GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum - View Single Post

directfiesta · 09-02-2012, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

Just speaking strictly economically...if McCain had been elected and opened up the energy industry, wouldn't it be very possible that this whole "recovery" would have already happened and we would be in economic good times?

Economists say that just The Keystone pipeline alone would have created one million great paying jobs.

Of course neither you or I can actually say with any certainty what would have happened if McCain had won.

The media kinda tilted our views (I voted Obama).
Just the fact that you just called it "McCain-Palin" and didn't say "Obama-Biden" shows how our votes and ideas were impacted by the media coverage.

One thing is for damn sure. I don't think Obama did a good job. He definitely squandered the first two years (when he had control of both houses) on a fucked up health care bill that turned out to be (as Bill Maher said on is show this week) a "big blowjob for the insurance companies".

I know that people who still support Obama are trying to make excuses and claim he did a lot. But it seems to me that if you need apologists to try and explain that you actually did something...then you probably didn't.

This country needs jobs and a secure energy policy. And those two would go hand in hand right now.

It looks like Obama though was too scared to piss off his liberal base to make that decisive move. Matter of fact, he has appeared to me to lack any kind of leadership move that would piss off his base.

Say what you will about Bush...but he not only did what he wanted, he also passed and funded every liberal bill that got in front of him (the prescription drug bill is a HUGE liberal "non-Republican" kind of thing to do)

Obama on the other hand, shut the Republicans out immediately when he took office. They had no say at all in health care legislation...or anything else. They weren't even allowed at the table.
That was a logistical mistake on the part of Pelosi and Reid. And it's cost Obama ever since in my opinion.

hummmmm......

Quote:

Washington (CNN) - The top House Democrat appears to be signaling that her party has all but given up any hope of achieving meaningful bipartisan support for a health care reform bill.

?Bipartisanship is a two-way street,? House Speaker Nancy Pelosi declares in an interview airing Sunday on CNN?s State of the Union.

?But let me say this,? Pelosi continues, ?The bill can be bipartisan, even though the votes might not be bipartisan, because they [Republicans] have made their imprint on this.?

Pelosi pointed to the fact that the final bill will, in all likelihood, not include a government-run public health insurance option, a provision vigorously opposed by congressional Republicans but supported by liberal House Democrats. Instead, Pelosi tells CNN Senior Political Correspondent Candy Crowley, Democrats have settled on insurance exchanges as a way to help contain health care costs. That compromise position, Pelosi suggested, reflects an acknowledgement of Republicans? approach to health care reform.

Reflecting a key provision of the Senate bill passed late last year, the legislative outline released by the White House last week does not include a public option. Asked about the White House?s decision to forego a provision popular with many liberals in the Democratic Party, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the administration made that decision because it did not appear that there would be sufficient votes to get the public option passed in Congress. Although some liberal Democrats in both chambers favor a public option, a substantial block of conservative Democrats in the House, known as the Blue Dogs, do not support it.

In the interview, Pelosi is also quick to suggest that President Obama and congressional Democrats have gone to great lengths to give Republicans an opportunity to weigh in on health care reform notwithstanding fundamental ideological differences between the two parties.

?We went into the legislative process - hundreds of hours of hearings and bill writing and all the rest - where the Republicans made their suggestions,? Pelosi tells Crowley. ?We know that one of the reasons we didn?t have a bill in the fall is because the president wanted to give the Senate more time to arrive at bipartisanship in the Senate bill, which he thought might be possible then.?

Pelosi added, ?And so what we?ve had is the year of trying to strive for bipartisanship, as I say over 100 Republican amendments in the bill. And the Republicans placed their own bill on the floor, here in the House, which insured 3 million. Our bill insures over 30 million. So we have a different value system here.?