|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
On September 10 2009 13:51 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:
When someone can give me a reasonable answer as to how the hell this will ever be "budget neutral" I'll reconsider my position.
But as it stands I feel Obama is being deceptive in his numbers.
The "budget neutral" claim includes tax increases to pay for the bill.
|
On September 10 2009 13:46 keV. wrote:
The president is a cheerleader. They don't do anything but cheer/talk and press a Yes/No button after all is said and done.
The reason he called the speech was to discuss the health care reform bills being drawn up by congress. Its not important to make sure everyone is on the same page when a huge bill is being drawn up?
I'd say it is. He isn't up for reelection for another 4 years, this isn't for votes... He is just doing his job.
The president isn't a cheerleader. Saying so is complete retardation. A president does embolden people to make the nation better, but he has responsibility serious responsibilities, like showing up to a session that he himself called others to.
He can catch everyone up on the same page by sending out a memo. He didn't even do that, he has said everything already. Everything. Every sentence and word (except his stupid kennedy letter). He called an important conference to get attention and applause for himself.
People thought it was a good speech, not that it explained anything.
People favor lowering costs, insuring more, and keeping people alive. What a worthless trash poll. The president didn't show any evidence that his healthcare bill will do those things.
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
On September 10 2009 13:55 SnK-Arcbound wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2009 13:46 keV. wrote:
The president is a cheerleader. They don't do anything but cheer/talk and press a Yes/No button after all is said and done.
The reason he called the speech was to discuss the health care reform bills being drawn up by congress. Its not important to make sure everyone is on the same page when a huge bill is being drawn up?
I'd say it is. He isn't up for reelection for another 4 years, this isn't for votes... He is just doing his job.
The president isn't a cheerleader. Saying so is complete retardation. A president does embolden people to make the nation better, but he has responsibility serious responsibilities, like showing up to a session that he himself called others to. He can catch everyone up on the same page by sending out a memo. He didn't even do that, he has said everything already. Everything. Every sentence and word (except his stupid kennedy letter). He called an important conference to get attention and applause for himself.
None of it was new? Bullshit. Stop acting like you've heard it all before... I can guarantee you that I've been following his statements on the public option extremely closely and he never said anything like what he said tonight.
|
On September 10 2009 13:55 SnK-Arcbound wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2009 13:46 keV. wrote:
The president is a cheerleader. They don't do anything but cheer/talk and press a Yes/No button after all is said and done.
The reason he called the speech was to discuss the health care reform bills being drawn up by congress. Its not important to make sure everyone is on the same page when a huge bill is being drawn up?
I'd say it is. He isn't up for reelection for another 4 years, this isn't for votes... He is just doing his job.
The president isn't a cheerleader. Saying so is complete retardation. A president does embolden people to make the nation better, but he has responsibility serious responsibilities, like showing up to a session that he himself called others to. He can catch everyone up on the same page by sending out a memo. He didn't even do that, he has said everything already. Everything. Every sentence and word (except his stupid kennedy letter). He called an important conference to get attention and applause for himself. People thought it was a good speech, not that it explained anything. People favor lowering costs, insuring more, and keeping people alive. What a worthless trash poll. The president didn't show any evidence that his healthcare bill will do those things.
Something as important as health care reform is a little more important then a memo. Clearly not everyone is on the same page with someone actually yelling "Lie" during the speech. I'd rather be allowed the speech myself rather then not at all, even if things are repetitive (Never said they were not). Do you really think Obama, or any president really, is a glory hound that seeks out applause? Considering they are eviscerated verbally just as much, I don't go there. Sounds completely stupid to me.
|
On September 10 2009 13:37 Mystlord wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2009 13:25 NExUS1g wrote:On September 10 2009 12:41 Mystlord wrote:On September 10 2009 12:31 NExUS1g wrote:On September 10 2009 11:41 Mystlord wrote:On September 10 2009 11:33 motbob wrote:
I don't see how this is C-level content. He explained how the bill will help consumers of health insurance. He explained how the bill would decrease costs. I gotta refer you back to my post at the bottom of page 2 that has a lot of quotes about his specific plan.
