Obama at House Republican retreat - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

rahl · 01-30-2010, 01:21 PM

Obama At House Republican Retreat In Baltimore: FULL VIDEO, TEXT

This is a complete recording of the retreat, accompanied by a full transcript. It's over an hour long so if you have time to watch or read great, if not I'm sure you've atleast heard a summary.

Now I haven't watched any news channels on this discussion so I can try to judge for myself what took place. It seemed to me to be a pretty fair and civil exchange between the Republicans and the President. And hopefully the two parties can try to come together just a little to get some things done.

Your thoughts?

Willravel · 01-30-2010, 01:28 PM

It was funny to see the president respond to some of the more outrageous stuff. The Bolshevik comment had me rolling.

That said, President Obama did dodge a few questions, like his pledge not to allow lobbyists into his administration.

rahl · 01-30-2010, 01:45 PM

I agree. I don't think any intelligent person could have watched this exchange in the hopes that it wouldn't be political. I would love to have heard the discussion that went on in the room after the Pres left.

Derwood · 01-30-2010, 03:13 PM

They should do this 4 times a year. On national TV.

I'm glad he had a chance to call BS on certain claims, and also glad that he copped to some of his mistakes.

loquitur · 01-30-2010, 05:31 PM

He needs them now. He didn't before. He is no dummy. So he's doing what he needs to do.
I wonder whether they'll perceive it to be in their interest to play ball with him. You'd hope they would - he is, after all, the president.

Derwood · 01-30-2010, 06:31 PM

The general media consensus was that Obama really "took it to" the Republicans here, so I doubt they'll be in a rush to do this again any time soon

loquitur · 01-30-2010, 07:40 PM

the general media consensus is generally pro-Democrat. So maybe if you want to know how the Repubs perceived it, someone should ask them. Makes sense to get things from the horse's mouth, doesnt it?

Derwood · 01-30-2010, 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loquitur

the general media consensus is generally pro-Democrat. So maybe if you want to know how the Repubs perceived it, someone should ask them. Makes sense to get things from the horse's mouth, doesnt it?

My point was that if the perception is that Obama "won", that's all it will take for the Republicans to not do it again. Washington is more about perceptions than policies these days (sadly)

aceventura3 · 01-31-2010, 10:09 AM

I listened to Obama at the retreat and some of the media coverage afterward. From a big picture point of view, as been the case a lot lately, I don't understand Obama. For the last couple of years all he has been saying about Republicans is how their failed policies has been negative for this country both domestically and internationally, now he talks about how he has adopted many of those failed policies.

Derwood · 01-31-2010, 10:13 AM

you just choose to hear what you want to hear. Obama could spend an hour talking about everything you want to hear from a President but you'll put a negative spin on it. I give up

aceventura3 · 01-31-2010, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derwood

you just choose to hear what you want to hear. Obama could spend an hour talking about everything you want to hear from a President but you'll put a negative spin on it. I give up

Please do give up.

I simply give an honest assessment of my point of view and give anyone interested an opportunity to help clarify what causes me confusion. I did not make any attack, was not trying to be offensive, or sarcastic. Again, I get a cryptic response suggesting someone knows my motivations without giving me the opportunity to elaborate on any questions or concerns they have. If what I write causes any problems for you, simply stop reading what I write.

Derwood · 01-31-2010, 11:08 AM

be more specific about the problems you had with what he said. give me some quotes so I can respond

aceventura3 · 01-31-2010, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derwood

be more specific about the problems you had with what he said. give me some quotes so I can respond

The observation on my part was a broad view, but I think this quote from Obama responding to a question from Roskam at the event capsulizes the tone of his campaign from my poit of view:

Quote:

I mean, 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. They don't know sometimes this is just politics what you guys -- or folks on my side do sometimes.

Obama At House Republican Retreat In Baltimore: FULL VIDEO, TEXT

as Obama spoke to Republicans the other day talking about how they should support his agenda when it has components that they would normally support, on the surface that makes a lot sense. But, when I recall his campaign and his actions as a Senator,Obama's constant belittling of Bush and the "failed" policies under the Bush administration, Obama's out-reach to Republicans seem inconsistent with his rhetoric as a Senator and as canidate for President.

Was this Obama's attempt of apologizing, acknowledging some shared fault and asking for a new start, or was this Obama lecturing Republicans primarily for their behavior but feeling obligated to say "...folks on my side do sometimes?"

