PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues Obama taking questions from GOP house members live and unscripted.


Pages : [1] 2

BigRedChief
01-29-2010, 11:25 AM
http://www.cnn.com/video/flashLive/live.html?stream=stream2&hpt=T2

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD>Obama tells GOP his health plan has been demonized



STORY HIGHLIGHTS

NEW: President Obama agrees health care legislation has been "messy process"
Obama said he has embraced some GOP approaches on health care
Obama speaks, takes questions at House GOP retreat
Obama, conservative Republicans will try to find middle ground on divisive issues



RELATED TOPICS

Barack Obama (http://topics.cnn.com/topics/Barack_Obama)
Republican Party (http://topics.cnn.com/topics/U_S_Republican_Party_Politics)
Democratic Party (http://topics.cnn.com/topics/U_S_Democratic_Party_Politics)
Health Care Reform (http://topics.cnn.com/topics/Health_Care_Reform)
John Boehner (http://topics.cnn.com/topics/John_Boehner)


Baltimore, Maryland (CNN) -- President Obama defended his health care plan Friday as centrist but said Republicans had presented it as "some Bolshevik plot" and called on lawmakers on both sides of the aisle to stop demonizing each other.
"We've got to close the gap a little bit between the rhetoric and the reality," he said, speaking to House Republicans at their annual retreat in Baltimore.
"If the way these issues are being presented by the Republicans is that this is some wild-eyed plot to impose huge government in every aspect of our lives, what happens is you guys then don't have a lot of room to negotiate with me."
He said even Republicans who vote with the Obama administration become politically vulnerable in their own base.
"You've given yourselves very little room to work in a bipartisan fashion," he said.
Obama said Republicans and Democrats both need "to think about tone" in debate.
"This is part of what's happened in our politics, where we demonize the other side so much that when it comes to actually getting things done, it becomes tough to do."
Obama said he has embraced some GOP approaches on health care. "When you say I ought to be willing to accept Republican ideas on health care, let's be clear -- I have. Bipartisanship, not for its own sake, but to solve problems," he said.
"From the start, I sought out and supported ideas from Republicans. I even talked about an issue that has been a holy grail for a lot of you, which was tort reform, and said that I'd be willing to work together as part of a comprehensive package to deal with it. "
He mentioned starting "a high-risk pool for uninsured folks with pre-existing conditions. That wasn't my idea. It was Sen. [John] McCain's, and I supported it."
The president said he took responsibility for not having the health care debate broadcast on C-SPAN, which he said he would do, and calling criticism "legitimate."
"If you look at the health care process -- just over the course of the year -- overwhelmingly the majority of it actually was on C-SPAN, because it was taking place in congressional hearings in which guys were participating," Obama said.
He said that once legislation went through the committee process, there were meetings across the Capitol on how to shape the measure.
"That was a messy process, and I take responsibility for not having structured it in a way where it was all taking place in one place that could be filmed," he said.
"How to do that logistically would not have been as easy as it sounds, because you're shuttling back and forth between between the House, the Senate, different offices, etc., different legislators."
The president also defended his stimulus plan before GOP House members.
"There is not a single person in here who, had it not been for what was in the stimulus package, wouldn't be going home to more teachers laid off, more firefighters laid off, more cops laid off," Obama said.
"The component parts of the Recovery Act are consistent" with what many Republicans say are important, he said.
Obama cited "rebuilding our infrastructure, tax cuts for families and businesses, and making sure that we were providing states and individuals some support when the roof was caving in."
The president told House Republicans that Americans don't "want us to focus on our job security. They want us to focus on their job security."
Obama said Americans don't want more gridlock, partisanship and obstruction.
"They didn't send us to Washington to fight each other in some sort of political field cage match to see who comes out alive. That's not what they want. They sent us to Washington to work together, to get things done and to solve the problems that they're grappling with every single day."
He pointed to bipartisan efforts, citing support for putting troops in Afghanistan and denying al Qaeda a safe haven.
Obama took aim at wasteful spending, saying, "I would love for Congress itself to show discipline on both sides of the aisle."
He said that "wasteful spending is usually spent somehow outside of your district."
"Have you noticed that? The spending in your district tends to seem pretty sensible. So I would love to see more restraint within Congress."
He said he intends to create a commission to confront deficits by executive order.
"The idea of a bipartisan fiscal commission to confront the deficits in the long term died in the Senate the other day," he said. "So I'm going to establish such a commission by executive order, and I hope that you participate fully and genuinely in that effort."
The recommendations of a commission created by executive order would not be binding; those from a commission created by Congress would have been.
At issue at Friday's gathering is whether it is possible for the Democratic president and increasingly conservative House Republicans to find a middle ground on a growing number of sharply divisive issues.
Political leaders on both sides of the aisle also are struggling to bridge a trust gap. Democrats have pointed to near-uniform GOP opposition to most administration initiatives as evidence that Republicans (http://topics.cnn.com/topics/U_S_Republican_Party_Politics) are pursuing a strategy of total obstruction to maximize gains in the upcoming midterm elections.
Democrats (http://topics.cnn.com/topics/U_S_Democratic_Party_Politics)' tenuous ability to pass legislation on a strict party-line basis was undermined by last week's special election to fill Ted Kennedy's U.S. Senate seat in Massachusetts.
GOP state Sen. Scott Brown's upset victory stripped Democrats of their 60-seat Senate "supermajority" and gave Republicans the ability to block votes on most bills.
Obama (http://topics.cnn.com/topics/Barack_Obama) acknowledged the changed political climate in Wednesday's State of the Union address when he told Republicans they now share in the responsibility of governing.
"If the Republican leadership is going to insist that 60 votes in the Senate are required to do any business at all in this town ... then the responsibility to govern is now yours as well," he said.
"Just saying no to everything may be good short-term politics, but it's not leadership. We were sent here to serve our citizens, not our ambitions. So let's show the American people that we can do it together."
Obama appeared to extend an olive branch to Republicans during the speech, announcing his intention to begin monthly meetings with both Democratic and GOP leaders.
"I know you can't wait," he said to laughter.
Also Wednesday, Obama challenged Republicans to come up with an alternative to his struggling health care plan. Republicans have said such challenges are disingenuous, pointing to a proposal that House Minority Leader John Boehner (http://topics.cnn.com/topics/John_Boehner), R-Ohio, unveiled in November.
Boehner's proposal is less ambitious in scope than most Democratic plans. It costs much less and would extend coverage to far fewer uninsured Americans.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><!--Article End--><!--Bibliography Goes Here-->
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD> </TD></TR><TR><TD bgColor=#cccccc>http://images.clickability.com/pti/spacer.gif</TD></TR><TR><TD> </TD></TR><TR><TD></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<!--Bibliography End--><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=font-cn> </TD></TR><TR><TD class=font-cn>Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/29/obama.gop/index.html?hpt=T2 </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Hydrae
01-29-2010, 11:35 AM
We need bipartisan support so the Republicans need to get on board with the Democrats.

At least that is what I read here and heard during the SOTU address the other night.

HonestChieffan
01-29-2010, 11:44 AM
ObamaCare Good.
Bush...oh wait, Bush be gone.

ObamaCare good.
Republicans all bad.
Blame republicans.


Moron.

The Mad Crapper
01-29-2010, 11:45 AM
"If the way these issues are being presented by the Republicans is that this is some wild-eyed plot to impose huge government in every aspect of our lives, what happens is you guys then don't have a lot of room to negotiate with me."

If?

Donger
01-29-2010, 11:46 AM
Boy, Obama sure does seem to believe in bipartisanship since that pesky election in Massachusetts.

HonestChieffan
01-29-2010, 11:55 AM
He also pointed out that the majority of the HC debate was on CSPAN.

Ok then.

Captain Obvious
01-29-2010, 03:45 PM
I'm a young guy, so help me out fellas. Is this something that most Presidents do? I don't recall Bush doing it or Clinton (though I have to admit I wasn't paying much attention with these two).

You may not agree, but I find this whole thing fascinating. Then again I don't mind a little political theater.

BucEyedPea
01-29-2010, 03:56 PM
Obama tells GOP his health plan has been demonized

You're dayum right it has been!!! As it should be!!

Taco John
01-29-2010, 04:03 PM
"If the way these issues are being presented by the Republicans is that this is some wild-eyed plot to impose huge government in every aspect of our lives, what happens is you guys then don't have a lot of room to negotiate with me."


Uh, yeah. That's right. It's a wild-eyed plot, to be sure. It's hard to imagine anything more insane than FORCING people to become customers of insurance companies with enforcement through the IRS. Yes, that is a wild-eyed plot. Any Republican who backs that idea in any way, shape, or form has absolutely no business even being a Republican.

Taco John
01-29-2010, 04:05 PM
I'm a young guy, so help me out fellas. Is this something that most Presidents do? I don't recall Bush doing it or Clinton (though I have to admit I wasn't paying much attention with these two).

You may not agree, but I find this whole thing fascinating. Then again I don't mind a little political theater.

This is what presidents who are on the verge of being a lame duck after only a single year do.

BigRedChief
01-29-2010, 04:56 PM
He also pointed out that the majority of the HC debate was on CSPAN.

Ok then.
Very fascinating TV. A President taking unscripted questions from the opposition on live TV. :clap:

The Mad Crapper
01-29-2010, 05:06 PM
He also pointed out that the majority of the HC debate was on CSPAN.

Ok then.

That's like, the fifth out and out lie the greasy bastard said at the SOTU.

patteeu
01-29-2010, 05:46 PM
I'm a young guy, so help me out fellas. Is this something that most Presidents do? I don't recall Bush doing it or Clinton (though I have to admit I wasn't paying much attention with these two).

You may not agree, but I find this whole thing fascinating. Then again I don't mind a little political theater.

Most presidents demonstrate their bipartisanship through their participation in the legislative process. For example, GWBush invited Ted Kennedy to help craft No Child Left Behind legislation early in his first term. He also worked with democrats while putting together the prescription drug program and on GWoT activities. He didn't have the luxury of huge majorities in the Senate and the House. If he had, maybe he would have been as uninterested in bipartisanship as Obama has been, but we'll never know.

Jenson71
01-29-2010, 05:50 PM
He also pointed out that the majority of the HC debate was on CSPAN.

Ok then.

How much has been?

ChiefaRoo
01-29-2010, 05:50 PM
I watched it. Hard to tell much other than the fact that he showed up. He deserves credit for that. He's either going to go to the true middle like Clinton or he's going to go lie to the public and then try to cram his agenda through before Nov. If he goes to the middle then he's going to lose the Libs in the House which will be good because if America is smart they're going to vote every worthless big spending D and self serving R out of congress. IF he goes towards the middle he could save his Presidency. If he tries and sneaks past the American people he's gone.

ILChief
01-29-2010, 05:55 PM
I'm a young guy, so help me out fellas. Is this something that most Presidents do? I don't recall Bush doing it or Clinton (though I have to admit I wasn't paying much attention with these two).

You may not agree, but I find this whole thing fascinating. Then again I don't mind a little political theater.


Yes other Presidents have done it. but this is the first time its been televised.

BigRedChief
01-29-2010, 06:27 PM
Yes other Presidents have done it. but this is the first time its been televised.And hopefully not the last.

BigRedChief
01-29-2010, 06:31 PM
Most presidents demonstrate their bipartisanship through their participation in the legislative process. For example, GWBush invited Ted Kennedy to help craft No Child Left Behind legislation early in his first term. He also worked with democrats while putting together the prescription drug program and on GWoT activities. He didn't have the luxury of huge majorities in the Senate and the House. If he had, maybe he would have been as uninterested in bipartisanship as Obama has been, but we'll never know.hey Patteau, Do you think Palin would have the intellectual heft to pull off standing in a room full of Democrats and they are allowed to ask any question on any topic and you don't know whats coming? To stand there while Democrats get to say their talking points and its all on TV, live. She can't even handle Katie Couric.ROFL

Toadkiller
01-29-2010, 06:36 PM
Did fox really quit airing it 20 minutes before it finished and if so why?

patteeu
01-29-2010, 06:40 PM
hey Patteau, Do you think Palin would have the intellectual heft to pull off standing in a room full of Democrats and they are allowed to ask any question on any topic and you don't know whats coming? To stand there while Democrats get to say their talking points and its all on TV, live. She can't even handle Katie Couric.ROFL

I think Dick Cheney would have done a far better job than Obama did. You'll have to ask someone more in tune with the Palin camp about her.

Mr. Flopnuts
01-29-2010, 06:43 PM
Did fox really quit airing it 20 minutes before it finished and if so why?