Also I know a lot of people don't care about this, but he gave a shoutout to the progressives who had been freaking out about his position on the public option. He basically told everyone to calm the fuck down and that the public option isn't that big of a deal, even though he wants it in the bill. And I have to refer you back to my earlier post. While this is a nice bill, it's only expanding coverage and not addressing the true costs of heatlh care. Even though he says that this is going to decrease costs, heatlh care always increases no matter what you do. Not only that, but the growth increases with every passing year. According to the White House, the current average annual growth in health care costs is 6.1%. We're coming to the point when the previous baby boom generation is hitting retirement age. Cost can only increase at this point. The question is, if less people are forced to use our health care system as "sick care" because of the out-of-pocket costs, limitations, etc. won't we save money on people who would otherwise needlessly end up in the hospital? What? I don't exactly get what you're saying... Maybe I'm just tired. Unless you mean that rising health care costs will cause people to rely less on health care? If that's what you're saying, it doesn't work because the consumer's out-of-pocket costs are generally kept stable. Although health care might increase as a percentage of our GDP, the same growth doesn't aply to out-of-pocket costs. In addition, what you're theorizing sounds very much like the consumer-gas prices relation. When gas prices are high, people start going environment crazy. When they lower, people start to use more gas again. It just ends up going in a cycle. That's not what needs to happen with health care. Imagine this... A woman does not get her regular mammogram. One day she feels a lump and goes into the doctor who finds she has breast cancer. The breast cancer is advanced and has spread into the lymph system. Surgery to remove the lymph nodes as well as the radical mastectomy are completed along with the standard chemo and radiation therapy. Down the line, the cancer reoccurs because of its late detection which causes another surgery to be done to remove the cancer and then another round of therapy. The cancer occurs a third time. This time, the cancer has metastasized throughout her body and her prognosis is poor. Now the insurance is paying for hospice, durable medical equipment, frequent hospital and doctor visits, medications, etc. This is if she's still under her lifetime limit (which by this point she may not be), still has insurance (they may have kicked her), or even has insurance (unable to get coverage because of this or another preexisting condition). Many insurance companies currently will not cover preventive care like mammograms. Because of recent publicity in the last couple of decades, insurance companies are feeling the pressure to cover mammograms, but this is just one thing in a very long list of preventive cares that would save so much money and many lives in the long run. Early detection and treatment is key in sickness. The more advanced a sickness becomes, the more difficult or impossible and expensive it is to treat it. Yeah... Did I ever say that preventive care shouldn't be covered or something? Yes it's also an important facet of this picture and should be taken into account. Umm... That's a long example to prove a point 
Perhaps you did not say that, but you were talking about the problem that this bill will not prevent rising health care costs. This example was meant to show how better preventive care and more global coverage helps in saving on health care costs.
Unless I just misunderstood your post.
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
On September 10 2009 13:55 SnK-Arcbound wrote:People thought it was a good speech, not that it explained anything.
You continue to be incredibly wrong.
More than seven in ten say that Obama clearly stated his goals, with one in four saying he didn't express his goals clearly.
|
On September 10 2009 14:06 keV. wrote:
I'd rather be allowed the speech myself rather then not at all, even if things are repetitive (Never said they were not).
On September 10 2009 14:03 motbob wrote:
None of it was new? Bullshit. Stop acting like you've heard it all before... I can guarantee you that I've been following his statements on the public option extremely closely and he never said anything like what he said tonight.
Oops, looks like someone is wrong. And it's you.
On September 10 2009 14:06 keV. wrote:
Something as important as health care reform is a little more important then a memo. Clearly not everyone is on the same page with someone actually yelling "Lie" during the speech. I'd rather be allowed the speech myself rather then not at all, even if things are repetitive (Never said they were not). Do you really think Obama, or any president really, is a glory hound that seeks out applause? Considering they are eviscerated verbally just as much, I don't go there. Sounds completely stupid to me.
Yes, having the speech rather than not, is the better option. A joint session is extreme.
And do I think Obama does it just for the applause? No, I think he expects it reguardless of content. He has been given the least critisism, and the most positive coverage. That is his standard, glowing coverage. If you suddenly stepped into the limelight, after being an obscure freshman congressman, and you received praise from almost all sources, wouldn't you continue to expect that?