The answer to the above question makes a big difference in how I would respond (agian, just me, I don't speak for others and I know all about my short comings).

loquitur · 01-31-2010, 05:21 PM

Only indirectly relevant:

Quote:

One day shortly after the Second World War ended, Winston Churchill and Labour Party Prime Minister Clement Attlee encountered one another at the urinal trough in the House of Common's men's washroom. Attlee arrived first. When Churchill arrived, he stood as far away from him as possible. Attlee said, "Feeling standoffish today, are we, Winston?" Churchill said: "That's right. Every time you see something big, you want to nationalize it."

Willravel · 01-31-2010, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceventura3

as Obama spoke to Republicans the other day talking about how they should support his agenda when it has components that they would normally support, on the surface that makes a lot sense. But, when I recall his campaign and his actions as a Senator,Obama's constant belittling of Bush and the "failed" policies under the Bush administration, Obama's out-reach to Republicans seem inconsistent with his rhetoric as a Senator and as canidate for President.

It wasn't belittling, as belittling suggests an attempt at reducing the standing of something. The standing was already reduced. Remember President Bush's numbers toward the end? It was maybe in the 20s. President Obama cited President Bush's failed policies, but of course he did. Do you expect him to not mention the 8 years of screw-ups when he's running against someone that shares many of the same plans as the guy in charge over those 8 years?

Anyway, President Obama's outreach started right after he came into office. Why do you think the left is so pissed off at him? He's continuing wiretapping, rendition, (torture), and he's fumbled closing Gitmo. He only went with the public option instead of single payer, and he CUT TAXES for over 95% of Americans. That's major outreach, and it's more than the GOP should have ever hoped for considering how badly they screwed up. And yet all President Obama's gotten in response to the blatant attempts at reaching out is uber-right wing extremists fearmongering and insanity. Instead of "thanks for not pushing through single payer", we got "OMGDEATHPANELS" from not just morons like Palin but echoed from those who used to be considered moderate conservatives.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceventura3

Was this Obama's attempt of apologizing, acknowledging some shared fault and asking for a new start, or was this Obama lecturing Republicans primarily for their behavior but feeling obligated to say "...folks on my side do sometimes?"

Let me ask this: when did President Obama lie or significantly exaggerate during his lecture? And didn't he really make an effort to answer even ridiculous questions as honestly as possible? How is this not transparent and bipartisan, things generally considered to be of pinnacle importance by conservatives?

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceventura3

The answer to the above question makes a big difference in how I would respond (agian, just me, I don't speak for others and I know all about my short comings).

Can you imagine if I were president? I'd have laid into them with everything I had. I would have energized the living shit out of the left base and forever ruined any chance of fixing the rift between the left and the right. I would have done this to scare the House and Senate Democrats into line but it ultimately would have been a mistake (I think). President Obama's unwilling to give up on trying to pull this huge mess back together, which at the end of the day is the more important job. If we're fighting each other, it's harder to come together to get done what needs to be done.

You know I'm not an Obama apologist—I'm one of his harshest critics on the left—but please tell me you can see how this Q&A session was absolutely necessary and was carried out in the best way.

loquitur · 01-31-2010, 05:40 PM

Will, the left is ALWAYS pissed about something. That the left is pissed is like saying the sun rises in the East. Lefties are the brotherhood of perpetual outrage. As Roseanne Roseannadanna used to say, if it's not one thing it's another.

I remember reading some right-wing rant a few years ago in which some neanderthal said that he wanted the Dems to win both houses of Congress and the Presidency, just so they'd have the experience of having to keep the country safe. He thought that would make them finally shut up.

I remember laughing when I read that but it turns out that lunatic was right. Much of what Bush did, however inartfully explained and implemented, turns out to have been the best solution of a bad set of options. It might just be that Guantanamo is still open because it's the most sensible place for the people who are kept there. Same for using military tribunals. Other stuff, too. And Obama (as I have continually maintained) is no dummy - he learns as he goes and even though he lets his worst (or most childish) instincts get the better of him sometimes, he does sometimes come back to the best solution. So bully for him. Too bad he became Pres 10 or 15 years before he was ready.

cementor · 01-31-2010, 05:42 PM

All this comes back to a single issue - Transparency. A number of the questions were related to Healthcare. We have had those debates before and will continue to do so , but hopefully not here. But using that as the base, we have a bill that no one gets to read before they vote. The Republicans have to be obstructionists. To do anything else is irresponsible. They don't know if their ideas are incorporated or not in any form, do they? They have to base their opinion on no information, they were unrepresented in the drafting of the bill, there is no bill to read prior to vote, so "trust us it's in there" is totally unacceptable. And within the portions of the bill that was made public are an awful lot of we'll figure that out later pieces.