Probably because he wrapped the whole thing up by talking about how no one can do anything with all of the dirty politics going on. He talked expansively on how each side paints themselves into a corner because they demonize the other side about every little thing.

He went on to discuss a particular point where the Democrats put a piece of legislature into the Health Care bill that was proposed by a Republican Senator from Texas. The Republicans then started the whole media frenzy of how old people were going to die from Medicare cuts. That's a brief summary.

The most trusted news in America: Fox News.

Mr. Flopnuts
01-29-2010, 06:45 PM
I'll give the guy some credit for his unprecedented Republican courtship. I liked what he had to say about both sides coming together and to quit demonizing each other over every single issue.

What I really want to see though, is for him to do the same damn thing with his own leadership. Let's see him sit Nancy, and Uncle Harry down and have the same conversation.

BigRedChief
01-29-2010, 06:49 PM
I'll give the guy some credit for his unprecedented Republican courtship. I liked what he had to say about both sides coming together and to quit demonizing each other over every single issue.

What I really want to see though, is for him to do the same damn thing with his own leadership. Let's see him sit Nancy, and Uncle Harry down and have the same conversation.I agree that is just as important. Obama is going to have to sit on Pelosi and her partisan BS. He needs to have them at the table from the start. But, they have to realize that bi-partisanship doesn't mean do what you want but negoiate.

petegz28
01-29-2010, 06:50 PM
How much has been?

According to C-Span...all of 1 hour.

petegz28
01-29-2010, 06:51 PM
hey Patteau, Do you think Palin would have the intellectual heft to pull off standing in a room full of Democrats and they are allowed to ask any question on any topic and you don't know whats coming? To stand there while Democrats get to say their talking points and its all on TV, live. She can't even handle Katie Couric.ROFL

WTF does Palin have to do with anything? I swear you people on the Left worry more about unelected people like I have never seen. Rush, Beck, Palin, Hannity.....get over it. None of those people are the President.

Mr. Flopnuts
01-29-2010, 06:53 PM
I agree that is just as important. Obama is going to have to sit on Pelosi and her partisan BS. He needs to have them at the table from the start. But, they have to realize that bi-partisanship doesn't mean do what you want but negoiate.

This is what he's supposed to be good at. Negotiating with the other party. It's time for O to strap on his boots and get it done. Otherwise, what was once thought impossible will become a stark reality. Obama will be a 1 term President. I think the American people are done with this bullshit. And I applaud them for it if that's the case.

patteeu
01-29-2010, 06:54 PM
I'll give the guy some credit for his unprecedented Republican courtship. I liked what he had to say about both sides coming together and to quit demonizing each other over every single issue.

What I really want to see though, is for him to do the same damn thing with his own leadership. Let's see him sit Nancy, and Uncle Harry down and have the same conversation.

And it's all pretty worthless if it's just talk. Bipartisanship can't just be about Republicans being more polite as democrats pass 100% pure democrat legislation. The dems want Republican votes, but they don't want to incorporate significant Republican ideas, e.g. tort reform. Not that I blame them. If it were Republicans in charge, I wouldn't want them to levy a punitive tax on business just to get democrat votes.

BigRedChief
01-29-2010, 06:55 PM
WTF does Palin have to do with anything? I swear you people on the Left worry more about unelected people like I have never seen. Rush, Beck, Palin, Hannity.....get over it. None of those people are the President.I'm just poking Patteau with a verbal stick, Palin is as big a joke as Barney Frank,

Mr. Flopnuts
01-29-2010, 07:04 PM
And it's all pretty worthless if it's just talk. Bipartisanship can't just be about Republicans being more polite as democrats pass 100% pure democrat legislation. The dems want Republican votes, but they don't want to incorporate significant Republican ideas, e.g. tort reform. Not that I blame them. If it were Republicans in charge, I wouldn't want them to levy a punitive tax on business just to get democrat votes.

There are always going to be core issues that you can't achieve bipartisanship on. But the example the President gave about inserting some core ideals of the Republican Senator from Texas (I can't remember his name) into the Health Care bill, and then getting blasted in the media by the Republicans for it is unacceptable. And I full well know that happens on both sides, on just about every level of politics there are.

That's where it can't be just talk, and why I was saying I'd love to see him sit his own people down and have the same conversation. You want people to change? Change yourself and show them that you're serious.

petegz28
01-29-2010, 07:08 PM
I'm just poking Patteau with a verbal stick, Palin is as big a joke as Barney Frank,

FRank is the bigger joke. He is actually an elected official. For some reason.

Bwana
01-29-2010, 07:19 PM
Boy, Obama sure does seem to believe in bipartisanship since that pesky election in Massachusetts.

BINGO!

Cannibal
01-29-2010, 07:25 PM
One Republican who attended said they never should have let cameras in the room because he knows the Republicans got schooled.

KCWolfman
01-29-2010, 07:29 PM
So I am confused. On one hand the POTUS states the Republicans have offered nothing in healthcare reform and is disappointed in them. On the other he admits they have when he states he read their detailed pamphlet but didn't like the plan.

How long can he continue this doublespeak and people actually defend him? It is like watching a wife with a black eye say she fell into a doorknob and deserved it right before going back in the home with the abusive husband. I use to feel pity for the people defending him - now I realize they are stupid because they chose to be stupid.

KCWolfman
01-29-2010, 07:32 PM
Here is the yahoonews story on the same subject

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100129/ap_on_re_us/us_obama_gop

BALTIMORE – In a remarkably sharp face-to-face confrontation, President Barack Obama chastised Republican lawmakers Friday for opposing him on taxes, health care and the economic stimulus, while they accused him in turn of brushing off their ideas and driving up the national debt.

The president and GOP House members took turns questioning and sometimes lecturing each other for more than an hour at a Republican gathering in Baltimore. The Republicans agreed to let TV cameras inside, resulting in an extended, point-by-point interchange that was almost unprecedented in U.S. politics, except perhaps during presidential debates.

With voters angry about partisanship and legislative logjams, both sides were eager to demonstrate they were ready to cooperate, resulting in the GOP invitation and Obama's acceptance. After polite introductions, however, Friday's exchange showed that Obama and the Republicans remain far apart on key issues, and neither side could resist the chance to challenge and even scold the other.

Obama said Republican lawmakers have attacked his health care overhaul so fiercely, "you'd think that this thing was some Bolshevik plot." His proposals are mainstream, widely supported ideas, he said, and they deserve some GOP votes in Congress.

"I am not an ideologue," the president declared.

But Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga., pointedly asked Obama: "What should we tell our constituents who know that Republicans have offered positive solutions" for health care, "and yet continue to hear out of the administration that we've offered nothing?"

Obama showed little sympathy, disputing Price's claim that a Republican plan would insure nearly all Americans without raising taxes.

"That's just not true," said Obama. He called such claims "boilerplate" meant to score political points.

At times it seemed more like Britain's "question time" — when lawmakers in the House of Commons trade barbs with the prime minister — than a meeting between a U.S. president and members of Congress.

Republican Conference Chairman Mike Pence of Indiana defended Price on the health care proposals. He said a GOP agenda booklet given to Obama at the start of the session "is backed up by precisely the kind of detailed legislation that Speaker (Nancy) Pelosi and your administration have been busy ignoring for 12 months."

Obama shot back that he had read the Republican proposals and that they promise solutions that can't be realized.

In another barbed exchange, the president said some Republican lawmakers in the audience had attended ribbon-cutting ceremonies for projects in their districts funded by the 2009 stimulus package that they voted against.

Pence said Obama was trying to defend "a so-called stimulus that was a piecemeal list of projects and boutique tax cuts."

Obama replied, "When you say they were boutique tax cuts, Mike, 95 percent of working Americans got tax cuts."

"This notion that this was a radical package is just not true," he said.

Republicans are feeling energized after winning a Democratic Senate seat in Massachusetts, and Obama is trying to refocus his stalled agenda more on jobs than health care. With Obama at a podium facing a hotel conference room full of Republicans, both sides jumped to the debate.

"It was the kind of discussion that we frankly need to have more of," said House Republican Whip Eric Cantor of Virginia.

"I'm having fun, this is great," Obama said when Pence asked if he had time for more questions.

"So are we," said Pence.

Some Republicans prefaced their questions with lengthy recitations of conservative talking points. The president sometimes listened impassively but sometimes broke in.

"I know there's a question in there somewhere, because you're making a whole bunch of assertions, half of which I disagree with," Obama said to Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas, whom he mistakenly called "Jim."

Obama, a former law school professor, launched into lectures of his own at times. He warned lawmakers from both parties against demonizing a political opponent, because voters might find it incomprehensible if the two sides ever agree on anything.

"We've got to be careful about what we say about each other sometimes, because it boxes us in in ways that makes it difficult for us to work together because our constituents start believing us," Obama said. "So just a tone of civility instead of slash-and-burn would be helpful."

Republicans sat attentively for the most part. There was some grumbling when Obama remarked — after being pressed about closed-door health care negotiations — that much of the legislation was developed in congressional committees in front of television cameras.

"That was a messy process," Obama said.

GOP lawmakers pressured him to support a presidential line-item veto for spending bills and to endorse across-the-board tax cuts. Obama said he was ready to talk about the budget proposal, though he disputed accusations that his administration was to blame for big increases in deficit spending. And he demurred on the idea of cutting everyone's taxes, saying with a smile that billionaires don't need tax cuts.

In his opening remarks, Obama criticized what he said was a Washington culture driven by opinion polls and nonstop political campaigns.

"I don't believe that the American people want us to focus on our job security, they want us to focus on their job security," he said.

The president acknowledged that Republicans have joined Democrats in some efforts, such as sending more U.S. troops to Afghanistan. But he said he was disappointed and perplexed by virtually unanimous GOP opposition to other programs, such as the economic stimulus bill.

Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., said of the event, "In some places I kind of felt like I was in my high school assembly being lectured by my principal. In others, I felt like he was listening."

When it was over, House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio issued a statement saying Obama "acknowledged the fact that House Republicans have offered better solutions over the last year."

Not exactly how the president and his allies saw it.

Cannibal
01-29-2010, 07:52 PM
Fox was showing it and cut away when they realized how bad they were getting their asses kicked.

Cannibal
01-29-2010, 07:53 PM
Can you imagine Bush doing this same thing with 114 of his opposition? He wouldn't be capable.

KCWolfman
01-29-2010, 07:55 PM
Fox was showing it and cut away when they realized how bad they were getting their asses kicked.

Really???

The POTUS says the Reps offered nothing, and the Reps show proof they have and that is getting their asses kicked?

You are one of those people I am referring to. You are deluded and you deserve everything you get from this farsical administration.

Cannibal
01-29-2010, 08:07 PM
The Republican won't do this again. You watch. 114 against 1 and they won't do it again.

BigRedChief
01-29-2010, 08:22 PM
The Republican won't do this again. You watch. 114 against 1 and they won't do it again.Anyone who watches this is going to see the Republicans get schooled big time. Jeeezzz the man is a walking encyclopedia of knowledge. Totally owned that room. And all without a teleprompter.ROFL

MarcBulger
01-29-2010, 08:25 PM
Whats the Obama lie count up to? Lets see, Lobbyists not in my adm. I have looked at your proposals, I put the HC debate on C-Span.

I mean the man gets up in front of COngress and lie's about the Supreme Court decision and you still blow himm...Gull....i....ble.......

BigRedChief
01-29-2010, 08:25 PM
Can you imagine Bush doing this same thing with 114 of his opposition? He wouldn't be capable.Name me any Republican capable of pulling this off? Or for that matter any other Democrat.

MarcBulger
01-29-2010, 08:29 PM
I was real little at the time but as I recall Nixon was pretty good at it, until his lies caught up with him...

Cannibal
01-29-2010, 08:33 PM
Name me any Republican capable of pulling this off? Or for that matter any other Democrat.

Evidently the Republicans "invited" Obama to this meeting (of course assuming he'd decline and look like a douche), but he accepted with the condition that cameras be allowed. LOL they said no cameras at first but they had to relent or look like puzzies. It was a brilliant political move.

MarcBulger
01-29-2010, 08:35 PM
So you don't mind being lied to..

KCWolfman
01-29-2010, 08:41 PM
Anyone who watches this is going to see the Republicans get schooled big time. Jeeezzz the man is a walking encyclopedia of knowledge. Totally owned that room. And all without a teleprompter.ROFL

Again, he blatantly lied. He stated the Republicans offered nothing in healthcare - ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Then he was given proof they had and he even stated he received it but didn't like it.