On September 10 2009 14:13 motbob wrote:You continue to be incredibly wrong. Show nested quote +More than seven in ten say that Obama clearly stated his goals, with one in four saying he didn't express his goals clearly.
On September 10 2009 13:55 SnK-Arcbound wrote:People favor lowering costs, insuring more, and keeping people alive.
That doesn't mean that obamacare will deliver those things. You lack reading comprehension, and polling comprehension.
|
United States22883 Posts
On September 10 2009 12:29 Mortality wrote:
All of this is idiotic.
Any idiot should realize that a healthcare system, whether public or private, can only ever be as good as the policy that defines it. And the policy etched out in the current bill is an absolute piece of shit.
Obama's a great speaker, I'll give him that much, but that's all his "reform" has going for it. If you look at the actual bill and actually READ THE FUCKING DOCUMENT, then I think it's quite clear that this isn't the system that everyone is hyping it up to be. I just wish the COCKSUCKING MEDIA would get serious about addressing the real criticisms, rather than harping about the fundamental ideological differences between public and private healthcare systems.
Edit: Let me be clear: it's not that this bill can't work. It's that it can't work without serious revisions that aren't going to happen in the current political climate.
God no longer blesses America. If he ever did.
The first iteration of the bill is going to suck. The hope is that Obama can use his political capital to push the general bill through, and over time it can be changed into something more helpful. The fear of not pushing it through now, of waiting until a better bill is available, is that it will be too late to get it done. The economic collapse was a big enough crisis to justify fundamental changes to our system, and this is probably the best chance he'll have of getting a comprehensive plan passed, even if it requires a lot of improvement.
|
United States22883 Posts
On September 10 2009 14:13 motbob wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2009 13:55 SnK-Arcbound wrote:People thought it was a good speech, not that it explained anything. You continue to be incredibly wrong. Show nested quote +More than seven in ten say that Obama clearly stated his goals, with one in four saying he didn't express his goals clearly.
Public opinion polling is bad. CNN is bad. CNN polling is exponentially bad. Stop trying to use it as evidence, and cite the parts that were actually well explained.
|
Mystlord
United States10264 Posts
On September 10 2009 14:11 NExUS1g wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2009 13:37 Mystlord wrote:On September 10 2009 13:25 NExUS1g wrote:On September 10 2009 12:41 Mystlord wrote:On September 10 2009 12:31 NExUS1g wrote:On September 10 2009 11:41 Mystlord wrote:On September 10 2009 11:33 motbob wrote:
I don't see how this is C-level content. He explained how the bill will help consumers of health insurance. He explained how the bill would decrease costs. I gotta refer you back to my post at the bottom of page 2 that has a lot of quotes about his specific plan.
Also I know a lot of people don't care about this, but he gave a shoutout to the progressives who had been freaking out about his position on the public option. He basically told everyone to calm the fuck down and that the public option isn't that big of a deal, even though he wants it in the bill. And I have to refer you back to my earlier post. While this is a nice bill, it's only expanding coverage and not addressing the true costs of heatlh care. Even though he says that this is going to decrease costs, heatlh care always increases no matter what you do. Not only that, but the growth increases with every passing year. According to the White House, the current average annual growth in health care costs is 6.1%. We're coming to the point when the previous baby boom generation is hitting retirement age. Cost can only increase at this point. The question is, if less people are forced to use our health care system as "sick care" because of the out-of-pocket costs, limitations, etc. won't we save money on people who would otherwise needlessly end up in the hospital? What? I don't exactly get what you're saying... Maybe I'm just tired. Unless you mean that rising health care costs will cause people to rely less on health care? If that's what you're saying, it doesn't work because the consumer's out-of-pocket costs are generally kept stable. Although health care might increase as a percentage of our GDP, the same growth doesn't aply to out-of-pocket costs. In addition, what you're theorizing sounds very much like the consumer-gas prices relation. When gas prices are high, people start going environment crazy. When they lower, people start to use more gas again. It just ends up going in a cycle. That's not what needs to happen with health care. Imagine this... A woman does not get her regular mammogram. One day she feels a lump and goes into the doctor who finds she has breast cancer. The