If this administration is to get anything done, and I hope for the sake of the country they do, both sides of this thing need to get a dose of reality and recognition that the 2 sides do not trust each other and to attempt to work in a vaccuum is wasted effort. This isn't a shot at the dems because they are in the majority,, it is a shot at all of the washington crowd. From the rep's side I would be in a position of watching carefully what Mr. Obama DOES now that he has admonished both sides. His actions will be extremely important to his credibility. Stay squarely in the partisan (or even appear to do so) he will fail to get anything accomplished. He will be able to blame it on the Reps, but I don't believe that is what America wants, nor do I believe it will get him reelected. I know it is not what I want and if he can't get anything substantial accomplished I will be looking to the next guy to see if they can.

Obama is correct in that if the two sides continue to lack diplomacy in their comments they paint themselves into a corner regarding effectiveness. I visited a Renewable Energy gathering last week and the terminology the speaker ( a Colorado government official ) used regarding , Oil and Gas , Nuclear, Coal and others in the "conventional energy" industry was so offensive and loaded with half to non truths, it was hard to even listen to the excellent data (small percentage of the talk) he presented that has merit toward an all encompassing energy policy. Lesson learned - it isn't always what you say, it is how you say it!

Best Regards TFPers. It is great fun to be amongst you!

Derwood · 01-31-2010, 06:36 PM

correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't every iteration of the Health Care bill been online? I've seen people quoting from it left and right over the past several months. I don't buy for a second that it was "unavailable before the vote"

Willravel · 01-31-2010, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loquitur

Will, the left is ALWAYS pissed about something.

This is meaningless. Really, we're always pissed about "something"? Right now we're pissed about very specific things. President Obama should be center left, but he's acting center right and our Senate majority is acting full-on right. The people that are supposed to represent us at least in some way aren't. Like, seriously aren't. I can count on one hand the number of liberals in the legislative branch, despite the fact that there are plenty of liberals all over the US, a much higher percentage than we get in our representatives.

When it was the GOP in the executive, and legislative, at least we knew why we were being ignored. We even understood when it was President Clinton vs. the Republican Senate before Bush. Now? We have strong majorities in the house and senate along with a left center president. And yet the public option is dead, Gitmo's still open, we'er still in Iraq and are escalating in Afghanistan, etc. etc. etc.

So I'm sorry but you can't just give me a dismissive "the left is always whining". This is not by any stretch of the imagination the same as it's been in 30 years.

You should be more pissed, though. Just as there are very few liberals around, there are even fewer traditional conservatives. IIRC, you're a more traditional conservative, yes? Smaller government, fiscal responsibility, social moderate? You've got one guy and he's Ron Paul. I mean at least we've got Grayson and Franken.

loquitur · 01-31-2010, 08:05 PM

Will, I'm not a conservative. I'm a classical liberal.
And I have been royally pissed, about the same things, for years.
Ron Paul is a crank. And he hangs with some highly unsavory characters.

Willravel · 01-31-2010, 08:35 PM

Please let us not get bogged down in labels. You're basically pro-small government, yes? Fiscal responsibility? You're more of an individualist than a collectivist? You believe that the free-market can generally take care of itself? There aren't any of those, whatever you wish to call them, in the House, Senate, or White House. The funny thing is that there are plenty of folks that pretend to share your ideologies. There are not folks that pretend to share mine.

What would you have asked President Obama had you been present at the Q&A.

loquitur · 01-31-2010, 08:56 PM

I would have asked him about his fitness regimen. He is in good shape and looks terrific. So clearly that's something he's knowledgeable enough about to speak competently.
I would have asked what his end game is in Afghanistan.

Beyond that, I think we would not have been speaking the same language. And it's prob just as well because I don't speak the same language as most of the Republicans in that room either. They're all a bunch of statist whores as well.

Willravel · 01-31-2010, 09:38 PM

It must be a steady diet of organic White House garden produce!

Also stress.

aceventura3 · 02-01-2010, 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Willravel

It wasn't belittling, as belittling suggests an attempt at reducing the standing of something. The standing was already reduced. Remember President Bush's numbers toward the end? It was maybe in the 20s. President Obama cited President Bush's failed policies, but of course he did. Do you expect him to not mention the 8 years of screw-ups when he's running against someone that shares many of the same plans as the guy in charge over those 8 years?

