PDA

View Full Version : Obama Eric Massa(D-Astral Plateau) Says Grassley is a traitor


HonestChieffan
08-19-2009, 12:19 PM
Just a few days after saying he knows more than the people he is supposed to represent...


<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/S7g8UfnJesA&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/S7g8UfnJesA&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Donger
08-19-2009, 12:23 PM
What did Grassley say, exactly?

dirk digler
08-19-2009, 12:36 PM
I would never use the word traitor to describe someone opposing a certain bill. But he could have used the word liar and been accurate.

petegz28
08-19-2009, 01:06 PM
There are a certain group of Dems that are just getting out of hand

Chief Henry
08-19-2009, 01:09 PM
I would never use the word traitor to describe someone opposing a certain bill. But he could have used the word liar and been accurate.



Like Obama then.

orange
08-19-2009, 01:20 PM
What did Grassley say, exactly?

Repeating the "death panel" canard.

petegz28
08-19-2009, 01:20 PM
Repeating the "death panel" canard.

Big deal....who cares? How does that make him a "traitor"??

Donger
08-19-2009, 01:22 PM
Repeating the "death panel" canard.

I'm not sure how anyone could reasonably consider that to be treasonous.

orange
08-19-2009, 01:31 PM
Grassley Comment Raises Fresh Doubts About Bipartisanship
First Posted: 08-13-09 07:39 AM | Updated: 08-13-09 07:53 AM

Sen. Chuck Grassley's endorsement Wednesday of an unfounded, extremist argument that Democratic health care legislation could empower the government to "pull the plug on grandma" has once again raised question about the utility of the White House's efforts at bipartisanship.

The Iowa Republican has been relentlessly wooed by the White House on account of his role as one of the three GOP Senators on the Senate Finance Committee who have put themselves forward as chief negotiators on a bipartisan health care bill.

According to a report in Thursday's New York Times, Grassley has had many personal conversations with the president, both by phone and in person, during the health care legislation crafting process. Obama even told a gathering in New Hampshire on Tuesday that Grassley was one of his "Republican friends on Capitol Hill" who was "sincerely trying to figure out if they find a health care bill that works."

But for all the private outreach and public compliments it's hard to see what, if anything, Obama has gained in return. While even some of Grassley's fellow Republicans are distancing themselves from the fear-mongering lies espoused by the likes of former Alaska governor Sarah Palin, Grassley, at a town hall meeting in Iowa on Wednesday, gave credence to the myth that Obama and congressional Democrats were advocating direct government involvement in end-of-life decisions.

"There is some fear because in the House bill, there is counseling for end-of-life," Grassley said. "And from that standpoint, you have every right to fear.... We should not have a government program that determines if you're going to pull the plug on grandma."

The Senator also remains a staunch opponent of a public option for insurance coverage - a key aspect of the president's agenda.

Despite all this, the White House continues to speak of bipartisanship when it comes to crafting reform - although the definition of what constitutes Republican participation has become a bit more elastic.

"In terms of bi-partisanship in health care, he wants Republican ideas. He wants to talk to Republicans about it," a senior administration official told the Huffington Post earlier this week. "He wants to give them an opportunity to contribute constructively to the process. That is his test for whether it is a bipartisan bill... If they choose to all vote against it for some strategic political reason -- so be it. We have no control over that."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/13/despite-being-wooed-by-ob_n_258347.html

petegz28
08-19-2009, 01:32 PM
Grassley Comment Raises Fresh Doubts About Bipartisanship
First Posted: 08-13-09 07:39 AM | Updated: 08-13-09 07:53 AM

Sen. Chuck Grassley's endorsement Wednesday of an unfounded, extremist argument that Democratic health care legislation could empower the government to "pull the plug on grandma" has once again raised question about the utility of the White House's efforts at bipartisanship.

The Iowa Republican has been relentlessly wooed by the White House on account of his role as one of the three GOP Senators on the Senate Finance Committee who have put themselves forward as chief negotiators on a bipartisan health care bill.

According to a report in Thursday's New York Times, Grassley has had many personal conversations with the president, both by phone and in person, during the health care legislation crafting process. Obama even told a gathering in New Hampshire on Tuesday that Grassley was one of his "Republican friends on Capitol Hill" who was "sincerely trying to figure out if they find a health care bill that works."

But for all the private outreach and public compliments it's hard to see what, if anything, Obama has gained in return. While even some of Grassley's fellow Republicans are distancing themselves from the fear-mongering lies espoused by the likes of former Alaska governor Sarah Palin, Grassley, at a town hall meeting in Iowa on Wednesday, gave credence to the myth that Obama and congressional Democrats were advocating direct government involvement in end-of-life decisions.