He lied. You ignored he lied, Cannibal ignored he lied. If a Republican says he lies then Jimmy Carter and the liberal press will say they are racist.

You people are just stupid sometimes.

BigRedChief
01-29-2010, 08:47 PM
Again, he blatantly lied. He stated the Republicans offered nothing in healthcare - ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Then he was given proof they had and he even stated he received it but didn't like it.

He lied. You ignored he lied, Cannibal ignored he lied. If a Republican says he lies then Jimmy Carter and the liberal press will say they are racist.

You people are just stupid sometimes.How many BS lies have the republicans told about Obama? He's going to kill Grandma, He's a communist, He's not an American, he is a muslim etc etc any of these ring a bell?

Cannibal
01-29-2010, 08:47 PM
Again, he blatantly lied. He stated the Republicans offered nothing in healthcare - ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Then he was given proof they had and he even stated he received it but didn't like it.

He lied. You ignored he lied, Cannibal ignored he lied. If a Republican says he lies then Jimmy Carter and the liberal press will say they are racist.

You people are just stupid sometimes.

Calm down dude the name calling is unnecessary. If you remember correctly, the Dems and Obama originally wanted a single payer option to go along with private insurance. Guess what, that was scrapped due to the Republican's refusing to vote for it. The Dems have compromised a shit load on this bill and the Republicans still refuse to vote and are still being obstructionist. Obama was right.

Cannibal
01-29-2010, 08:48 PM
How many BS lies have the republicans told about Obama? He's going to kill Grandma, He's a communist, He's not an American, he is a muslim etc etc ring a bell?

All of this also true and good retort

patteeu
01-29-2010, 08:52 PM
Name me any Republican capable of pulling this off? Or for that matter any other Democrat.

There are plenty of Republicans who could pull this off. I know Dick Cheney or Ron Paul could and I'm pretty sure a guy like Mike Huckabee or Newt Gingrich could too. There really isn't a shortage. Tony Snow used to do pretty much the same thing on a daily basis.

petegz28
01-29-2010, 08:53 PM
I just heard some clips of his whine fest with the Repubs. Woe is Barry. LMAO

BucEyedPea
01-29-2010, 08:53 PM
How many BS lies have the republicans told about Obama? He's going to kill Grandma, He's a communist, He's not an American, he is a muslim etc etc any of these ring a bell?
Those aren't all lies. You just have to know what communism is.

BucEyedPea
01-29-2010, 08:54 PM
Anyone who watches this is going to see the Republicans get schooled big time. Jeeezzz the man is a walking encyclopedia of knowledge. Totally owned that room. And all without a teleprompter.ROFL
He is NOT!
It amazes the different reactions people get from the same event.

petegz28
01-29-2010, 08:54 PM
Anyone who watches this is going to see the Republicans get schooled big time. Jeeezzz the man is a walking encyclopedia of knowledge. Totally owned that room. And all without a teleprompter.ROFL

From what I heard, it was Obama doing a lot of whining.

Hydrae
01-29-2010, 08:55 PM
Calm down dude the name calling is unnecessary. If you remember correctly, the Dems and Obama originally wanted a single payer option to go along with private insurance. Guess what, that was scrapped due to the Republican's refusing to vote for it. The Dems have compromised a shit load on this bill and the Republicans still refuse to vote and are still being obstructionist. Obama was right.

I am not Republican but I thank them daily for being obstructionist on this issue.

BucEyedPea
01-29-2010, 08:55 PM
This is nothing more than a PR stunt by the WH so they have something to paint the Rs as obstructionist. The thing is there are people out there who want them to be obstructionist on this bill.

petegz28
01-29-2010, 08:56 PM
The fact of the matter that seems to get lost on the Left is the Dems don't need 1 Repub vote for anything. Or didn't. So for anyone to blame the Repubs for obstructing and preventing things is just pure bull cockey.

ROYC75
01-29-2010, 08:57 PM
OK, where was Obo's proof that the republican plan was bad ? He just simply said it didn't.

Are we to just take Obo for his word ? Why not, Lie and deflect is a great campaign.

BucEyedPea
01-29-2010, 08:57 PM
The fact of the matter that seems to get lost on the Left is the Dems don't need 1 Repub vote for anything. Or didn't. So for anyone to blame the Repubs for obstructing and preventing things is just pure bull cockey.

That's true. But there's an election coming up this year. That's what this is about.

BigRedChief
01-29-2010, 08:58 PM
I just heard some clips of his whine fest with the Repubs. Woe is Barry. LMAOAre you kidding?On drugs? Even the Republicans are saying it was a mistake and they got owned.

patteeu
01-29-2010, 08:59 PM
Calm down dude the name calling is unnecessary. If you remember correctly, the Dems and Obama originally wanted a single payer option to go along with private insurance. Guess what, that was scrapped due to the Republican's refusing to vote for it. The Dems have compromised a shit load on this bill and the Republicans still refuse to vote and are still being obstructionist. Obama was right.

The democrats compromised with THEMSELVES. They didn't compromise enough to get a single vote in the Senate and only got a couple of token republican votes (iirc) in the House. That isn't compromise, that's the back of the hand.

petegz28
01-29-2010, 09:01 PM
Are you kidding?On drugs? Even the Republicans are saying it was a mistake and they got owned.

That's cause Repubs don't know how to play the game. It was still a whine fest.

BucEyedPea
01-29-2010, 09:02 PM
That's cause Repubs don't know how to play the game. It was still a whine fest.

Torture. I thought he was against that as well as the hard-left Ds?

petegz28
01-29-2010, 09:04 PM
"You guys tried to say I wanted more government control and said the health care plan was a bolshevik plan" (paraphrased)

Well, Barry, you do and it is.

Cannibal
01-29-2010, 09:05 PM
114 to 1 and they lost.

petegz28
01-29-2010, 09:06 PM
114 to 1 and they lost.

Whatever that is supposed to mean.

Cannibal
01-29-2010, 09:07 PM
The democrats compromised with THEMSELVES. They didn't compromise enough to get a single vote in the Senate and only got a couple of token republican votes (iirc) in the House. That isn't compromise, that's the back of the hand.

They scaled their proposals back time and time again. What do you want them to do? Abandon all of their own ideas and just use all of the Republicans ideas?

petegz28
01-29-2010, 09:09 PM
An example came from Representative Jeb Hensarling, who asked: "Will that new budget, like your old budget, triple the national debt and continue to take us down the path of increasing the cost of government to almost 25 percent of our economy? That's the question, Mr. President."

Obama complained that "the whole question was structured as a talking point for running a campaign

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60S5JY20100129?type=politicsNews?feedType=RSS&feedName=politicsNews&rpc=22&sp=true

petegz28
01-29-2010, 09:11 PM
While acknowledging double-digit unemployment could not be tolerated, Obama also reminded the lawmakers of the high joblessness and huge budget deficit he had inherited from his Republican predecessor, George W. Bush

LMAO Haven't heard that one before

dirk digler
01-29-2010, 09:19 PM
I watched part of this when it was going on. I thought it was a great idea by both the Republicans and Obama. I did catch Jeb's speech. He talked for like 5 minutes before he got to his question.

One of the interesting things I caught was at the end Obama was talking to one of the Republicans who submitted a health care proposal and Obama actually said he read the whole bill and liked alot of it.

Norman Einstein
01-29-2010, 09:23 PM
How many BS lies have the republicans told about Obama? He's going to kill Grandma, He's a communist, He's not an American, he is a muslim etc etc any of these ring a bell?

You are so FOS.

He's going to kill Grandma,
Have you read the HC bill?

He's a communist,
Prove that his concepts are not.

He's not an American,
Whre is your proof there? I've never seen anything that validates that other than comments from koolaid drinkers like you.

he is a muslim
Prove he's not. He talks the talk and may walk the walk.

etc etc
More of things you can't validate, I'm sure.

Go ahead, see if you can go to one of your liberal sites and cut and paste more biased bullshit.

Norman Einstein
01-29-2010, 09:25 PM
Calm down dude the name calling is unnecessary. If you remember correctly, the Dems and Obama originally wanted a single payer option to go along with private insurance. Guess what, that was scrapped due to the Republican's refusing to vote for it. The Dems have compromised a shit load on this bill and the Republicans still refuse to vote and are still being obstructionist. Obama was right.

Why don't you down load the latest HC bill and read it before you state things that are not true?

petegz28
01-29-2010, 09:26 PM
I watched part of this when it was going on. I thought it was a great idea by both the Republicans and Obama. I did catch Jeb's speech. He talked for like 5 minutes before he got to his question.

One of the interesting things I caught was at the end Obama was talking to one of the Republicans who submitted a health care proposal and Obama actually said he read the whole bill and liked alot of it.

Then why weren't the Repubs involved in any of the negotiantions, one must wonder?

Norman Einstein
01-29-2010, 09:26 PM
Those aren't all lies. You just have to know what communism is.

I think he feels he does due to his name. BigREDChief He is basically delusional.

petegz28
01-29-2010, 09:27 PM
Calm down dude the name calling is unnecessary. If you remember correctly, the Dems and Obama originally wanted a single payer option to go along with private insurance. Guess what, that was scrapped due to the Republican's refusing to vote for it. The Dems have compromised a shit load on this bill and the Republicans still refuse to vote and are still being obstructionist. Obama was right.

So the Repubs who mattered not when it came to votes stopped this? WRONG! There were several moderate Dems against the Single Payer option.

Norman Einstein
01-29-2010, 09:28 PM
Then why weren't the Repubs involved in any of the negotiantions, one must wonder?

No real wonder here, Obama ordered the dems to go behind closed doors and come up with a plan. That's why it is generally so shitty.

Norman Einstein
01-29-2010, 09:31 PM
They scaled their proposals back time and time again. What do you want them to do? Abandon all of their own ideas and just use all of the Republicans ideas?

Apparently you haven't been paying attention throughout the whole ordeal. The dems put it together without the repubs having a chance to review it and give any input whatsoever. The final Bill still has no republican input in it, only modifications of the dems ideas to appease some of the legislators that are not dems. And none of it to come up with a bill that will reform healthcare, but to give the gov full control of ALL Healthcare.

Like I said before, read the bill before you start deciding what is and is not in it and who put the shit in it there.

dirk digler
01-29-2010, 09:33 PM
Then why weren't the Repubs involved in any of the negotiantions, one must wonder?

Actually I was wrong it was a budget proposal but it mostly about Medicare

Now, going forward, here's the deal. I think, Paul, for example, head of the budget committee, has looked at the budget and has made a serious proposal. I've read it. I can tell you what's in it. And there are some ideas in there that I would agree with, but there are some ideas that we should have a healthy debate about because I don't agree with them.

The major driver of our long-term liabilities, everybody here knows, is Medicare and Medicaid and our health care spending. Nothing comes close. Social Security we could probably fix the same way Tip O'Neill and Ronald Reagan sat down together and they could figure something out. That is manageable. Medicare and Medicaid -- massive problem down the road. That's where -- that's going to be what our children have to worry about.

Now, Paul's approach -- and I want to be careful not simplifying this, because I know you've got a lot of detail in your plan -- but if I understand it correctly, would say we're going to provide vouchers of some sort for current Medicare recipients at the current level --

CONGRESSMAN RYAN: No.

THE PRESIDENT: No?

CONGRESSMAN RYAN: People 55 and above --

THE PRESIDENT: Fifty-five and -- well, no, I understand. I mean, there's a grandfathering in, but just for future beneficiaries, right? That's why I said I didn't want to -- I want to make sure that I'm not being unfair to your proposal, but I just want to point out that I've read it. And the basic idea would be that at some point we hold Medicare cost per recipient constant as a way of making sure that that doesn't go way out of whack, and I'm sure there are some details that --

CONGRESSMAN RYAN: We drew it as a blend of inflation and health inflation, the point of our plan is -- because Medicare, as you know, is a $38 trillion unfunded liability -- it has to be reform for younger generations because it won't exist because it's going bankrupt. And the premise of our idea is, look, why not give people the same kind of health care plan we here have in Congress? That's the kind of reform we're proposing for Medicare. (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT: No, I understand. Right, right. Well, look, as I said before, this is an entirely legitimate proposal.

Direckshun
01-29-2010, 10:36 PM
And it's all pretty worthless if it's just talk. Bipartisanship can't just be about Republicans being more polite as democrats pass 100% pure democrat legislation. The dems want Republican votes, but they don't want to incorporate significant Republican ideas, e.g. tort reform.

That's hilarious.

Have you read the Republican healthcare bill? I've read it.

It contains four elements, tort reform is the fourth and by far the least impactful.

