20 Oct 09
2 edits
My adopted Senator (Thread 119481) tells it like it is.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/10/19/sen_gregg_us_on_path_to_banana_republic.html
Sure, he could stand to be a bit more charismatic; but I'm quite proud of my surrogate's take on the skyrocketing debt.
20 Oct 09
Originally posted by sh76Charisma be damned. I love that guy. The thing I can't get my head around is that Obama and Co. must be bright enough to know that what Gregg says is true. So WTF are they doing?
My adopted Senator (Thread 119481) tells it like it is.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/10/19/sen_gregg_us_on_path_to_banana_republic.html
Sure, he could stand to be a bit more charismatic; but I'm quite proud of my surrogate's take on the skyrocketing debt.
20 Oct 09
1 edit
Originally posted by SleepyguyAccording to some conservatives I know, they are trying to bring the current government and ecoomy to its knees so they can then "reform" it. No one in their right mind wishes to enter the socialist utopia they invision, so the only way to get us to come along is to destroy all other alternatives. They call it, the single voter option.
Charisma be damned. I love that guy. The thing I can't get my head around is that Obama and Co. must be bright enough to know that what Gregg says is true. So WTF are they doing?
21 Oct 09
1 edit
Originally posted by KazetNagorraExactly, these guys don't seem to get it. It's not an Obama versus Bush, liberal versus conservative thing. The two factions in the U.S. are really just one big party.
And Obama is happily continuing them...
Politicians love partisanship. It keeps you pointing fingers at your side of choice, because you miss the ultimate point.
21 Oct 09
Originally posted by sh76I was just watching Joe Lieberman on C-SPAN saying why he will not vote for cloture to proceed to the unpaid for $245 billion effort to bribe the medical community into supporting ObamaCare. His reason? The road to our current $12 trillion debt crisis has "been paved with good intentions", but not adding to that debt is a greater priority than health care reform. He went on at length and sounded a lot like Gregg. It was refreshing to hear from a liberal like Lieberman.
My adopted Senator (Thread 119481) tells it like it is.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/10/19/sen_gregg_us_on_path_to_banana_republic.html
Sure, he could stand to be a bit more charismatic; but I'm quite proud of my surrogate's take on the skyrocketing debt.
21 Oct 09
Originally posted by SleepyguySo reforming health care, which currently wastes 1 trillion dollars annually in inefficiency (that is the amount of money saved if US health care spending as a percentage of GDP would be at the OECD average) is not a priority because getting the budget in order is more important?
I was just watching Joe Lieberman on C-SPAN saying why he will not vote for cloture to proceed to the unpaid for $245 billion effort to bribe the medical community into supporting ObamaCare. His reason? The road to our current $12 trillion debt crisis has "been paved with good intentions", but not adding to that debt is a greater priority than hea ...[text shortened]... length and sounded a lot like Gregg. It was refreshing to hear from a liberal like Lieberman.
21 Oct 09
1 edit
Originally posted by KazetNagorraThis was a cloture vote on $247 billion bill that was totally unpaid for, and being considered separately from health care reform. It failed miserably too, much to Harry Reid's surprise and dismay. 53 nays, including all Republicans, Lieberman, and Democrats Bayh, Byrd, Conrad, Dorgan, Feingold, Kohl, McCaskill, Nelson, Warner, Webb, Wicker, and Wyden. Bad news for Reid because he will have to find another way to pretend that $247 billion is not an an actual cost of ObamaCare. It's very good news for anyone worried about our national debt.
So reforming health care, which currently wastes 1 trillion dollars annually in inefficiency (that is the amount of money saved if US health care spending as a percentage of GDP would be at the OECD average) is not a priority because getting the budget in order is more important?
22 Oct 09
Originally posted by KazetNagorrait's additional coverage and additional benefits, the congressional budge office already looked at how much the proposals actually exceed their savings, and it's a lot!
So reforming health care, which currently wastes 1 trillion dollars annually in inefficiency (that is the amount of money saved if US health care spending as a percentage of GDP would be at the OECD average) is not a priority because getting the budget in order is more important?