say and think now the man still served his country.
Van Jones he is at the moment a visiting fellow at Princeton University & also Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs as well as been a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress (Soros helped to found) and a advisor for Green for All, again how often has he visited the White house since he resigned?
As for Andy Stern why shoudnt someone in his position be a visitor to the White house, would you be complaining so loudly if it was a owner of a large corporation?
Now please tell me what exactly Israel has been held back on by the United States and How President Obama has derided them?
Why dont you just try been honest and admit that you woudnt like anything that President Obama does on princible

 

Actually, I was quoting the Speaker of the House and didn't giver her credit. My bad, I should have given her credit for the comment. A public comment is hardly a talking point.

As far as your memory back to 1903 goes.....

In the last Congress that Republicans controlled, from 2005 to 2006, Rules Committee Chairman David Dreier used the self-executing rule more than 35 times, and was no stranger to the concept of “deem and pass.” That strategy, then decried by the House Democrats who are now using it, and now being called unconstitutional by WSJ editorialists, was defended by House Republicans in court (and upheld). Dreier used it for a $40 billion deficit reduction package so that his fellow GOPers could avoid an embarrassing vote on immigration....Norman Ornstein

As with reconciliation, self-executing rules have been used by both Democratic and Republican congressional majorities....Congress used it 36 times in 2005 and 2006, when the GOP was in charge, and 49 times in 2007 and 2008, after the Democrats had taken control. A 2006 Congressional Research Service report on self-executing rules calls them "procedurally imaginative" and notes that they have been used "on matters involving House-Senate relations." The CRS report says the mechanism was originally used as a way to streamline House approval of Senate amendments or to make technical changes or corrections to legislation....USA Today

So again, Republican hypocrisy wants two sets of rules, one for them and one for the Democrats. How convenient.

 

So both sides have used these measures over the years to pass uncontested & basically minor pieces of business in orderto speed up the process?
Does this justify the libs trying to cram through such a hugely fractious & unpopular law of this magnitude? Your comparing apples to oranges here and you know it. Obamcare has ZERO republican support, no popular support and only 50/50 support in the democratic party yet the leaders are willing to take these drastic steps in order to see it through? You don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to realize there is more to the agenda.

 

These are phony statistic you are making up on the spot. You can do better than that.

Let me ask you, why should the Republicans get to decide what the House rules apply to and what they don't apply to? The agenda you disparage is the agenda Obama was elected on. I really don't care if Republicans object to how the congress goes about health care reform as long as it gets reformed in the end.

 

Do you believe it is responsible governing to pay de facto bribes to members of Congress in order to get theim to vote BO's way on healthcare? Is it good for everyone when the unions get tax concessions on healthcare premuims in order to win support for Obamacare? Doesn't it concern you that BO appoints the brother of a member of Congress to a judgeship on the very same day he calls that member to the WH to try to win his vote for Obamacare? Isn't it odd that BO would make a campaign promise to debate healthcare in the open, on C-Span, but then does not? Isn't it odd that BO, Pelosi, Emanuel & Axelrod demand that a bill be passed into law with no regard as to what's in it (remember "just pass something") ? We haven't even mentioned Pelosi bringing a 2000 page proposal to the House & requiring a vote on Christmas Eve and not giving anyone the time to read it.
I really have to wonder how anyone could believe this sort of irresponsible behavior is in anyones best interest.

Oh yeah, did you ignore the few suggestions I made in an earlier post?

 

Horse trading, give and take, whipping, compromise, and political bribery....All is routine in congress. This is nothing new. Did you even bother reading the Medicare Part D post? The whining going on in Washington by Republicans is just obnoxious. As far as the Republicans complaints go, first it was too much too fast. Then the bill was too long. Then it was too complicated. Then they wanted to start all over. Stalling and obstructionism is all they are interested in. They want a bill that says only what they want and nothing the Democrats want. That ain't gonna happen. Since they have been completely unwilling to compromise, they deserve what they get in the end and their supporters can thank them for playing the game so badly. I really don't care. They are all irrelevant as they have been in all significant legislation in the past. They are on the wrong side of history yet again.

There is a question here. It was not rhetorical.