The first two? 1. No preexisting conditions, and 2. national exchange.

Which, because of the national exchange being promoted over the state exchange, is actually to the left of the Senate bill.

Don't even pretend like Republican ideas have had no hearing in the healthcare debate. The Senate bill bears a striking resemblence to what Republicans offered in counter to Clinton's healthcare initiatives in the 90s.

Democrats come around to that plan a generation later and Republicans like yourself pull the football away and say "that's not good enough."

You're a joke, pat.

Norman Einstein
01-30-2010, 03:30 AM
That's hilarious.

Have you read the Republican healthcare bill? I've read it.

It contains four elements, tort reform is the fourth and by far the least impactful.

The first two? 1. No preexisting conditions, and 2. national exchange.

Which, because of the national exchange being promoted over the state exchange, is actually to the left of the Senate bill.

Don't even pretend like Republican ideas have had no hearing in the healthcare debate. The Senate bill bears a striking resemblence to what Republicans offered in counter to Clinton's healthcare initiatives in the 90s.

Democrats come around to that plan a generation later and Republicans like yourself pull the football away and say "that's not good enough."

You're a joke, pat.

Have you read the democrats version of the health bill? I have, it is so full of shit the Christmas Goose wouldn't accept it. The democrats version is written with so much of the standard if this then that language that it can never be explained to the common American. The underlying plan of the government is not to let insurance companies fail, it's to take over their business and be a single payer system. Are you aware that single payer system is the gov? The IRS will no longer be the largest entity inside the government, the health care beaucracy will be the largest and still have the competentcy of the government and the compassion of the IRS.

You, sir, are not a joke, jokes are funny and your concept of the current democrats health care reform is far from accurate.

KCWolfman
01-30-2010, 03:34 AM
How many BS lies have the republicans told about Obama? He's going to kill Grandma, He's a communist, He's not an American, he is a muslim etc etc any of these ring a bell?

Why is it when you are confronted with obvious lies from your candidate all you can say is "they did it too"? That is childish and you sound like a sycophant.

The crap you bring up wasn't by the leaders of this nation, it wasn't made on a national program, and it wasn't proven false directly in front of America right when it was stated. Your corollary isn't even accurate.

Here is what you are saying BRC [sic] Well, he showed them he was so much smarter than they were, it was just sad to watch. Yeah, he wasn't accurate with what he said, in fact he flat out lied, but he used large words without a teleprompter, so it was beautiful to watch him lie.

Do you really feel comfortable with your posts after reading how other people view them? You are a bootlicker with this guy.

KCWolfman
01-30-2010, 03:40 AM
Calm down dude the name calling is unnecessary. If you remember correctly, the Dems and Obama originally wanted a single payer option to go along with private insurance. Guess what, that was scrapped due to the Republican's refusing to vote for it. The Dems have compromised a shit load on this bill and the Republicans still refuse to vote and are still being obstructionist. Obama was right.

LOL, Cannibal, you crying about someone else "name calling" is just assinine.

And I am not uptight at all. Believe me, I am calm.

You are being a bootlicker as well. He stated the Republicans offered nothing. Those were his exact words. When proven false, he didn't say "I'm sorry" or "I was wrong" he said "Yes, I saw this but it wasn't enough".

Either his first statement was a lie or his second was. Take your pick.

He is an eloquent liar, YAAAA for your team. But don't make it sound like he knew more than those questioning him when he could say whatever false statements he wanted without fear of being questioned on them.

KCWolfman
01-30-2010, 03:41 AM
All of this also true and good retort

Only if you are deluded

KCWolfman
01-30-2010, 03:45 AM
They scaled their proposals back time and time again. What do you want them to do? Abandon all of their own ideas and just use all of the Republicans ideas?


Again, false statements.

Many of them did swallow their own ideas and went directly against what they said they would support merely to have a sole (D) by the bill. Are you stating it was not against their ideas to bride the Senator from the state of Nebraska? Bribery is okay, but compromise isn't?

Here is a crazy idea, why did it have to be a (R) or (D) bill? Why couldn't they have actually asked the MAJORITY OF THE CONSTITUENTS against the bill what they wanted and went with their ideas instead?

KCWolfman
01-30-2010, 03:47 AM
Then why weren't the Repubs involved in any of the negotiantions, one must wonder?

More importantly, why aren't they transparent to the American public like we were promised?

KCWolfman
01-30-2010, 03:49 AM
That's hilarious.

Have you read the Republican healthcare bill? I've read it.

It contains four elements, tort reform is the fourth and by far the least impactful.

The first two? 1. No preexisting conditions, and 2. national exchange.

Which, because of the national exchange being promoted over the state exchange, is actually to the left of the Senate bill.

Don't even pretend like Republican ideas have had no hearing in the healthcare debate. The Senate bill bears a striking resemblence to what Republicans offered in counter to Clinton's healthcare initiatives in the 90s.

Democrats come around to that plan a generation later and Republicans like yourself pull the football away and say "that's not good enough."

You're a joke, pat.
Then why not say just that instead of lie on national television?

mlyonsd
01-30-2010, 05:42 AM
That's hilarious.

Have you read the Republican healthcare bill? I've read it.

It contains four elements, tort reform is the fourth and by far the least impactful.

The first two? 1. No preexisting conditions, and 2. national exchange.

Which, because of the national exchange being promoted over the state exchange, is actually to the left of the Senate bill.

Don't even pretend like Republican ideas have had no hearing in the healthcare debate. The Senate bill bears a striking resemblence to what Republicans offered in counter to Clinton's healthcare initiatives in the 90s.

Democrats come around to that plan a generation later and Republicans like yourself pull the football away and say "that's not good enough."

You're a joke, pat.

No, this is hilarious.

|Zach|
01-30-2010, 06:24 AM
That just didn't go all that well for Republicans. I don't think anything crazy happened or anyone looked terrible in the whole ordeal. But I have been reading over and over about how much of a clown Obama is and how he can't do anything without a teleprompter. He seemed much more informed and on point than the rest of the room.

NewChief
01-30-2010, 06:32 AM
That just didn't go all that well for Republicans. I don't think anything crazy happened or anyone looked terrible in the whole ordeal. But I have been reading over and over about how much of a clown Obama is and how he can't do anything without a teleprompter. He seemed much more informed and on point than the rest of the room.

Yeah, the Republicans will fact check and spin it and point to inaccuracies and lies in Obama's performance (rightly)... but the fact is that, for a day, Obama kicked their asses in a resounding performance. I don't think it's any kind of demoralizing defeat for Republicans or anything. It's not some kind of turning point. It was, however, a much needed high point in a Presidency that, so far, has been lackluster.

Most importantly, it might have given Obama's base a tad bit of energy and given them a much needed glimpse of the candidate for whom they thought they voted.

HonestChieffan
01-30-2010, 06:34 AM
This is nothing more than a PR stunt by the WH so they have something to paint the Rs as obstructionist. The thing is there are people out there who want them to be obstructionist on this bill.

Huge opportunity for the Republicans now to bury the Whitehouse in the proposals they have made and tried to make and publicly make Obama address the proposals and make him be the one to show any effort toward bipartisanship. This will be a PR disaster for Obama. This is the big leagues.

mlyonsd
01-30-2010, 06:37 AM
That just didn't go all that well for Republicans. I don't think anything crazy happened or anyone looked terrible in the whole ordeal. But I have been reading over and over about how much of a clown Obama is and how he can't do anything without a teleprompter. He seemed much more informed and on point than the rest of the room.

Well I wouldn't agree with your last sentence but do think Obama is doing the best thing he could for his cause....go directly to the reps and try to make the public believe they are the problem.

So now IMO the best thing the reps could do is reach out. I'd have every rep come out now and say the same thing. Something like "We'll start with true TORT reform. Unless you initially put that on the table you're not serious about us being included".

|Zach|
01-30-2010, 06:41 AM
Yeah, the Republicans will fact check and spin it and point to inaccuracies and lies in Obama's performance (rightly)... but the fact is that, for a day, Obama kicked their asses in a resounding performance. I don't think it's any kind of demoralizing defeat for Republicans or anything. It's not some kind of turning point. It was, however, a much needed high point in a Presidency that, so far, has been lackluster.

Most importantly, it might have given Obama's base a tad bit of energy and given them a much needed glimpse of the candidate for whom they thought they voted.

Seems to me if Obama is as clownish and idiotic as I keep around here it would have been really easy to make a fool out of him in that setting.

|Zach|
01-30-2010, 06:42 AM
Well I wouldn't agree with your last sentence but do think Obama is doing the best thing he could for his cause....go directly to the reps and try to make the public believe they are the problem.

So now IMO the best thing the reps could do is reach out. I'd have every rep come out now and say the same thing. Something like "We'll start with true TORT reform. Unless you initially put that on the table you're not serious about us being included".

Because ultimatums are a great way to start anything like this.

HonestChieffan
01-30-2010, 06:47 AM
Because ultimatums are a great way to start anything like this.

all negotiations begin with two ultimatums.

NewChief
01-30-2010, 06:49 AM
Seems to me if Obama is as clownish and idiotic as I keep around here it would have been really easy to make a fool out of him in that setting.

Yeah, the whole teleprompter meme that Republicans have been working lately pretty much got demolished last night.

|Zach|
01-30-2010, 06:51 AM
all negotiations begin with two ultimatums.

No. The negotiation process is iterative and adjustable.

mlyonsd
01-30-2010, 07:01 AM
Because ultimatums are a great way to start anything like this.

If Obama wants to try and paint the reps as the problem.....yes, they need to set an ultimatum right up front and make him blink.

|Zach|
01-30-2010, 07:04 AM
If Obama wants to try and paint the reps as the problem.....yes, they need to set an ultimatum right up front and make him blink.

Well if the Reps were to do that they may have to be interested in making it happen. Tort reform doesn't have anything to do with sitting around and emoting. Not sure if the Republicans are up for branching out like that. Do you?

HonestChieffan
01-30-2010, 07:10 AM
No. The negotiation process is iterative and adjustable.

Read what I said. All negotiations begin with two ultimatums. More correctly all successful negotiations start with two or at least one. The art is for you to make the other guy adjust.

The Mad Crapper
01-30-2010, 07:10 AM
B.O. has no interest in the views of opponents. They are obstacles--- and he can go around them. They might annoy him for a while, cause a bit of frustration, but nothing is going to get in the way of his grand design.

At least until November.

|Zach|
01-30-2010, 07:14 AM
Read what I said. All negotiations begin with two ultimatums. More correctly all successful negotiations start with two or at least one. The art is for you to make the other guy adjust.

You are taking a simplistic view.

|Zach|
01-30-2010, 07:16 AM
At least until November.

When the opposition will be offering [blank].

What do you think the blank will be?

mlyonsd
01-30-2010, 07:17 AM
Well if the Reps were to do that they may have to be interested in making it happen. Tort reform doesn't have anything to do with sitting around and emoting. Not sure if the Republicans are up for branching out like that. Do you?

Yes.

The Mad Crapper
01-30-2010, 07:17 AM
When the opposition will be offering [blank].

What do you think the blank will be?

For somebody who claims they watched it, you may recall John Boehner handing B.O. a very large book upon his introduction.

But keep running with "the party of no" narrative, it's worked great so far in NJ, VA, and MA.

|Zach|
01-30-2010, 07:19 AM
For somebody who claims they watched it, you may recall John Boehner handing B.O. a very large book upon his introduction.

But keep running with "the party of no" narrative, it's worked great so far in NJ, VA, and MA.

Yes, I understand your Superbowl came a few weeks early. Why didn't you answer the question? What do you think they come to the table with?

The Mad Crapper
01-30-2010, 07:20 AM
Yes, I understand your Superbowl came a few weeks early. Why didn't you answer the question? What do you think they come to the table with?

:rolleyes:

Go to the GOP website.

|Zach|
01-30-2010, 07:24 AM
:rolleyes:

Go to the GOP website.

Think they will vet their VP this time around?

I bet they do.

The Mad Crapper
01-30-2010, 07:48 AM
Think they will vet their VP this time around?

I bet they do.

The Dims won the presidential election in 2008 because of Axelrods no brainer strategy "A vote for McCain is a vote for 4 more years of Bush".

He's not going to have that luxury in 2012; he's going to have to present a case to the American people why B.O. deserves 4 more years.

Right now, unemployment is 10%---

B.O. would have to implement a policy that will create 6 million private sector jobs over the next three years, just to get back to 2008 levels, but he won't do that. Indeed, he is doubling down on his failed policies.