breast cancer is advanced and has spread into the lymph system. Surgery to remove the lymph nodes as well as the radical mastectomy are completed along with the standard chemo and radiation therapy. Down the line, the cancer reoccurs because of its late detection which causes another surgery to be done to remove the cancer and then another round of therapy. The cancer occurs a third time. This time, the cancer has metastasized throughout her body and her prognosis is poor. Now the insurance is paying for hospice, durable medical equipment, frequent hospital and doctor visits, medications, etc. This is if she's still under her lifetime limit (which by this point she may not be), still has insurance (they may have kicked her), or even has insurance (unable to get coverage because of this or another preexisting condition). Many insurance companies currently will not cover preventive care like mammograms. Because of recent publicity in the last couple of decades, insurance companies are feeling the pressure to cover mammograms, but this is just one thing in a very long list of preventive cares that would save so much money and many lives in the long run. Early detection and treatment is key in sickness. The more advanced a sickness becomes, the more difficult or impossible and expensive it is to treat it. Yeah... Did I ever say that preventive care shouldn't be covered or something? Yes it's also an important facet of this picture and should be taken into account. Umm... That's a long example to prove a point Perhaps you did not say that, but you were talking about the problem that this bill will not prevent rising health care costs. This example was meant to show how better preventive care and more global coverage helps in saving on health care costs. Unless I just misunderstood your post.
Preventive care will help to reduce health care costs, but only to an extent. The percentage of GDP spent on health care probably won't drop by an appreciable amount. The problems go far deeper than preventive care.
|
On September 10 2009 14:03 motbob wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2009 13:55 SnK-Arcbound wrote:On September 10 2009 13:46 keV. wrote:
The president is a cheerleader. They don't do anything but cheer/talk and press a Yes/No button after all is said and done.
The reason he called the speech was to discuss the health care reform bills being drawn up by congress. Its not important to make sure everyone is on the same page when a huge bill is being drawn up?
I'd say it is. He isn't up for reelection for another 4 years, this isn't for votes... He is just doing his job.
The president isn't a cheerleader. Saying so is complete retardation. A president does embolden people to make the nation better, but he has responsibility serious responsibilities, like showing up to a session that he himself called others to. He can catch everyone up on the same page by sending out a memo. He didn't even do that, he has said everything already. Everything. Every sentence and word (except his stupid kennedy letter). He called an important conference to get attention and applause for himself. None of it was new? Bullshit. Stop acting like you've heard it all before... I can guarantee you that I've been following his statements on the public option extremely closely and he never said anything like what he said tonight.
He never said anything like what he said tonight? Uhhh this is the most gross exaggeration I've heard in a while. Seriously, the guy can speak well, can read off a teleprompter even better, there's no denying that, but quite frankly this is publicity shit that doesn't get anything done.
We've been hearing about hope and change and change and hope the whole year and yet the situations only tend to get worse. He barks, but can't bite. Perhaps I'm unphased by this all, infact I now I am, but its just ludacris how he can hop up on stage, speak about things that seem very unlikely to be for the best when taking all angles into account, and then everyone is like HOLY COW we've got change! Just like during the campaign, just like when he got elected, the same thing over and over. People just light up like Christmas trees and then all of a sudden the juice starts running out until the next speech. No, he's definitely a cheerleader.
"That is why we cannot fail. Because there are too many Americans counting on us to succeed" lol you've seriously never heard him say things like this before or anything like it? Come on, its recycled stuff.
|
10387 Posts
Lol even if it was just repeating what he has already said I think that's good because half the fucking country doesn't even know what the hell the Healthcare is about, just some stupid things like the whole "Deathpanel" thing -_-
|
On September 10 2009 14:20 Alizee- wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2009 14:03 motbob wrote:On September 10 2009 13:55 SnK-Arcbound wrote:On September 10 2009 13:46 keV. wrote:
The president is a cheerleader. They don't do anything but cheer/talk and press a Yes/No button after all is said and done.