"There is some fear because in the House bill, there is counseling for end-of-life," Grassley said. "And from that standpoint, you have every right to fear.... We should not have a government program that determines if you're going to pull the plug on grandma."

The Senator also remains a staunch opponent of a public option for insurance coverage - a key aspect of the president's agenda.

Despite all this, the White House continues to speak of bipartisanship when it comes to crafting reform - although the definition of what constitutes Republican participation has become a bit more elastic.

"In terms of bi-partisanship in health care, he wants Republican ideas. He wants to talk to Republicans about it," a senior administration official told the Huffington Post earlier this week. "He wants to give them an opportunity to contribute constructively to the process. That is his test for whether it is a bipartisan bill... If they choose to all vote against it for some strategic political reason -- so be it. We have no control over that."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/13/despite-being-wooed-by-ob_n_258347.html


Yeah, Orange, we know....now please explaun how this justifes calling him a traitor?

petegz28
08-19-2009, 01:33 PM
I'm not sure how anyone could reasonably consider that to be treasonous.

Man I can remember when the Dems were just blowing their lids because they thought they were being called treasonous or un-American.

Now it seems that is all they do.

Donger
08-19-2009, 01:33 PM
Grassley Comment Raises Fresh Doubts About Bipartisanship
First Posted: 08-13-09 07:39 AM | Updated: 08-13-09 07:53 AM

Sen. Chuck Grassley's endorsement Wednesday of an unfounded, extremist argument that Democratic health care legislation could empower the government to "pull the plug on grandma" has once again raised question about the utility of the White House's efforts at bipartisanship.

The Iowa Republican has been relentlessly wooed by the White House on account of his role as one of the three GOP Senators on the Senate Finance Committee who have put themselves forward as chief negotiators on a bipartisan health care bill.

According to a report in Thursday's New York Times, Grassley has had many personal conversations with the president, both by phone and in person, during the health care legislation crafting process. Obama even told a gathering in New Hampshire on Tuesday that Grassley was one of his "Republican friends on Capitol Hill" who was "sincerely trying to figure out if they find a health care bill that works."

But for all the private outreach and public compliments it's hard to see what, if anything, Obama has gained in return. While even some of Grassley's fellow Republicans are distancing themselves from the fear-mongering lies espoused by the likes of former Alaska governor Sarah Palin, Grassley, at a town hall meeting in Iowa on Wednesday, gave credence to the myth that Obama and congressional Democrats were advocating direct government involvement in end-of-life decisions.

"There is some fear because in the House bill, there is counseling for end-of-life," Grassley said. "And from that standpoint, you have every right to fear.... We should not have a government program that determines if you're going to pull the plug on grandma."

The Senator also remains a staunch opponent of a public option for insurance coverage - a key aspect of the president's agenda.

Despite all this, the White House continues to speak of bipartisanship when it comes to crafting reform - although the definition of what constitutes Republican participation has become a bit more elastic.

"In terms of bi-partisanship in health care, he wants Republican ideas. He wants to talk to Republicans about it," a senior administration official told the Huffington Post earlier this week. "He wants to give them an opportunity to contribute constructively to the process. That is his test for whether it is a bipartisan bill... If they choose to all vote against it for some strategic political reason -- so be it. We have no control over that."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/13/despite-being-wooed-by-ob_n_258347.html

And?

orange
08-19-2009, 01:34 PM
Yeah, Orange, we know....now please explaun how this justifes calling him a traitor?

Some people use more extreme rhetoric than others.

I'm just pointing out what Massa's referring to.

petegz28
08-19-2009, 01:40 PM
Some people use more extreme rhetoric than others.

I'm just pointing out what Massa's referring to.

We all knew what he was referring too. Do you agree with his calling Grassley a traitor?

orange
08-19-2009, 01:41 PM
We all knew what he was referring too. Do you agree with his calling Grassley a traitor?

Donger asked - I answered. If you don't think Donger's questions are sincere, take it up with him, not me.

HonestChieffan
08-19-2009, 01:43 PM
Every day a new label for those who disagree. If Nazi wont stick, use racist, or then maybe un american...now traitor.

Beats hell out of the issue and trying to fix the problem.

petegz28
08-19-2009, 01:47 PM
Donger asked - I answered. If you don't think Donger's questions are sincere, take it up with him, not me.