The R's just have to get a fiscal conservative, Governor Jindal from La. as an example, and they will win in a landslide.

First up though is the massacre in November of this year.

Your boy is a fraud, and everybody (now) knows it.

BigRedChief
01-30-2010, 07:58 AM
Yeah, the Republicans will fact check and spin it and point to inaccuracies and lies in Obama's performance (rightly)... but the fact is that, for a day, Obama kicked their asses in a resounding performance. I don't think it's any kind of demoralizing defeat for Republicans or anything. It's not some kind of turning point. It was, however, a much needed high point in a Presidency that, so far, has been lackluster.

Most importantly, it might have given Obama's base a tad bit of energy and given them a much needed glimpse of the candidate for whom they thought they voted.I agree. That Obama that I voted for. I want to see more of that dude and less of this hands off, let Pelosi and her minions do the sausage making. Lead by example and put the clamps down on his fellow Dems and their rhetroic. Quit the BS backroom deals.

mlyonsd
01-30-2010, 08:01 AM
Think they will vet their VP this time around?

I bet they do.

ROFL If the dems are going to continue to run against Palin Obama is more vulnerable than I thought.

mlyonsd
01-30-2010, 08:02 AM
I agree. That Obama that I voted for. I want to see more of that dude and less of this hands off, let Pelosi and her minions do the sausage making. Lead by example and put the clamps down on his fellow Dems and their rhetroic. Quit the BS backroom deals.

That's the Obama I saw in 2007. Let's see if he heeds your advice.

BigRedChief
01-30-2010, 08:06 AM
Why is it when you are confronted with obvious lies from your candidate all you can say is "they did it too"? That is childish and you sound like a sycophant.

The crap you bring up wasn't by the leaders of this nation, it wasn't made on a national program, and it wasn't proven false directly in front of America right when it was stated. Your corollary isn't even accurate.

Here is what you are saying BRC [sic] Well, he showed them he was so much smarter than they were, it was just sad to watch. Yeah, he wasn't accurate with what he said, in fact he flat out lied, but he used large words without a teleprompter, so it was beautiful to watch him lie.

Do you really feel comfortable with your posts after reading how other people view them? You are a bootlicker with this guy.I'm thinking of adding you to the list of people that I'm no longer going to respond to on here, like shtsprayer and Tom Cash. You are entitled to your opinion. But this consistent in your face posting style is tiresome and I'm not going to particpate in this any longer. I don't want those 2 guys previously mentioned banned but as a personal cjoice I choose to not particpate in a dialog with those individuals. You are a very smart man and have many vaild points to bring to the discussion. I'm just asking to back off on the rhetoric to a patteau level. He calls BS. He gets in peoples grills but its done in the right way.

BigRedChief
01-30-2010, 08:14 AM
Seems to me if Obama is as clownish and idiotic as I keep around here it would have been really easy to make a fool out of him in that setting.No chit, if he was a communist out to ruin America the Republicans had a room full of people against 1 man and ask him anything in any way they wanted and he came off as reasonable not some "bolveshvick".

HonestChieffan
01-30-2010, 08:19 AM
You are taking a simplistic view.

No, its called experience.

BucEyedPea
01-30-2010, 08:28 AM
No chit, if he was a communist out to ruin America the Republicans had a room full of people against 1 man and ask him anything in any way they wanted and he came off as reasonable not some "bolveshvick".

A communist is a socialist basically. Both are collectivists. Those are what Obama's domestic policies are. Bald and basic fact. He's just in denial as are his followers. Or it's lack of education on what make up those things.

Bolshevik is a Marxist-Leninist. Obama is more a Menshevik. Get it right!

BucEyedPea
01-30-2010, 08:30 AM
He stated the Republicans offered nothing. Those were his exact words. When proven false, he didn't say "I'm sorry" or "I was wrong" he said "Yes, I saw this but it wasn't enough".
"Nothing" means they won't tow the line. Meanwhile, the public don't like his bill either.

petegz28
01-30-2010, 08:49 AM
The president, known for his "No-drama Obama" demeanor, grew testier as the session wore on

When Georgia congressman Tom Price charged that Obama had repeatedly accused Republicans of offering "no ideas and no solutions," Obama shot back, "I don't think I said that."

Yeah, the Repubs were really pasted all over the place. LMAO

petegz28
01-30-2010, 08:51 AM
Assailing Republicans for trying to obstruct him on everything from economic stimulus to healthcare, Obama suggested their political motive was to score points with voters in the November congressional elections.

Yeah, well, it's working MR. President. Obama was on TV and gave more speeches than any other President in 1 year. So, I have to ask, Barry, who has the failing message???

BucEyedPea
01-30-2010, 08:55 AM
His father was a communist and Obama's economic blue print is similar to the one foisted on Kenya—a socialist dump!

ChiefaRoo
01-30-2010, 09:15 AM
And it's all pretty worthless if it's just talk. Bipartisanship can't just be about Republicans being more polite as democrats pass 100% pure democrat legislation. The dems want Republican votes, but they don't want to incorporate significant Republican ideas, e.g. tort reform. Not that I blame them. If it were Republicans in charge, I wouldn't want them to levy a punitive tax on business just to get democrat votes.


yep.

BigRedChief
01-30-2010, 09:27 AM
His father was a communistMy father was a die hard core Republican. So, now we are to be punished for the sind of our fathers? How bibical
http://kabbalah4women.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/biblical.jpg

The Mad Crapper
01-30-2010, 09:47 AM
I'm thinking of adding you to the list of people that I'm no longer going to respond to on here, like shtsprayer and - ahem, shut your mouth -. You are entitled to your opinion. But this consistent in your face posting style is tiresome and I'm not going to particpate in this any longer. I don't want those 2 guys previously mentioned banned but as a personal cjoice I choose to not particpate in a dialog with those individuals. You are a very smart man and have many vaild points to bring to the discussion. I'm just asking to back off on the rhetoric to a patteau level. He calls BS. He gets in peoples grills but its done in the right way.

Oh boo hoo, the cheerleader doesn't approve of me.

:crybaby:

patteeu
01-30-2010, 09:55 AM
They scaled their proposals back time and time again. What do you want them to do? Abandon all of their own ideas and just use all of the Republicans ideas?

I want them to own this partisanship and stop whining about how the Republicans won't support their leftwing ideas.

patteeu
01-30-2010, 09:57 AM
LMAO Haven't heard that one before

The joblessness and the deficits of the Bush administration are looking mighty attractive after just one year of Obama.

The Mad Crapper
01-30-2010, 10:26 AM
The Dims won the presidential election in 2008 because of Axelrods no brainer strategy "A vote for McCain is a vote for 4 more years of Bush".

He's not going to have that luxury in 2012; he's going to have to present a case to the American people why B.O. deserves 4 more years.

Right now, unemployment is 10%---

B.O. would have to implement a policy that will create 6 million private sector jobs over the next three years, just to get back to 2008 levels, but he won't do that. Indeed, he is doubling down on his failed agenda.

The national debt will continue to grow by leaps and bounds.

The R's just have to get a fiscal conservative, Governor Jindal from La. as an example, and they will win in a landslide.

First up----the massacre in November.

patteeu
01-30-2010, 10:48 AM
That's hilarious.

Have you read the Republican healthcare bill? I've read it.

It contains four elements, tort reform is the fourth and by far the least impactful.

The first two? 1. No preexisting conditions, and 2. national exchange.

Which, because of the national exchange being promoted over the state exchange, is actually to the left of the Senate bill.

Don't even pretend like Republican ideas have had no hearing in the healthcare debate. The Senate bill bears a striking resemblence to what Republicans offered in counter to Clinton's healthcare initiatives in the 90s.

Democrats come around to that plan a generation later and Republicans like yourself pull the football away and say "that's not good enough."

You're a joke, pat.

Yeah, I'm the joke who didn't proclaim that the debate over health care had ended and then run away and hide when the chips all came crashing down. But leaving that aside...

Which of the many Republican health care plans did you read?

The Patient's Choice Act of 2009, for example, doesn't include a national exchange. Instead, it includes a state exchange but limits the ability of states to place requirements on the plans offered through the exchange to that which is in the plans offered to those in the US Congress. It doesn't eliminate pre-existing conditions, but it does put plans offered through the state exchanges on the same footing as employer-based group plans in terms of the way pre-existing conditions are dealt with.

The Health Care Freedom Plan doesn't eliminate pre-existing conditions, but it does create block grants for states "to develop innovative programs that ensure the provision of affordable health insurance coverage for eligible individuals with pre-existing health conditions" such as high-risk pools. It also enables insurance products to be sold across state lines if certain requirements are met.

The Empowering Patients First Act establishes something called Individual Membership Associations to allow people who don't work for large companies to join groups for purposes of purchasing insurance. It also establishes high risk pools for covering those with pre-existing conditions.

I haven't read any of the Republican offerings in their entirety (how much of a dweeb would a person have to be to want to do that with legislative proposals that are destined for the trash heap?), but I've looked through the three I've mentioned above and I haven't found what you describe so you must have a different plan in mind. Whether there is such a plan or not, the variability in the MANY Republican plans ought to be enough to clue you into the fact that even if the democrats adopted a sliver of one Republican's plan it wouldn't necessarily be enough to quiet the protests of most Republicans. A serious effort at compromise would be required for that and that effort simply has not even begun. There was NO effort on the part of your laughably non-post-partisan President nor on the part of any of his party's leadership hacks in Congress.

patteeu
01-30-2010, 10:51 AM
My father was a die hard core Republican. So, now we are to be punished for the sind of our fathers? How bibical
http://kabbalah4women.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/biblical.jpg

It wasn't just his father. He's been steeped in socialist radicalism since the day he was born. He should have never been trusted with 4 years of our national history.

http://www.moonbattery.com/obama-connections-big.jpg

patteeu
01-30-2010, 10:58 AM
Yeah, the whole teleprompter meme that Republicans have been working lately pretty much got demolished last night.

Once a meme like that has set in, it's harder to shake it than giving one good performance. Ask Dan Quayle, Newt Gingrich, or Sarah Palin. Obama may not have been damaged to the same extent by the teleprompter jokes, but he's damaged and this isn't going to change that.

patteeu
01-30-2010, 11:02 AM
I didn't see Obama vs the Republicans like many of you did. My first inclination was to guess that the rave reviews from BigRedChief were huge exaggerations coming from a guy who's clearly smitten, but the fact that it dragged Zach and Direckshun out into the open must mean he actually did pretty well.

The Mad Crapper
01-30-2010, 11:08 AM
I didn't see Obama vs the Republicans like many of you did. My first inclination was to guess that the rave reviews from BigRedChief were huge exaggerations coming from a guy who's clearly smitten, but the fact that it dragged Zach and Direckshun out into the open must mean he actually did pretty well.

I can tell they were pretty impressed that B.O. did this show without a teleprompter.

HonestChieffan
01-30-2010, 11:21 AM
The reviews of his perfomance are not all that great other than he can talk...we knew that, and he was a bit aloof..as one would expect.

All the glowing reviews are from the same ones that think he pees nickles and shits goldbricks on a daily basis.

The Mad Crapper
01-30-2010, 11:31 AM
Nothing was delivered
And I tell this truth to you
Not out of spite or anger
But simply because it's true
Now, I hope you won't object to this
Giving back all what you owe
The fewer words you have to waste on this
The sooner you can go.

Nothing is better, nothing is best
Take heed of this and get plenty of rest.

Nothing was delivered
But I can't say I sympathize
With what your fate is going to be
Yes, for telling all those lies
Now you must provide some answers
For what you sold has not been received
And the sooner you come up with them
The sooner you can leave.

Nothing is better, nothing is best
Take heed of this and get plenty of rest.

Now you know
Nothing was delivered
And it's up to you to say
Just what you had in mind
When you made ev'rybody pay
No, nothing was delivered
Yes, 'n' someone must explain
That as long as it takes to do this
Then that's how long that you'll remain
Nothing is better, nothing is best
Take heed of this and get plenty of rest.

-Bob Dylan

HonestChieffan
01-30-2010, 11:53 AM
PosterBoy Grayson on this "reaching out to republicans"....do much for bi partisanship.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Ei8cNsAlmfA&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&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/Ei8cNsAlmfA&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Jenson71
01-30-2010, 12:00 PM
According to C-Span...all of 1 hour.

One hour of the White House debate. They have shown hundreds of hours of public debate and Congressional debate though.

If you search Health Care at cspans website, you can watch over 3,000 programs either on Health Care debates or at least where it's mentioned.