First he was not running against Bush. Second, I would understand if he took a materially different course than Bush, he has not, hence my confusion.

Quote:

Anyway, President Obama's outreach started right after he came into office. Why do you think the left is so pissed off at him? He's continuing wiretapping, rendition, (torture), and he's fumbled closing Gitmo. He only went with the public option instead of single payer, and he CUT TAXES for over 95% of Americans. That's major outreach, and it's more than the GOP should have ever hoped for considering how badly they screwed up. And yet all President Obama's gotten in response to the blatant attempts at reaching out is uber-right wing extremists fearmongering and insanity. Instead of "thanks for not pushing through single payer", we got "OMGDEATHPANELS" from not just morons like Palin but echoed from those who used to be considered moderate conservatives.

You support my point. I would not continue or outreach to "failed policies". I would govern based on my beliefs. Obama had a super majority, he won the election based on his words, yet he has governed differently. Why?

Quote:

Let me ask this: when did President Obama lie or significantly exaggerate during his lecture? And didn't he really make an effort to answer even ridiculous questions as honestly as possible? How is this not transparent and bipartisan, things generally considered to be of pinnacle importance by conservatives?

I have a low tolerance for B.S. If you recall I was calling out Edwards long before it was fashionable, and I got it from some of you folks. My gut tells me Obama is like a "snake oil" salesman. When it comes to the test, his "elixir" just does not work and I think he realizes that.

Willravel · 02-01-2010, 08:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceventura3

First he was not running against Bush. Second, I would understand if he took a materially different course than Bush, he has not, hence my confusion.

When Senator McCain was running, his platform was eerily similar to that of the Bush administration. And despite my not being a strong Obama supporter, I'm well aware that President Obama has shifted a lot of policies that were in place under President Bush.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceventura3

You support my point. I would not continue or outreach to "failed policies". I would govern based on my beliefs. Obama had a super majority, he won the election based on his words, yet he has governed differently. Why?

His outreach has been entirely consistent since taking office. That's my point. The GOP should be thanking him, not (forgive me) acting like a bunch of complete idiots.

And you and the majority of the GOP likely stand apart on the whole "strong leadership" thing. If President Obama led the way I would have (decimating anyone that stood in the way of my strong leftist agenda), the GOP would have long since launched an armed revolution. You, while totally disagreeing with his policies, would at least respect him for having the fortitude to go balls to the wall.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceventura3

I have a low tolerance for B.S. If you recall I was calling out Edwards long before it was fashionable, and I got it from some of you folks. My gut tells me Obama is like a "snake oil" salesman. When it comes to the test, his "elixir" just does not work and I think he realizes that.

You didn't really respond to what I posted, so here it is again: when did President Obama lie or significantly exaggerate during his lecture? And didn't he really make an effort to answer even ridiculous questions as honestly as possible? How is this not transparent and bipartisan, things generally considered to be of pinnacle importance by conservatives?

aceventura3 · 02-01-2010, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Willravel

When Senator McCain was running, his platform was eerily similar to that of the Bush administration. And despite my not being a strong Obama supporter, I'm well aware that President Obama has shifted a lot of policies that were in place under President Bush.

Bush was not far right, his policies were practical. McCain also is more of a centrist. Obama ran far left based on his rhetoric, even further left than Hillery Clinton. I would not have expected any President to deviate much from Bush, just like Bush did not deviate too much from Bill Clinton and him from the first Bush.

Quote:

His outreach has been entirely consistent since taking office. That's my point. The GOP should be thanking him, not (forgive me) acting like a bunch of complete idiots.

Is his outreach sincere? I have my doubts.

Quote:

And you and the majority of the GOP likely stand apart on the whole "strong leadership" thing. If President Obama led the way I would have (decimating anyone that stood in the way of my strong leftist agenda), the GOP would have long since launched an armed revolution. You, while totally disagreeing with his policies, would at least respect him for having the fortitude to go balls to the wall.

Bush had no problems with his agenda, even given that he "stole the election". I always say, stick with your convictions, if you have them.

Quote:

You didn't really respond to what I posted, so here it is again: when did President Obama lie or significantly exaggerate during his lecture? And didn't he really make an effort to answer even ridiculous questions as honestly as possible? How is this not transparent and bipartisan, things generally considered to be of pinnacle importance by conservatives?