The reason he called the speech was to discuss the health care reform bills being drawn up by congress. Its not important to make sure everyone is on the same page when a huge bill is being drawn up?
I'd say it is. He isn't up for reelection for another 4 years, this isn't for votes... He is just doing his job.
The president isn't a cheerleader. Saying so is complete retardation. A president does embolden people to make the nation better, but he has responsibility serious responsibilities, like showing up to a session that he himself called others to. He can catch everyone up on the same page by sending out a memo. He didn't even do that, he has said everything already. Everything. Every sentence and word (except his stupid kennedy letter). He called an important conference to get attention and applause for himself. None of it was new? Bullshit. Stop acting like you've heard it all before... I can guarantee you that I've been following his statements on the public option extremely closely and he never said anything like what he said tonight. He never said anything like what he said tonight? Uhhh this is the most gross exaggeration I've heard in a while. Seriously, the guy can speak well, can read off a teleprompter even better, there's no denying that, but quite frankly this is publicity shit that doesn't get anything done. We've been hearing about hope and change and change and hope the whole year and yet the situations only tend to get worse. He barks, but can't bite. Perhaps I'm unphased by this all, infact I now I am, but its just ludacris how he can hop up on stage, speak about things that seem very unlikely to be for the best when taking all angles into account, and then everyone is like HOLY COW we've got change! Just like during the campaign, just like when he got elected, the same thing over and over. People just light up like Christmas trees and then all of a sudden the juice starts running out until the next speech. No, he's definitely a cheerleader. "That is why we cannot fail. Because there are too many Americans counting on us to succeed" lol you've seriously never heard him say things like this before or anything like it? Come on, its recycled stuff.
|
United States22883 Posts
On September 10 2009 14:14 SnK-Arcbound wrote:
Yes, having the speech rather than not, is the better option. A joint session is extreme. I don't think calling a joint session itself is that extreme. It's overblown, plus it's not as if he can demand they show up. Both chambers had to pass a resolution for it. Also, both Clinton and Bush had joint session speeches relating to budget/economics.
And do I think Obama does it just for the applause? No, I think he expects it reguardless of content. He has been given the least critisism, and the most positive coverage. That is his standard, glowing coverage. If you suddenly stepped into the limelight, after being an obscure freshman congressman, and you received praise from almost all sources, wouldn't you continue to expect that? He expects it because he's the President. Whether he's republican or democrat, he can stand up there and do the hamster dance and he's going to get applause.
|
On September 10 2009 14:20 Alizee- wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2009 14:03 motbob wrote:On September 10 2009 13:55 SnK-Arcbound wrote:On September 10 2009 13:46 keV. wrote:
The president is a cheerleader. They don't do anything but cheer/talk and press a Yes/No button after all is said and done.
The reason he called the speech was to discuss the health care reform bills being drawn up by congress. Its not important to make sure everyone is on the same page when a huge bill is being drawn up?
I'd say it is. He isn't up for reelection for another 4 years, this isn't for votes... He is just doing his job.
The president isn't a cheerleader. Saying so is complete retardation. A president does embolden people to make the nation better, but he has responsibility serious responsibilities, like showing up to a session that he himself called others to. He can catch everyone up on the same page by sending out a memo. He didn't even do that, he has said everything already. Everything. Every sentence and word (except his stupid kennedy letter). He called an important conference to get attention and applause for himself. None of it was new? Bullshit. Stop acting like you've heard it all before... I can guarantee you that I've been following his statements on the public option extremely closely and he never said anything like what he said tonight. He never said anything like what he said tonight? Uhhh this is the most gross exaggeration I've heard in a while. Seriously, the guy can speak well, can read off a teleprompter even better, there's no denying that, but quite frankly this is publicity shit that doesn't get anything done. We've been hearing about hope and change and change and hope the whole year and yet the situations only tend to get worse. He barks, but can't bite. Perhaps I'm unphased by this all, infact I now I am, but its just ludacris how he can hop up on stage, speak about things that seem very unlikely to be for the best when taking all angles into account, and then everyone is like HOLY COW we've got change! Just like during the campaign, just like when he got elected, the same thing over and over. People just light up like Christmas trees and then all of a sudden the juice starts running out until the next speech. No, he's definitely a cheerleader. "That is why we cannot fail. Because there are too many Americans counting on us to succeed" lol you've seriously never heard him say things like this before or anything like it? Come on, its recycled stuff.