It was wrong for Obama to say in the campaign that he'll have (as if he can make) CSPAN do something. But a knowledgeable listener would have known that, already.

KCTitus
01-30-2010, 12:01 PM
It has always fascinated me the way the left uses bipartisanship which essentially means, to them, that the Conservative/Libertarian must sacrifice their core principles and agree to more government solutions to government created problems.

Jenson71
01-30-2010, 12:03 PM
It has always fascinated me the way the left uses bipartisanship which essentially means, to them, that the Conservative/Libertarian must sacrifice their core principles and agree to more government solutions to government created problems.

What does bipartisanship mean to the right?

patteeu
01-30-2010, 12:06 PM
What does bipartisanship mean to the right?

It means libertarians and conservatives working together to crush socialist ideas into the dust that coats the wheels of history to me. :)

KCTitus
01-30-2010, 12:09 PM
What does bipartisanship mean to the right?

That's a good question. Just going by history over my years on this earth, I'd have to say it's 'sacrificing their core beliefs and agreeing to more government solutions to government created problems'...

Jenson71
01-30-2010, 12:19 PM
I hope we can be honest enough with ourselves to realize that on both sides bipartisanship means the minority party compromises with the majority party to some degree more than the majority party compromises with the minority party.

vailpass
01-30-2010, 12:22 PM
More talk from obama. Great. The talking part is done now. The time for action is long overdue.

patteeu
01-30-2010, 12:30 PM
I hope we can be honest enough with ourselves to realize that on both sides bipartisanship means the minority party compromises with the majority party to some degree more than the majority party compromises with the minority party.

No, that's not what it means. It means the side that needs it more compromises to some degree more than the other side. Right now, Republicans gain by not compromising and democrats would gain if they could get bipartisan cover for their efforts, mainly because Obama set an expectation of changing the way politics are done and then let his party be seen running roughshod over the opposition for a full year.

RedNeckRaider
01-30-2010, 12:40 PM
More talk from obama. Great. The talking part is done now. The time for action is long overdue.

Talking is how he got the job. He is the ultimate politician. He is a perfect fit for the cesspool in DC. People will now scurry to the right and the scam of the two party system continues~

KCTitus
01-30-2010, 12:42 PM
I hope we can be honest enough with ourselves to realize that on both sides bipartisanship means the minority party compromises with the majority party to some degree more than the majority party compromises with the minority party.

I disagree...it didnt happen. When Republicans were in control between 94-06, the cries of bipartisanship were for them to compromise on their prinicples and not to be a partisan majority...now, the cries are for Republicans to compromise their principles because they're not in the majority.

Jenson71
01-30-2010, 12:42 PM
No, that's not what it means. It means the side that needs it more compromises to some degree more than the other side. Right now, Republicans gain by not compromising and democrats would gain if they could get bipartisan cover for their efforts, mainly because Obama set an expectation of changing the way politics are done and then let his party be seen running roughshod over the opposition for a full year.

I agree that that's what it is. But when a party, both parties, says what they want bipartisanship to be, then it's my model they are espousing. To pretend or think, as KCTitus does, that there is some dichotomy between what the "right" party thinks bipartisanship essentially is and what the "left" party thinks bipartisanship essentially is, that's just laughable and a sign of supreme hackery.

KCTitus
01-30-2010, 12:45 PM
I agree that that's what it is. But when a party, both parties, says what they want bipartisanship to be, then it's my model they are espousing. To pretend or think, as KCTitus does, that there is some dichotomy between what the "right" party thinks bipartisanship essentially is and what the "left" party thinks bipartisanship essentially is, that's just laughable and a sign of supreme hackery.

You might want to re-read my posts...both parties believe the same thing. Maybe you read something different that what I actually wrote.

HonestChieffan
01-30-2010, 12:47 PM
I hope we can be honest enough with ourselves to realize that on both sides bipartisanship means the minority party compromises with the majority party to some degree more than the majority party compromises with the minority party.

Not at all true. Only the weakest of the sides has to move.

Jenson71
01-30-2010, 12:49 PM
You might want to re-read my posts...both parties believe the same thing. Maybe you read something different that what I actually wrote.

There's a couple ways of reading your previous posts.

If both parties believe the same thing, then I see little reason to attack only the "left's" interpretation of what bipartisanship means.

petegz28
01-30-2010, 12:50 PM
One hour of the White House debate. They have shown hundreds of hours of public debate and Congressional debate though.

If you search Health Care at cspans website, you can watch over 3,000 programs either on Health Care debates or at least where it's mentioned.

It was wrong for Obama to say in the campaign that he'll have (as if he can make) CSPAN do something. But a knowledgeable listener would have known that, already.

Not really. They have show little if any.

Jenson71
01-30-2010, 12:51 PM
Not at all true. Only the weakest of the sides has to move.

Don't confuse what happens (patteau's post is better) from what I was talking about -- "what both sides mean when they say bipartisanship"

patteeu
01-30-2010, 12:52 PM
I agree that that's what it is. But when a party, both parties, says what they want bipartisanship to be, then it's my model they are espousing. To pretend or think, as KCTitus does, that there is some dichotomy between what the "right" party thinks bipartisanship essentially is and what the "left" party thinks bipartisanship essentially is, that's just laughable and a sign of supreme hackery.

KC Titus seems to be describing the mainstream talking heads pov and if he is, I think he's right. I don't think he said what you think he said.

Jenson71
01-30-2010, 12:54 PM
Not really. They have show little if any.

You act like I said all the Health Care debate has been on CSPAN....What do you mean "not really" to?

That the CSPAN CEO said only one hour of White House debates gave invitations to CSPAN?

That there are over 3,000 programs on CSPAN's website dedicated in some part to Health Care debate?

That Obama shouldn't have said that, as if CSPAN was a governmental institution?

Or that a knowledgeable listener should have known that?

RedNeckRaider
01-30-2010, 12:58 PM
KC Titus seems to be describing the mainstream talking heads pov and if he is, I think he's right. I don't think he said what you think he said.
Total transparency page by page. That is what happened right?

KCTitus
01-30-2010, 12:58 PM
There's a couple ways of reading your previous posts.

If both parties believe the same thing, then I see little reason to attack only the "left's" interpretation of what bipartisanship means.

Yes, I guess that's true, it could be confusing. I attack the left for being disingenuous about their intent to be 'bipartisan' while sticking to their core principles and forcing the right to capitulate. I fault the republicans for accepting the left's definition of bipartisanship and compromising their core principles.

Basically, bipartisan = government solution and republicans compromise, the left doesnt.

petegz28
01-30-2010, 01:01 PM
Yes, I guess that's true, it could be confusing. I attack the left for being disingenuous about their intent to be 'bipartisan' while sticking to their core principles and forcing the right to capitulate. I fault the republicans for accepting the left's definition of bipartisanship and compromising their core principles.

Basically, bipartisan = government solution and republicans compromise, the left doesnt.

What is disingenuous is the Left crying that the Repubs are blocking and obstructing when up until 1 week ago they didn't need 1 Repub vote for anything.

RedNeckRaider
01-30-2010, 01:05 PM
What is disingenuous is the Left crying that the Repubs are blocking and obstructing when up until 1 week ago they didn't need 1 Repub vote for anything.

A little fact ignored by many~

KCTitus
01-30-2010, 01:08 PM
What is disingenuous is the Left crying that the Repubs are blocking and obstructing when up until 1 week ago they didn't need 1 Repub vote for anything.

It's a good case in point. There's probably eleventy billion examples.

patteeu
01-30-2010, 01:11 PM
Basically, bipartisan = government solution and republicans compromise, the left doesnt.

There's a good point in here (as there often are in your posts, so don't get me wrong, lol). What is the bipartisan compromise between expanding the scope of state involvement (more laws, greater regulation) and reducing it (deregulation)? Is the right answer to do nothing? No one is satisfied with that.

And what about a case where one side wants to do nothing and the other side wants a big government program? The pressure is on the side that thinks nothing should be done to abandon their principle while the pressure on the big program side is to just moderate theirs by settling for a somewhat smaller program. This is what happened on prescription drugs, btw. Democrats convinced the public that something needed to be done so GWBush compromised the small government principles of the party by agreeing to a significantly smaller program than the democrats wanted. Clearly, the forces of big government won that compromise. But ironically, democrats continued to pretend that Bush was the most divisive leader ever. What a joke.

BucEyedPea
01-30-2010, 01:11 PM
Obama and the left are acting like Bolsheviks at this point! :D

ROYC75
01-30-2010, 01:18 PM
That's true. But there's an election coming up this year. That's what this is about.

Lie and deflect, place blame on others to make yourself look good. The Liberal. oops, I mean the progressives way.

KCTitus
01-30-2010, 01:24 PM
There's a good point in here (as there often are in your posts, so don't get me wrong, lol). What is the bipartisan compromise between expanding the scope of state involvement (more laws, greater regulation) and reducing it (deregulation)? Is the right answer to do nothing? No one is satisfied with that.

I'm quite satisfied with doing nothing. Nothing is better than making the problems worse.

I would prefer defunding and eliminating some of the federal programs, but if my choice is more government control or nothing. I'll take the latter.

HonestChieffan
01-30-2010, 01:26 PM
You never compromise on matters of principal. Methods of approach and tactics perhaps but never sell your principals out. If you do, you just become a victim.

Ebolapox
01-30-2010, 02:54 PM
Yes, I understand your Superbowl came a few weeks early..

ROFL

I'm sorry... did you just go bronco fan on us?

RedNeckRaider
01-30-2010, 03:05 PM
ROFL

I'm sorry... did you just go bronco fan on us?

Zach just being Zack throwing out his little snipes~

BucEyedPea
01-30-2010, 04:20 PM
Lie and deflect, place blame on others to make yourself look good. The Liberal. oops, I mean the progressives way.

It's progress for them! :shake:

BucEyedPea
01-30-2010, 04:20 PM
Zach just being Zack throwing out his little snipes~

That's about the size of it with him! Little contribution.

|Zach|
01-30-2010, 05:26 PM
That's about the size of it with him! Little contribution.

It is true. Buc has a friend that knows me.

BucEyedPea
01-30-2010, 05:30 PM
It is true. Buc has a friend that knows me.

We have chickenhawks and chickenshits here. You belong in the latter.

|Zach|
01-30-2010, 05:39 PM
We have chickenhawks and chickenshits here. You belong in the latter.

To be fair though I am a paleo-chickenshit. Read up a little bit before you start throwing around labels like you know what you are talking about.

Frankie
01-30-2010, 07:29 PM
Boy, Obama sure does seem to believe in bipartisanship since that pesky election in Massachusetts.

WTF?!!!

Your observation is quite lacking, dude. One of my big beefs with him has always been that he dreams that Bi-Partisan/Change-in-Washington dream too much. All along he's given the pouting-baby Republicans a lot of undeserved concession disregarding his and his party's political cash. He and the Dems are the folks in power and by a legit election. Hillary would have told the 40 GOP Senators and the couple of DINOs to go to hell and pushed through with Health Care and other things she was elected for. Obama's Bi-Partisan insistence has been a point of frustration for a lot of Dems and Libs. It certainly DID NOT start with the Massachusetts election.

Brock
01-30-2010, 07:32 PM
Obama's Bi-Partisan insistence has been a point of frustration for a lot of Dems and Libs. It certainly DID NOT start with the Massachusetts election.

Catering to libs loses elections, it should be pretty obvious he isn't going to do that.

wazu
01-30-2010, 07:33 PM
Saw part of this yesterday. It was pretty cool, although for reasons beyond comprehension Fox News decided to cut over to talking heads to "talk about it" rather than continue airing it live.

Frankie
01-30-2010, 07:37 PM
I'm a young guy, so help me out fellas. Is this something that most Presidents do?

No. This is new. And I think it's a brilliant political maneuver to bring the sleazy work of the Limbaughists out in the open. For too long they have been getting away with outrageous claims and petty attacks without any accountability. While an idealistic Obama may have thought that taking the high road was to his benefit, it was actually begining to show him as week, playing right into the hands of Limbaugh/Beck/Hannity BS.

Norman Einstein
01-30-2010, 07:39 PM
No. This is new. And I think it's a brilliant political maneuver to bring the sleazy work of the Limbaughists out in the open. For too long they have been getting away with outrageous claims and petty attacks without any accountability. While an idealistic Obama may have thought that taking the high road was to his benefit, it was actually begining to show him as week, playing right into the hands of Limbaugh/Beck/Hannity BS.

You seem to be very biased and more FOS than any poster here. Good luck with that.

Frankie
01-30-2010, 07:41 PM
I don't recall Bush doing it or Clinton.