My gut tells me his whole candidacy was a lie, and now he is trying to find cover for it, including his recent meeting with Republicans. I already know "my gut" has no importance, but you asked.

dippin · 02-01-2010, 10:29 AM

What part of Obama's rhetoric during the campaign was "far left?" The part where he said that he didn't support gay marriage? The part where he said that at most top income brackets would be paying what they paid in taxes under Clinton? The part where he said he would continue and expand the war in Afghanistan? A health care reform that never once was said to be single payer? What, exactly, were his far left promises during the campaign?

Baraka_Guru · 02-01-2010, 10:32 AM

"Far left" in American English translates roughly to "left of centre." I think Obama ventures there on some social issues.

Willravel · 02-01-2010, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceventura3

Bush was not far right, his policies were practical.

aceventura3 · 02-01-2010, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dippin

What part of Obama's rhetoric during the campaign was "far left?" The part where he said that he didn't support gay marriage? The part where he said that at most top income brackets would be paying what they paid in taxes under Clinton? The part where he said he would continue and expand the war in Afghanistan? A health care reform that never once was said to be single payer? What, exactly, were his far left promises during the campaign?

I don't know how to answer your question without asking one. Given Palin, Huckabee, Bush, McCain, Clinton, Obama, Kucinich, from right to left that is how I would rank them. How would you rank them?

In addition I would say Bush, McCain and Clinton are more or less in the center. I have written many times that I thought McCain and Romney were far to "political" for my tastes and that they lacked conviction. I supported Huckabee and only decided to vote for McCain because of Palin otherwise I would have did a protest vote for the Libertarian. I call-out Republicans when I don't trust them. I trust (not agree with) Clinton and Kucinich If you have been reading my views you would know that, in fact in a race between Clinton and McCain, I would have voted for Clinton, I wrote that several times also.

dippin · 02-01-2010, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceventura3

I don't know how to answer your question without asking one. Given Palin, Huckabee, Bush, McCain, Clinton, Obama, Kucinich, from right to left that is how I would rank them. How would you rank them?

In addition I would say Bush, McCain and Clinton are more or less in the center. I have written many times that I thought McCain and Romney were far to "political" for my tastes and that they lacked conviction. I supported Huckabee and only decided to vote for McCain because of Palin otherwise I would have did a protest vote for the Libertarian. I call-out Republicans when I don't trust them. I trust (not agree with) Clinton and Kucinich If you have been reading my views you would know that, in fact in a race between Clinton and McCain, I would have voted for Clinton, I wrote that several times also.

Still didn't answer my question. Oh, and Obama's healthcare plan was more conservative than Clinton's.

aceventura3 · 02-01-2010, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dippin

Still didn't answer my question. Oh, and Obama's healthcare plan was more conservative than Clinton's.

I don't know what Obama's health care plan is, in the meeting with Republican's he said some stuff sneaked in and that there were some provisions that may not allow people to keep their current coverage, etc., Obama never gave a detailed plan, he simply promised everything to everybody and turned the dirty work over to Congress. Obama gave himself, as he usually does, a way out, to say he had to compromise, to say if the bill doesn't deliver it was not his fault. Obama's rhetoric on health care was full of conflicting goals, no bill could deliver on all of his promises. You buy the B.S., I know better.

Obama reminds me of my first experience with a true B.S. artist. I had a female friend in high-school, an older guy starting showing interest in her, she would share with me what he would say and do, I told her it was all B.S., and that he just wanted what was between her legs and when he got enough of what he wanted would be done with her. Every time he failed to live up to her expectations, she would cry to me, and I kept telling her to stop buying his B.S., but she fell for it and fell hard. Eventually I went to him and suggested that he leave her alone if he wasn't serious, and then he starts with the B.S. with me, about how he cared, how he was going to do better, etc. I called him on it. He laughed and said to me "yea, you're right. I thought that was unbelievable at the time, how could a person do that, how could he be so convincing one minute and laugh about it the next. I grew up a little that day, I know the type and Obama fits the profile.

Again, excuse me for blowing off some steam. It is frustrating watching people buy into what I think is B.S.

dippin · 02-01-2010, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceventura3

I don't know what Obama's health care plan is, in the meeting with Republican's he said some stuff sneaked in and that there were some provisions that may not allow people to keep their current coverage, etc., Obama never gave a detailed plan, he simply promised everything to everybody and turned the dirty work over to Congress. Obama gave himself, as he usually does, a way out, to say he had to compromise, to say if the bill doesn't deliver it was not his fault. Obama's rhetoric on health care was full of conflicting goals, no bill could deliver on all of his promises. You buy the B.S., I know better.