I actually agree with some of this, Obama speaks using pretty words with a stone-faced look and a passionate voice that people believe he is going to do some change for them. Over this year, the only change that's gone on were the company bailouts that have nothing to do with us except tax us more.
Though, Obama can fight back when he was defending himself on what the Republicans have said from Death Panels and how the public option is bad to Glenn Beck's crazy tree.
|
On September 10 2009 14:25 Jibba wrote:He expects it because he's the President. Whether he's republican or democrat, he can stand up there and do the hamster dance and he's going to get applause.
Yes, both can expect applause from their side of the aisle, and that the opposition will keep quiet. However, you can't forget that bush was openly booed and cajolted during his speeches. You can't say that changing the rules will only be applied when you're wearing one color of underwear and not the other.
|
United States22883 Posts
On September 10 2009 14:28 Neos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2009 14:20 Alizee- wrote:On September 10 2009 14:03 motbob wrote:On September 10 2009 13:55 SnK-Arcbound wrote:On September 10 2009 13:46 keV. wrote:
The president is a cheerleader. They don't do anything but cheer/talk and press a Yes/No button after all is said and done.
The reason he called the speech was to discuss the health care reform bills being drawn up by congress. Its not important to make sure everyone is on the same page when a huge bill is being drawn up?
I'd say it is. He isn't up for reelection for another 4 years, this isn't for votes... He is just doing his job.
The president isn't a cheerleader. Saying so is complete retardation. A president does embolden people to make the nation better, but he has responsibility serious responsibilities, like showing up to a session that he himself called others to. He can catch everyone up on the same page by sending out a memo. He didn't even do that, he has said everything already. Everything. Every sentence and word (except his stupid kennedy letter). He called an important conference to get attention and applause for himself. None of it was new? Bullshit. Stop acting like you've heard it all before... I can guarantee you that I've been following his statements on the public option extremely closely and he never said anything like what he said tonight. He never said anything like what he said tonight? Uhhh this is the most gross exaggeration I've heard in a while. Seriously, the guy can speak well, can read off a teleprompter even better, there's no denying that, but quite frankly this is publicity shit that doesn't get anything done. We've been hearing about hope and change and change and hope the whole year and yet the situations only tend to get worse. He barks, but can't bite. Perhaps I'm unphased by this all, infact I now I am, but its just ludacris how he can hop up on stage, speak about things that seem very unlikely to be for the best when taking all angles into account, and then everyone is like HOLY COW we've got change! Just like during the campaign, just like when he got elected, the same thing over and over. People just light up like Christmas trees and then all of a sudden the juice starts running out until the next speech. No, he's definitely a cheerleader. "That is why we cannot fail. Because there are too many Americans counting on us to succeed" lol you've seriously never heard him say things like this before or anything like it? Come on, its recycled stuff. I actually agree with some of this, Obama speaks using pretty words with a stone-faced look and a passionate voice that people believe he is going to do some change for them. Over this year, the only change that's gone on were the company bailouts that have nothing to do with us except tax us more. Though, Obama can fight back when he was defending himself on what the Republicans have said from Death Panels and how the public option is bad to Glenn Beck's crazy tree. I think the main intent of the speech was to put indirect pressure on Congress, rather than just explain everything. There's a segment of the population that will trust him no matter what and another segment that will distrust him no matter what. He's trying to work on the middle to get all the Democrats in order (the GOP taking a hit with Rep. Wilson is also an added plus). Obviously we can't determine whether it was effective or not at this time, but I think he would be the first to admit that these are just words. He's not going to get away with executive privilege on something this big, so he's using a more indirect approach. Think of it as diplomacy (soft power), rather than force (hard power.)
|
On September 10 2009 14:37 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2009 14:28 Neos wrote:On September 10 2009 14:20 Alizee- wrote:On September 10 2009 14:03 motbob wrote:On September 10 2009 13:55 SnK-Arcbound wrote:On September 10 2009 13:46 keV. wrote:
The president is a cheerleader. They don't do anything but cheer/talk and press a Yes/No button after all is said and done.