ROFL

Bush would not have had near the mental capacity to hold up for 3 minutes in something like this.

Norman Einstein
01-30-2010, 07:44 PM
ROFL

Bush would not have had near the mental capacity to hold up for 3 minutes in something like this.

That explains your support of Obama, you hate Bush. Too bad Obama doesn't have any redeeming qualities.

Frankie
01-30-2010, 07:48 PM
And it's all pretty worthless if it's just talk. Bipartisanship can't just be about Republicans being more polite as democrats pass 100% pure democrat legislation.

Wait a minute Pat. So far it's been the posture of the Reps that everything HAS to be 100% their flavor or they'll take their ball home. As a reminder, the GOP sits at a 40%+/- minority in congress, but wants everything 100% their way. If they don't get it they would pout like babies, bitch like shrews and call BO a Communist.

Frankie
01-30-2010, 07:50 PM
FRank is the bigger joke. He is actually an elected official. For some reason.
Sarah Palin was ALSO an ELECTED OFFICIAL, lest you forget. Oh yeah, she's not anymore, BECAUSE SHE QUIT!!!

Frankie
01-30-2010, 07:51 PM
One Republican who attended said they never should have let cameras in the room because he knows the Republicans got schooled.

And I doubt if they will ever agree to this again. :D

headsnap
01-30-2010, 07:51 PM
Wait a minute Pat. So far it's been the posture of the Reps that everything HAS to be 100% their flavor or they'll take their ball home. As a reminder, the GOP sits at a 40%+/- minority in congress, but wants everything 100% their way. If they don't get it they would pout like babies, bitch like shrews and call BO a Communist.

ROFLROFL:doh!:

Norman Einstein
01-30-2010, 07:52 PM
FRank is the bigger joke. He is actually an elected official. For some reason.

I didn't know the trash collectors were voted in!

Frankie
01-30-2010, 07:52 PM
Fox was showing it and cut away when they realized how bad they were getting their asses kicked.

Yep. It's funny as hell.

|Zach|
01-30-2010, 07:52 PM
Saw part of this yesterday. It was pretty cool, although for reasons beyond comprehension Fox News decided to cut over to talking heads to "talk about it" rather than continue airing it live.

Really?

Frankie
01-30-2010, 07:59 PM
Whats the Obama lie count up to? Lets see, Lobbyists not in my adm. I have looked at your proposals, I put the HC debate on C-Span.

He did say he has LESS lobbyists and some are leftovers who will not be renewed after their terms were up.

As for C-Span he mentioned that as C-SPAN covers congressional stuff everyday, things WERE on C-SPAN.

Take it for what it's worth, but he DID explain the way he saw it. Those doNOT qualify as lies. "Iraq has WMDs aimed at us," for example, does.

I mean the man gets up in front of COngress and lie's about the Supreme Court decision and you still blow himm...Gull....i....ble.......

What was the "LIE" about the SC ruling?

Frankie
01-30-2010, 07:59 PM
Name me any Republican capable of pulling this off? Or for that matter any other Democrat.

Bill Clinton. But it pretty much stops there.

Frankie
01-30-2010, 08:00 PM
Evidently the Republicans "invited" Obama to this meeting (of course assuming he'd decline and look like a douche), but he accepted with the condition that cameras be allowed. LOL they said no cameras at first but they had to relent or look like puzzies. It was a brilliant political move.

Yes it was.

Frankie
01-30-2010, 08:01 PM
So you don't mind being lied to..

Did you vote for W in 2004?

wazu
01-30-2010, 08:01 PM
Really?

Okay, beyond my comprehension, anyway.

Frankie
01-30-2010, 08:04 PM
From what I heard, it was Obama doing a lot of whining.

You should not trust your hearing, Pete. Instead try to watch it when it's aired.

And Oh, bTW, was it you or SHITSPRAYER who kept posting threads after threads about how Obama is lost without the teleprompter? You guys should man-up about that. ;)

Frankie
01-30-2010, 08:35 PM
You seem to be very biased and more FOS than any poster here. Good luck with that.

So if you don't mind we agree to view each other exactly the same way.

Frankie
01-30-2010, 08:41 PM
That explains your support of Obama, you hate Bush. Too bad Obama doesn't have any redeeming qualities.

Let's see, the man, either through sheer incompetence or corruption (both?) drove this country into too costly wars, his administration ran roughshod through the constitution and is directly responsible for the death and dismemberment of thousands of Americans and countless Iraqis. Then he left this country with $ Trillions in debt while his CEO friends now make 350 times your average salary and mine. What's there to hate? :hmmm:

Frankie
01-30-2010, 08:43 PM
ROFLROFL:doh!:

That's all you have to offer in rebuttal isn't it. It's okay. I can understand nervous laughter.

headsnap
01-30-2010, 08:55 PM
That's all you have to offer in rebuttal isn't it. It's okay. I can understand nervous laughter.

dude you are seriously delusional...

in reference to the post... up until the Scott Brown shakeup, the Republicans didn't have access to the ball let alone the ability to take it home.

headsnap
01-30-2010, 08:59 PM
He did say he has LESS lobbyists and some are leftovers who will not be renewed after their terms were up.
and not surprisingly you believed that...

As for C-Span he mentioned that as C-SPAN covers congressional stuff everyday, things WERE on C-SPAN. yeah, 'things were on C-SPAN', just not the right stuff... the stuff that he said would be 'out in the open' that was actually done behind closed doors...

Amnorix
01-30-2010, 09:39 PM
Yes other Presidents have done it. but this is the first time its been televised.

Really?!? I'm surprised. Who, and when? It's highly risky, and I'm surprised he did it.

Amnorix
01-30-2010, 09:40 PM
And hopefully not the last.

That kind of thing is actually one of, if not THE, best thing about the British parliamentary system. Tough for dopes to run the show because they have to face the music once in a while.

Amnorix
01-30-2010, 09:42 PM
I think Dick Cheney would have done a far better job than Obama did. You'll have to ask someone more in tune with the Palin camp about her.

:LOL: With the possible exception of BEP and TJ for Ron Paul, I don't think anyone on here is as completely in teh tank for any politician as you are for Dick Cheney.

Amnorix
01-30-2010, 09:48 PM
Can you imagine Bush doing this same thing with 114 of his opposition? He wouldn't be capable.

Frankly, most Presidents wouldn't be. Love him or hate him, Obama has extremely unusual/exceptional skills that allow him to take this kind of risk. Most wouldn't dare because the odds of being annihilated would be far too great.

Amnorix
01-30-2010, 09:50 PM
I was real little at the time but as I recall Nixon was pretty good at it, until his lies caught up with him...

Good at what? Are you telling me he did what Obama did here? When and with who?

Not that Nixon wasn't VERY bright. A horrible President in many ways...but undeniably very bright. Unfortunately, it takes alot mroe than being bright to be a good President.

Amnorix
01-30-2010, 09:52 PM
Those aren't all lies. You just have to know what communism is.

"Anything to the left of ultra-strict, ultra-libertarianism as understood by the most conservative of the Founding Fathers."

Yeah, we know...

Amnorix
01-30-2010, 09:54 PM
LMAO Haven't heard that one before

The truth hasn't really changed, has it? or did he inherited a balanced budget and a humming economy that I hadn't heard about?

Amnorix
01-30-2010, 10:02 PM
Once a meme like that has set in, it's harder to shake it than giving one good performance. Ask Dan Quayle, Newt Gingrich, or Sarah Palin. Obama may not have been damaged to the same extent by the teleprompter jokes, but he's damaged and this isn't going to change that.

I honestly think that if you ask the average American at this point if Obama is just a guy who looks good when he has a telepromptr rolling in front of him, they're not going to agree with you. That's mostly just a right wing online circle jerk concept. One that was blown up pretty effectively...

Quayle and Palin were hung with "stupid" labels because of POOR performance in very visible settings. Obama doesn't have that particular albatross.

BucEyedPea
01-30-2010, 10:55 PM
To be fair though I am a paleo-chickenshit. Read up a little bit before you start throwing around labels like you know what you are talking about.

Nope. You're neo-chickenshit! I don't need to read up on anything. I am the master labeler. You need to learn from me.

Frankie
01-31-2010, 12:55 AM
dude you are seriously delusional...

in reference to the post... up until the Scott Brown shakeup, the Republicans didn't have access to the ball let alone the ability to take it home.

Yeah you post this and I AM delusional?! Now that's funny. Ironic, but funny.

Frankie
01-31-2010, 12:57 AM
Really?!? I'm surprised. Who, and when? It's highly risky, and I'm surprised he did it.

I'm very happy he did it. Shows off a self confidence that I was beginning to doubt.

Frankie
01-31-2010, 01:08 AM
The truth hasn't really changed, has it? or did he inherited a balanced budget and a humming economy that I hadn't heard about?

Righties like Pete want NO reminder of the 8 years of total failure that was George Bush. And they LOVE to create an atmosphere that would force a Dem POTUS to fail too so they could justify their support of W.

Frankie
01-31-2010, 01:10 AM
I honestly think that if you ask the average American at this point if Obama is just a guy who looks good when he has a telepromptr rolling in front of him, they're not going to agree with you. That's mostly just a right wing online circle jerk concept. One that was blown up pretty effectively...

Quayle and Palin were hung with "stupid" labels because of POOR performance in very visible settings. Obama doesn't have that particular albatross.

Excellent post. Rep.

RINGLEADER
01-31-2010, 01:59 AM
Very fascinating TV. A President taking unscripted questions from the opposition on live TV. :clap:

I wouldn't exactly call either the Republican questions or Obama's responses "unscripted".

Norman Einstein
01-31-2010, 05:01 AM
I'm very happy he did it. Shows off a self confidence that I was beginning to doubt.

It's not really a true self confidence, it would be best described as a Soros confidence. Soros is still pulling the strings of the democratic party.

Norman Einstein
01-31-2010, 05:04 AM
I wouldn't exactly call either the Republican questions or Obama's responses "unscripted".

Ubama never gets unscripted questions. If you ever want to ask a question it goes through the handlers first, if they don't like the question they either modify the question to suit their agenda or they refuse to let you ask the question.

Gibbs tried to talk himself out of that at one of the town hall meetings and only got himself in deeper than he could recover.

headsnap
01-31-2010, 06:15 AM
Yeah you post this and I AM delusional?! Now that's funny. Ironic, but funny.

what part of 60/40 do you not understand?

MarcBulger
01-31-2010, 06:39 AM
Calm down dude the name calling is unnecessary. If you remember correctly, the Dems and Obama originally wanted a single payer option to go along with private insurance. Guess what, that was scrapped due to the Republican's refusing to vote for it. The Dems have compromised a shit load on this bill and the Republicans still refuse to vote and are still being obstructionist. Obama was right.

Let me get this straight, the Dems had the Pres, Super Majority inthe Senate and the House, and its the Rep who are obstructionist. Wow...No wonder you voted for this Muslim raised, Black Liberation white hating church attendee....

petegz28
01-31-2010, 07:04 AM
The truth hasn't really changed, has it? or did he inherited a balanced budget and a humming economy that I hadn't heard about?

So that is the acceptable excuse for multiplying the deficit x 4?

ILChief
01-31-2010, 07:22 AM
Really?!? I'm surprised. Who, and when? It's highly risky, and I'm surprised he did it.

I think Bush and Clinton did.

ILChief
01-31-2010, 07:24 AM
That explains your support of Obama, you hate Bush. Too bad Obama doesn't have any redeeming qualities.


I find that reply ironic.

mlyonsd
01-31-2010, 07:32 AM
Yeah you post this and I AM delusional?! Now that's funny. Ironic, but funny.

Wow. Just, wow.

Norman Einstein
01-31-2010, 07:52 AM
I find that reply ironic.

Bush had redeeming qualities compared to Obama, not many but at least he had some.

alanm
01-31-2010, 08:07 AM
It means libertarians and conservatives working together to crush socialist ideas into the dust that coats the wheels of history to me. :)I like that. :thumb::D

Baby Lee
01-31-2010, 08:27 AM
Calm down dude the name calling is unnecessary. If you remember correctly, the Dems and Obama originally wanted a single payer option to go along with private insurance. Guess what, that was scrapped due to the Republican's refusing to vote for it. The Dems have compromised a shit load on this bill and the Republicans still refuse to vote and are still being obstructionist. Obama was right.