Obama reminds me of my first experience with a true B.S. artist. I had a female friend in high-school, an older guy starting showing interest in her, she would share with me what he would say and do, I told her it was all B.S., and that he just wanted what was between her legs and when he got enough of what he wanted would be done with her. Every time he failed to live up to her expectations, she would cry to me, and I kept telling her to stop buying his B.S., but she fell for it and fell hard. Eventually I went to him and suggested that he leave her alone if he wasn't serious, and then he starts with the B.S. with me, about how he cared, how he was going to do better, etc. I called him on it. He laughed and said to me "yea, you're right. I thought that was unbelievable at the time, how could a person do that, how could he be so convincing one minute and laugh about it the next. I grew up a little that day, I know the type and Obama fits the profile.

Again, excuse me for blowing off some steam. It is frustrating watching people buy into what I think is B.S.

It is not about buying into BS, it is about knowing that one's not knowing something is not the same as that something not being true.

I am quite aware of all the limitations and political games played by Obama. You seem to think that if you, personally, don't know something, that means that that something does not exist.

Here is the plan he campaigned on:

http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/issue...reFullPlan.pdf

Here's the plan approved by the senate:

http://help.senate.gov/BAI09A84_xml.pdf

Here's Clinton's health care plan:

Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

The fact that you don't know what the plan is doesn't mean that there isn't one. It is amazing to me how you think that not only your "gut" and your "feelings" are enough to predict the future, but that your "gut" and your "feelings" are actual valid descriptions of reality.

aceventura3 · 02-01-2010, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dippin

It is not about buying into BS, it is about knowing that one's not knowing something is not the same as that something not being true.

I am quite aware of all the limitations and political games played by Obama. You seem to think that if you, personally, don't know something, that means that that something does not exist.

Here is the plan he campaigned on:

http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/issue...reFullPlan.pdf

Here's the plan approved by the senate:

http://help.senate.gov/BAI09A84_xml.pdf

Here's Clinton's health care plan:

Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

The fact that you don't know what the plan is doesn't mean that there isn't one. It is amazing to me how you think that not only your "gut" and your "feelings" are enough to predict the future, but that your "gut" and your "feelings" are actual valid descriptions of reality.

You are joking aren't you? The plan you link to is 9 pages of general B.S. His first major bullet point item is: INVEST IN ELECTRONIC HEALTH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS, no doubt that is a worth goal, but come on...that is the first prominent part in his plan and he has a full paragraph devoted to it????? And let's not leave out that his plan is going to promote: Patient Safety. Oh, my...that is what I need from a health care bill is for health care providers to "report" preventable medical errors..., why doesn't he just waive his arms and say medical errors are not allowed???

Again, I am sorry for blowing off steam, nothing personal, excuse my ramblings, I realize my ramblings have no impact on anything other than my sanity.

dippin · 02-01-2010, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceventura3

You are joking aren't you? The plan you link to is 9 pages of general B.S. His first major bullet point item is: INVEST IN ELECTRONIC HEALTH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS, no doubt that is a worth goal, but come on...that is the first prominent part in his plan and he has a full paragraph devoted to it????? And let's not leave out that his plan is going to promote: Patient Safety. Oh, my...that is what I need from a health care bill is for health care providers to "report" preventable medical errors..., why doesn't he just waive his arms and say medical errors are not allowed???

Again, I am sorry for blowing off steam, nothing personal, excuse my ramblings, I realize my ramblings have no impact on anything other than my sanity.

If 9 pages is too short, feel free to read the current senate bill and its 600 plus pages. The info is out there.

aceventura3 · 02-02-2010, 07:42 AM

I am listening to Gietner saying TARP passed under Bush is going to be fully repaid, at no cost to taxpayers. However, when Obama talks about the deficit he inherited it includes the cost of TARP. He is using this to help justify his deficit spending. Isn't that being a little deceptive? Isn't that a little accounting trick to help sell his agenda? Does stuff like that give you confidence?