The reason he called the speech was to discuss the health care reform bills being drawn up by congress. Its not important to make sure everyone is on the same page when a huge bill is being drawn up?
I'd say it is. He isn't up for reelection for another 4 years, this isn't for votes... He is just doing his job.
The president isn't a cheerleader. Saying so is complete retardation. A president does embolden people to make the nation better, but he has responsibility serious responsibilities, like showing up to a session that he himself called others to. He can catch everyone up on the same page by sending out a memo. He didn't even do that, he has said everything already. Everything. Every sentence and word (except his stupid kennedy letter). He called an important conference to get attention and applause for himself. None of it was new? Bullshit. Stop acting like you've heard it all before... I can guarantee you that I've been following his statements on the public option extremely closely and he never said anything like what he said tonight. He never said anything like what he said tonight? Uhhh this is the most gross exaggeration I've heard in a while. Seriously, the guy can speak well, can read off a teleprompter even better, there's no denying that, but quite frankly this is publicity shit that doesn't get anything done. We've been hearing about hope and change and change and hope the whole year and yet the situations only tend to get worse. He barks, but can't bite. Perhaps I'm unphased by this all, infact I now I am, but its just ludacris how he can hop up on stage, speak about things that seem very unlikely to be for the best when taking all angles into account, and then everyone is like HOLY COW we've got change! Just like during the campaign, just like when he got elected, the same thing over and over. People just light up like Christmas trees and then all of a sudden the juice starts running out until the next speech. No, he's definitely a cheerleader. "That is why we cannot fail. Because there are too many Americans counting on us to succeed" lol you've seriously never heard him say things like this before or anything like it? Come on, its recycled stuff. I actually agree with some of this, Obama speaks using pretty words with a stone-faced look and a passionate voice that people believe he is going to do some change for them. Over this year, the only change that's gone on were the company bailouts that have nothing to do with us except tax us more. Though, Obama can fight back when he was defending himself on what the Republicans have said from Death Panels and how the public option is bad to Glenn Beck's crazy tree. I think the main intent of the speech was to put indirect pressure on Congress, rather than just explain everything. There's a segment of the population that will trust him no matter what and another segment that will distrust him no matter what. He's trying to work on the middle to get all the Democrats in order (the GOP taking a hit with Rep. Wilson is also an added plus). Obviously we can't determine whether it was effective or not at this time, but I think he would be the first to admit that these are just words. He's not going to get away with executive privilege on something this big, so he's using a more indirect approach. Think of it as diplomacy (soft power), rather than force (hard power.)
^
|
United States22883 Posts
On September 10 2009 14:30 SnK-Arcbound wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2009 14:25 Jibba wrote:He expects it because he's the President. Whether he's republican or democrat, he can stand up there and do the hamster dance and he's going to get applause. Yes, both can expect applause from their side of the aisle, and that the opposition will keep quiet. However, you can't forget that bush was openly booed and cajolted during his speeches. You can't say that changing the rules will only be applied when you're wearing one color of underwear and not the other.
The rules don't change. The democrats who booed Bush's State of the Union were out of line, and also comprised one of the worst Congresses in history, so they shared much of the blame.
|
On September 10 2009 14:39 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2009 14:30 SnK-Arcbound wrote:On September 10 2009 14:25 Jibba wrote:He expects it because he's the President. Whether he's republican or democrat, he can stand up there and do the hamster dance and he's going to get applause. Yes, both can expect applause from their side of the aisle, and that the opposition will keep quiet. However, you can't forget that bush was openly booed and cajolted during his speeches. You can't say that changing the rules will only be applied when you're wearing one color of underwear and not the other. The rules don't change. The democrats who booed Bush's State of the Union were out of line, and also comprised one of the worst Congresses in history, so they shared much of the blame.
Part of the issue I have with this is no one was rushing to call them immature back then because they hated Bush.
If you're going to call people immature at least be fair.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