This dude wanted to fuck my 10 yo daughter, in the spirit of bipartisanship he ended up settling for playing with her tittybuds.

patteeu
01-31-2010, 08:40 AM
Wait a minute Pat. So far it's been the posture of the Reps that everything HAS to be 100% their flavor or they'll take their ball home. As a reminder, the GOP sits at a 40%+/- minority in congress, but wants everything 100% their way. If they don't get it they would pout like babies, bitch like shrews and call BO a Communist.

Frankie's been sniffing glue again. He doesn't remember that the democrats forced through a porkulus bill through without the support of even the most liberal House Republican and that they couldn't get a single Senate Republican vote for ObamaCare. Not even Olympia Snowe or Susan Collins.

Republicans aren't a monolithic group that marches to a conservative party line drummer. If your policies can't even attract support from your most sympathetic Republicans, you can't claim your policies represent efforts toward bipartisanship. George W. Bush had liberals like Ted Kennedy helping to draft notable legislation during his run in office and he always had democrats voting for his major legislative initiatives. Obama can't hold GWBush's jock when it comes to bipartisanship and reaching out to the opposition.

patteeu
01-31-2010, 08:48 AM
He did say he has LESS lobbyists and some are leftovers who will not be renewed after their terms were up.

As for C-Span he mentioned that as C-SPAN covers congressional stuff everyday, things WERE on C-SPAN.

Take it for what it's worth, but he DID explain the way he saw it. Those doNOT qualify as lies. "Iraq has WMDs aimed at us," for example, does.



What was the "LIE" about the SC ruling?

You're moving off the reservation here, Frankie. Obama himself admits that he didn't achieve the CSpan coverage that he had promised.

No one ever said that Iraq had WMDs aimed at us.

The lie about the SC ruling was that it "reversed a century of law". In the words of Justice Alito, "Not true". In addition to that, it's probably a lie that he believes it will open the floodgates for foreign corporations to spend unlimited amounts in our political campaigns, but he may just be winging it without really knowing what he's talking about so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on his beliefs.

patteeu
01-31-2010, 08:54 AM
Let's see, the man, either through sheer incompetence or corruption (both?) drove this country into too costly wars, his administration ran roughshod through the constitution and is directly responsible for the death and dismemberment of thousands of Americans and countless Iraqis. Then he left this country with $ Trillions in debt while his CEO friends now make 350 times your average salary and mine. What's there to hate? :hmmm:

It took the Obama administration 4 weeks to pass a spending bill through Congress that exceeded the amount that Bush spent in the first 4 YEARS of the Iraq war.

patteeu
01-31-2010, 08:57 AM
:LOL: With the possible exception of BEP and TJ for Ron Paul, I don't think anyone on here is as completely in teh tank for any politician as you are for Dick Cheney.

:) I'd love to see a debate between Dick Cheney and Barack Obama. I bet Obama wouldn't even be willing to engage in it.

morphius
01-31-2010, 09:01 AM
Let me get this straight, the Dems had the Pres, Super Majority inthe Senate and the House, and its the Rep who are obstructionist. Wow...No wonder you voted for this Muslim raised, Black Liberation white hating church attendee....
Yeah, it was the bluedog democrats that got that knocked off of there as the President and Democrats realized that was the only way they were going to ever get it passed with even their own members. It had nothing to do with the republicans, as they were not even offered a seat at the table and were completely locked out of the discussions.

patteeu
01-31-2010, 09:09 AM
I honestly think that if you ask the average American at this point if Obama is just a guy who looks good when he has a telepromptr rolling in front of him, they're not going to agree with you. That's mostly just a right wing online circle jerk concept. One that was blown up pretty effectively...

Quayle and Palin were hung with "stupid" labels because of POOR performance in very visible settings. Obama doesn't have that particular albatross.

Palin had a couple of poor performances, but Quayle didn't really. The key to the demise of each of their reputations was the incessant criticism in the form of ridicule, not the performance.

RedNeckRaider
01-31-2010, 09:16 AM
I honestly think that if you ask the average leftwing fan, blind follower at this point if Obama is just a guy who looks good when he has a telepromptr rolling in front of him, they're not going to agree with you. That's mostly just a right wing online circle jerk concept. One that was blown up pretty effectively...

Quayle and Palin were hung with "stupid" labels because of POOR performance in very visible settings. Obama doesn't have that particular albatross.

FYP

ILChief
01-31-2010, 09:17 AM
:) I'd love to see a debate between Dick Cheney and Barack Obama. I bet Obama wouldn't even be willing to engage in it.

why should the sitting President debate a grouchy former VP?

patteeu
01-31-2010, 09:35 AM
why should the sitting President debate a grouchy former VP?

IMO, he shouldn't, unless he wants to be taken to school. It would be a huge mistake for him to face off with Cheney, particularly if it were televised.

headsnap
01-31-2010, 09:38 AM
The end result of all of this is Obama's base will be energized for a few days and there will be no movement on the Independents and Republicans...



have fun Frankie, it won't last long... :thumb:

ILChief
01-31-2010, 09:42 AM
IMO, he shouldn't, unless he wants to be taken to school. It would be a huge mistake for him to face off with Cheney, particularly if it were televised.

forget the individuals involved. why should any sitting president debate a former VP. has it ever been done before outside of a campaign?

patteeu
01-31-2010, 09:52 AM
forget the individuals involved. why should any sitting president debate a former VP. has it ever been done before outside of a campaign?

The only reason for a President to avoid debating a detractor is the risk that he will come off looking bad. No President would be likely to take this risk unless they were really desperate.

But if Obama is the god of rhetoric that his supporters believe he is, he should have no such fear, especially against an almost universally reviled former VP.

BigRedChief
01-31-2010, 09:54 AM
:) I'd love to see a debate between Dick Cheney and Barack Obama. I bet Obama wouldn't even be willing to engage in it.Obama would own Cheney. Get to work on Cheney 2012 and we will see it a couple of times.

ILChief
01-31-2010, 10:12 AM
The only reason for a President to avoid debating a detractor is the risk that he will come off looking bad. No President would be likely to take this risk unless they were really desperate.

But if Obama is the god of rhetoric that his supporters believe he is, he should have no such fear, especially against an almost universally reviled former VP.


Maybe there's nothing to gain by doing it?

BigRedChief
01-31-2010, 10:15 AM
Maybe there's nothing to gain by doing it?Thats why the Republicans allowed it to be televised. Both sides had motivation to allow it to happen. The Republicans thought if they made Obama answer their questions and respond to point blank questions on live tv that they would show the voters how FOS Obama is and they are the reasonable party. Obama got to seem like he's trying to be bi-partisan and point out on live tv the Republicans faults.

mlyonsd
01-31-2010, 10:17 AM
Thats why the Republicans allowed it to be televised. Both sides had motivation to allow it to happen. The Republicans thought if they made Obama answer their questions and respond to point blank questions on live tv that they would show the voters how FOS Obama is and they are the reasonable party. Obama got to seem like he's trying to be bi-partisan and point out on live tv the Republicans faults.

Or, they thought if it wasn't televised they'd be considered as non-transparent as the closed door democrats.

KCWolfman
01-31-2010, 10:18 AM
Yeah, the whole teleprompter meme that Republicans have been working lately pretty much got demolished last night.

Characterization of any candidate is stupid or has another means than one being shown. I don't believe for a second any POTUS or major candidacy for the Presidency since the advent of television is anything but shrewd and intelligent.

The press has made it an agenda to make the Republican Seat holder or candidate look like an idiot since Gerald Ford. I don't think that the perception is going to hold much longer since we get so many more details than before and they can no longer pick and choose which ones to air.

Honestly, I saw 15 different items when held by themselves that make the current POTUS look like a blithering idiot. However, more Americans are becoming smart enough not to trust single sources any longer so that recent attempts at propaganda against GWB and Palin are just a waste of time and actually makes the reporting source look stupid instead.

patteeu
01-31-2010, 10:18 AM
Maybe there's nothing to gain by doing it?

Unless Obama's approval ratings have skyrocketed without me being aware of it, I'm pretty sure that's not the answer. The answer is about how much he'd have to lose versus how unlikely it is that he'd gain.

BigRedChief
01-31-2010, 10:20 AM
Or, they thought if it wasn't televised they'd be considered as non-transparent as the closed door democrats.wellll then they don't have to invite him. Not every sitting President goes to it, but not inviting could have looked bad too.

mlyonsd
01-31-2010, 10:26 AM
wellll then they don't have to invite him. Not every sitting President goes to it, but not inviting could have looked bad too.
Or, they thought Obama would invite them out for a cheeseburger. We could go on and on.

HonestChieffan
01-31-2010, 10:40 AM
Or, they thought Obama would invite them out for a cheeseburger. We could go on and on.

I want a double and cheese fries.

Frankie
01-31-2010, 10:47 AM
It's not really a true self confidence, it would be best described as a Soros confidence. Soros is still pulling the strings of the democratic party.

Link please. Or is this another Hannity/Limbaugh/Beck "FACT" that you are willing to buy hook, line and sinker?

Frankie
01-31-2010, 10:53 AM
Ubama never gets unscripted questions. If you ever want to ask a question it goes through the handlers first, if they don't like the question they either modify the question to suit their agenda or they refuse to let you ask the question.

Gibbs tried to talk himself out of that at one of the town hall meetings and only got himself in deeper than he could recover.

Link please. Or is this another Hannity/Limbaugh/Beck "FACT" that you are willing to buy hook, line and sinker?

I mean really man, do you reall believe for one second that the Repubs in the session would have gone along with that arrangement.

Frankie
01-31-2010, 10:54 AM
what part of 60/40 do you not understand?

Ehh,... I believe I mentioned the argument of 60/40.

headsnap
01-31-2010, 10:57 AM
Ehh,... I believe I mentioned the argument of 60/40.

so you are arguing with yourself then...

Frankie
01-31-2010, 10:59 AM
Let me get this straight, the Dems had the Pres, Super Majority inthe Senate and the House, and its the Rep who are obstructionist.Hence my frustration that they should not have waited for the illusion of Bi-Partisanship. Repups have shown CLEARLY that they don't want to play.

Wow...No wonder you voted for this Muslim raised, Black Liberation white hating church attendee....

Gee YOU are not bigoted, are you!

BTW, could you show me the part of the Constitution that says people of other religions or races CANNOT be president?

Frankie
01-31-2010, 11:05 AM
So that is the acceptable excuse for multiplying the deficit x 4?

Most respected economists have said that what was done was the ONLY way to stop an upcoming DEPRESSION. In other words, sometimes you do the necessary evil that you don't like to do in order to head off the worse evil. You can keep repeating the oft-repeated Hannity/Limbaugh/Beck-issued talking point calling this the "Obama Economy". But the fact remains that Depression that was averted was "Bush Economy."

Frankie
01-31-2010, 11:06 AM
Bush had redeeming qualities compared to Obama, not many but at least he had some.

Link please.

Would you post a list?

Frankie
01-31-2010, 11:08 AM
Calm down dude the name calling is unnecessary. If you remember correctly, the Dems and Obama originally wanted a single payer option to go along with private insurance. Guess what, that was scrapped due to the Republican's refusing to vote for it. The Dems have compromised a shit load on this bill and the Republicans still refuse to vote and are still being obstructionist. Obama was right.

Rep. :thumb:

Frankie
01-31-2010, 11:13 AM
Frankie's been sniffing glue again. .... they couldn't get a single Senate Republican vote for ObamaCare. Not even Olympia Snowe or Susan Collins.

Republicans aren't a monolithic group that marches to a conservative party line drummer. .....

OK, Pat, now who is sniffing glue?

headsnap
01-31-2010, 11:30 AM
The Dems have compromised a shit load on this bill and the Republicans still refuse to vote and are still being obstructionist. Obama was right.
the only compromising done on this bill was by the Liberal Dems in order to get the Moderate Blue Dog Dems to sign onto it(60/40 ;) ). And with that they failed miserably for which myself, the majority of the US electorate, as well as I am sure the Republicans are grateful!

Norman Einstein
01-31-2010, 11:36 AM
The Dems have compromised a shit load on this bill and the Republicans still refuse to vote and are still being obstructionist. Obama was right.

Any comprimise by the republicans on this bill means they give in to the democrats plan, there are no arguable points from the republican side included in the bill for them to comprimise on.

The bill was written by a panel of 100% democrats. What compromise would you consider the republicans should do? Roll over and accept the ball of shit plan the democrats put together?

Lay off the obama koolaid, it will eventually kill you.

headsnap
01-31-2010, 12:01 PM
Most respected economists have said that what was done was the ONLY way to stop an upcoming DEPRESSION.

Link please...



though this is pointless because this is like GW, only the ones that agree with a certain point of view will be the 'respected' ones...