01-30-2010, 01:21 PM	#1 (permalink)
rahl Junkie Location: Ohio	Obama at House Republican retreat Obama At House Republican Retreat In Baltimore: FULL VIDEO, TEXT This is a complete recording of the retreat, accompanied by a full transcript. It's over an hour long so if you have time to watch or read great, if not I'm sure you've atleast heard a summary. Now I haven't watched any news channels on this discussion so I can try to judge for myself what took place. It seemed to me to be a pretty fair and civil exchange between the Republicans and the President. And hopefully the two parties can try to come together just a little to get some things done. Your thoughts? __________________ "Your life is Yours alone...Rise up and live it"

01-30-2010, 01:45 PM	#3 (permalink)
rahl Junkie Location: Ohio	I agree. I don't think any intelligent person could have watched this exchange in the hopes that it wouldn't be political. I would love to have heard the discussion that went on in the room after the Pres left. __________________ "Your life is Yours alone...Rise up and live it"

01-30-2010, 03:13 PM	#4 (permalink)
Derwood Who You Crappin? Location: Everywhere and Nowhere	They should do this 4 times a year. On national TV. I'm glad he had a chance to call BS on certain claims, and also glad that he copped to some of his mistakes. __________________ "You can't shoot a country until it becomes a democracy." - Willravel

01-30-2010, 06:31 PM	#6 (permalink)
Derwood Who You Crappin? Location: Everywhere and Nowhere	The general media consensus was that Obama really "took it to" the Republicans here, so I doubt they'll be in a rush to do this again any time soon __________________ "You can't shoot a country until it becomes a democracy." - Willravel

01-31-2010, 10:09 AM	#9 (permalink)
aceventura3 Junkie Location: Ventura County	I listened to Obama at the retreat and some of the media coverage afterward. From a big picture point of view, as been the case a lot lately, I don't understand Obama. For the last couple of years all he has been saying about Republicans is how their failed policies has been negative for this country both domestically and internationally, now he talks about how he has adopted many of those failed policies. __________________ "Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch." "It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion." "If you live among wolves you have to act like one." "A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

01-30-2010, 01:28 PM	#2 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	It was funny to see the president respond to some of the more outrageous stuff. The Bolshevik comment had me rolling. That said, President Obama did dodge a few questions, like his pledge not to allow lobbyists into his administration.

01-30-2010, 05:31 PM	#5 (permalink)
loquitur Junkie Location: NYC	He needs them now. He didn't before. He is no dummy. So he's doing what he needs to do. I wonder whether they'll perceive it to be in their interest to play ball with him. You'd hope they would - he is, after all, the president.

01-30-2010, 07:40 PM	#7 (permalink)
loquitur Junkie Location: NYC	the general media consensus is generally pro-Democrat. So maybe if you want to know how the Repubs perceived it, someone should ask them. Makes sense to get things from the horse's mouth, doesnt it?

01-31-2010, 10:13 AM	#10 (permalink)
Derwood Who You Crappin? Location: Everywhere and Nowhere	you just choose to hear what you want to hear. Obama could spend an hour talking about everything you want to hear from a President but you'll put a negative spin on it. I give up __________________ "You can't shoot a country until it becomes a democracy." - Willravel

01-31-2010, 11:08 AM	#12 (permalink)
Derwood Who You Crappin? Location: Everywhere and Nowhere	be more specific about the problems you had with what he said. give me some quotes so I can respond __________________ "You can't shoot a country until it becomes a democracy." - Willravel

01-31-2010, 05:40 PM	#16 (permalink)
loquitur Junkie Location: NYC	Will, the left is ALWAYS pissed about something. That the left is pissed is like saying the sun rises in the East. Lefties are the brotherhood of perpetual outrage. As Roseanne Roseannadanna used to say, if it's not one thing it's another. I remember reading some right-wing rant a few years ago in which some neanderthal said that he wanted the Dems to win both houses of Congress and the Presidency, just so they'd have the experience of having to keep the country safe. He thought that would make them finally shut up. I remember laughing when I read that but it turns out that lunatic was right. Much of what Bush did, however inartfully explained and implemented, turns out to have been the best solution of a bad set of options. It might just be that Guantanamo is still open because it's the most sensible place for the people who are kept there. Same for using military tribunals. Other stuff, too. And Obama (as I have continually maintained) is no dummy - he learns as he goes and even though he lets his worst (or most childish) instincts get the better of him sometimes, he does sometimes come back to the best solution. So bully for him. Too bad he became Pres 10 or 15 years before he was ready.