Answer my question, please.

thecoffeeguy
08-19-2009, 01:49 PM
Every day a new label for those who disagree. If Nazi wont stick, use racist, or then maybe un american...now traitor.

Beats hell out of the issue and trying to fix the problem.

:LOL:

orange
08-19-2009, 01:59 PM
Answer my question, please.

Do you see anything here that suggests:

(a) I have viewed that video
(b) I have or have not defended what Massa said
(c) I could give a shit what he had to say

?

Chief Faithful
08-19-2009, 02:00 PM
Grassley Comment Raises Fresh Doubts About Bipartisanship
First Posted: 08-13-09 07:39 AM | Updated: 08-13-09 07:53 AM

Despite all this, the White House continues to speak of bipartisanship when it comes to crafting reform - although the definition of what constitutes Republican participation has become a bit more elastic.

"In terms of bi-partisanship in health care, he wants Republican ideas. He wants to talk to Republicans about it," a senior administration official told the Huffington Post earlier this week. "He wants to give them an opportunity to contribute constructively to the process. That is his test for whether it is a bipartisan bill... If they choose to all vote against it for some strategic political reason -- so be it. We have no control over that."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/13/despite-being-wooed-by-ob_n_258347.html

So, when will Obama talk to the Republicans because so far he has not and every single Republican proposal has been nixed in committee. Right now there is no bi-partisanship in Congress or the White House because the Democrats are locking the Republicans out of the process.

petegz28
08-19-2009, 02:01 PM
Do you see anything here that suggests:

(a) I have viewed that video
(b) I have or have not defended what Massa said
(c) I could give a shit what he had to say

?

Nice dodge...

KC Dan
08-19-2009, 02:02 PM
So, when will Obama talk to the Republicans because so far he has not and every single Republican proposal has been nixed in committee. Right now there is no bi-partisanship in Congress or the White House because the Democrats are locking the Republicans out of the process.Didn't you know that allowing the other side's proposals to be voted down almost 100% of the time is biparatisanship? They could have just not allowed them to be introduced and voted on. Oh yeah, that is happening too.

orange
08-19-2009, 02:07 PM
So, when will Obama talk to the Republicans because so far he has not and every single Republican proposal has been nixed in committee. Right now there is no bi-partisanship in Congress or the White House because the Democrats are locking the Republicans out of the process.

You only had to read the next paragraph in that post you quoted.

RINGLEADER
08-19-2009, 09:47 PM
Who cares? The Dems don't need his vote. They want to do it by themselves.

Instead of calling him a traitor maybe this moron can point to a version of government health care that has worked. Or how they're going to fill the enormous hole the CBO says the plan will create. Or what's going to happen when the savings they're projection doesn't materialize.

patteeu
08-20-2009, 11:33 AM
I would never use the word traitor to describe someone opposing a certain bill. But he could have used the word liar and been accurate.

If what Orange posted is what this is all about, calling him a liar would be inaccurate. Depending on what he's said during his bipartisan conversations with democrats, traitor might be accurate. In this case though, he's a traitor to scoundrels, which isn't a bad thing at all.

dirk digler
08-20-2009, 11:40 AM
If what Orange posted is what this is all about, calling him a liar would be inaccurate. Depending on what he's said during his bipartisan conversations with democrats, traitor might be accurate. In this case though, he's a traitor to scoundrels, which isn't a bad thing at all.

He is a liar when he was saying the government was going to kill granny.

HonestChieffan
08-20-2009, 11:43 AM
He is a liar when he was saying the government was going to kill granny.


Killing granny would be substantially different than letting Granny die. I don't believe there would be actual terminations of life or killings as such.

BucEyedPea
08-20-2009, 11:49 AM
We all knew what he was referring too. Do you agree with his calling Grassley a traitor?

I do. Because he's one of chief pushers of the co-ops which leads us back to single-payer by stealth. The stinkin' RINO/Rockefeller/NeoCon Republican.

KC Dan
08-20-2009, 11:55 AM
Killing granny would be substantially different than letting Granny die. I don't believe there would be actual terminations of life or killings as such.Newsflash: Granny's gonna die!

patteeu
08-20-2009, 12:39 PM
He is a liar when he was saying the government was going to kill granny.

He didn't say that. He said that there's a basis for the fear, which there is. Interfering with the incentives for these end-of-life discussions between physician and patient is a step toward more government involvement in end-of-life decisions.

He also said it would be wrong for government to determine if you're going to pull the plug on grandma. Do you disagree with that?

He didn't say that there would be government "death panels" making those determinations immediately.