01-31-2010, 05:42 PM	#17 (permalink)
cementor Crazy Location: Denver	All this comes back to a single issue - Transparency. A number of the questions were related to Healthcare. We have had those debates before and will continue to do so , but hopefully not here. But using that as the base, we have a bill that no one gets to read before they vote. The Republicans have to be obstructionists. To do anything else is irresponsible. They don't know if their ideas are incorporated or not in any form, do they? They have to base their opinion on no information, they were unrepresented in the drafting of the bill, there is no bill to read prior to vote, so "trust us it's in there" is totally unacceptable. And within the portions of the bill that was made public are an awful lot of we'll figure that out later pieces. If this administration is to get anything done, and I hope for the sake of the country they do, both sides of this thing need to get a dose of reality and recognition that the 2 sides do not trust each other and to attempt to work in a vaccuum is wasted effort. This isn't a shot at the dems because they are in the majority,, it is a shot at all of the washington crowd. From the rep's side I would be in a position of watching carefully what Mr. Obama DOES now that he has admonished both sides. His actions will be extremely important to his credibility. Stay squarely in the partisan (or even appear to do so) he will fail to get anything accomplished. He will be able to blame it on the Reps, but I don't believe that is what America wants, nor do I believe it will get him reelected. I know it is not what I want and if he can't get anything substantial accomplished I will be looking to the next guy to see if they can. Obama is correct in that if the two sides continue to lack diplomacy in their comments they paint themselves into a corner regarding effectiveness. I visited a Renewable Energy gathering last week and the terminology the speaker ( a Colorado government official ) used regarding , Oil and Gas , Nuclear, Coal and others in the "conventional energy" industry was so offensive and loaded with half to non truths, it was hard to even listen to the excellent data (small percentage of the talk) he presented that has merit toward an all encompassing energy policy. Lesson learned - it isn't always what you say, it is how you say it! Best Regards TFPers. It is great fun to be amongst you! __________________ Cementor If I was any better I'd have to be twins!

01-31-2010, 06:36 PM	#18 (permalink)
Derwood Who You Crappin? Location: Everywhere and Nowhere	correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't every iteration of the Health Care bill been online? I've seen people quoting from it left and right over the past several months. I don't buy for a second that it was "unavailable before the vote" __________________ "You can't shoot a country until it becomes a democracy." - Willravel

01-31-2010, 08:05 PM	#20 (permalink)
loquitur Junkie Location: NYC	Will, I'm not a conservative. I'm a classical liberal. And I have been royally pissed, about the same things, for years. Ron Paul is a crank. And he hangs with some highly unsavory characters.

01-31-2010, 08:35 PM	#21 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	Please let us not get bogged down in labels. You're basically pro-small government, yes? Fiscal responsibility? You're more of an individualist than a collectivist? You believe that the free-market can generally take care of itself? There aren't any of those, whatever you wish to call them, in the House, Senate, or White House. The funny thing is that there are plenty of folks that pretend to share your ideologies. There are not folks that pretend to share mine. What would you have asked President Obama had you been present at the Q&A.

01-31-2010, 08:56 PM	#22 (permalink)
loquitur Junkie Location: NYC	I would have asked him about his fitness regimen. He is in good shape and looks terrific. So clearly that's something he's knowledgeable enough about to speak competently. I would have asked what his end game is in Afghanistan. Beyond that, I think we would not have been speaking the same language. And it's prob just as well because I don't speak the same language as most of the Republicans in that room either. They're all a bunch of statist whores as well.

01-31-2010, 09:38 PM	#23 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	It must be a steady diet of organic White House garden produce! Also stress.

02-01-2010, 10:29 AM	#27 (permalink)
dippin Crazy, indeed Location: the ether	What part of Obama's rhetoric during the campaign was "far left?" The part where he said that he didn't support gay marriage? The part where he said that at most top income brackets would be paying what they paid in taxes under Clinton? The part where he said he would continue and expand the war in Afghanistan? A health care reform that never once was said to be single payer? What, exactly, were his far left promises during the campaign?

02-01-2010, 10:32 AM	#28 (permalink)
Baraka_Guru warrior bodhisattva Super Moderator Location: East-central Canada	"Far left" in American English translates roughly to "left of centre." I think Obama ventures there on some social issues. __________________ Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing? —Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön Humankind cannot bear very much reality. —From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

02-02-2010, 07:42 AM	#36 (permalink)
aceventura3 Junkie Location: Ventura County	I am listening to Gietner saying TARP passed under Bush is going to be fully repaid, at no cost to taxpayers. However, when Obama talks about the deficit he inherited it includes the cost of TARP. He is using this to help justify his deficit spending. Isn't that being a little deceptive? Isn't that a little accounting trick to help sell his agenda? Does stuff like that give you confidence? __________________ "Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch." "It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion." "If you live among wolves you have to act like one." "A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."