"The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works" (Limbaugh, wage)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nothing once it was passed,in fact it looks like bailouts and nationalisation of business is the future for our nation...
That money didn't go out the day after the vote passed. There wasn't even a thought-out plan for how to distribute that money. Is there even a thought-out plan today? Once it was passed, people could have demanded more oversight, people could have demanded it be amended, could have reduced the amount. Law is not fait accompli, it's a process, especially when it comes to money. Only thousands of people wrote that representative, how many people are in his district? How many people took the easy way out, signing a form letter, or adding their names to an e-mail? People have got to care more than that.
Hmmm,the VAST majority of the people were against the bailout...yet it happened and ANOTHER even bigger one is coming.
Seems what the people want matters little.
Obama said at the congressional luncheon yesterday, "Reflect what we know are in the hearts of the American people." He said in the inaug. speech, "[T]hose of us who manage the public's dollars will be held to account, to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day, because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government."
So - at least he's said this. I think it's hugely important, though, that he or the WH spokesperson or whoever always explain decisions, very clearly and openly. They're supposed to, for Pete's sake. The bailouts - had to be done, for example. (This second $350B Obama is insisting its allocations be transparent.) Well - listen to our questions and explain to us the choices and the decisions honestly and in a way we can't help but understand.
The Bush crew were as transparent as a brick wall and as welcoming and open as Area 51, and that was so unnecessarily damaging, to them and to us generally. And through time we all became accustomed to this, it was excused by Admin apologists, etc. But it's WRONG and I hope it has ended for good.
That money didn't go out the day after the vote passed. There wasn't even a thought-out plan for how to distribute that money. Is there even a thought-out plan today? Once it was passed, people could have demanded more oversight, people could have demanded it be amended, could have reduced the amount. Law is not fait accompli, it's a process, especially when it comes to money. Only thousands of people wrote that representative, how many people are in his district? How many people took the easy way out, signing a form letter, or adding their names to an e-mail? People have got to care more than that.
Demand???
People cannot demand anything,as the people have little in the way of power.
You can demand anything you want but unless there are possible consequences it matters little.
Obama said at the congressional luncheon yesterday, "Reflect what we know are in the hearts of the American people." He said in the inaug. speech, "[T]hose of us who manage the public's dollars will be held to account, to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day, because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government."
So - at least he's said this. I think it's hugely important, though, that he or the WH spokesperson or whoever always explain decisions, very clearly and openly. They're supposed to, for Pete's sake. The bailouts - had to be done, for example. (This second $350B Obama is insisting its allocations be transparent.) Well - listen to our questions and explain to us the choices and the decisions honestly and in a way we can't help but understand.
The Bush crew were as transparent as a brick wall and as welcoming and open as Area 51, and that was so unnecessarily damaging, to them and to us generally. And I think through time we all became accustomed to this. But it's WRONG and I hope it has ended for good.
Obama supported the first bailout...if he felt that strongly about transparency perhaps he should have spoken up?
People cannot demand anything,as the people have little in the way of power.
You can demand anything you want but unless there are possible consequences it matters little.
That's absolutely right. I can demand anything, but if I want to be heard, I've got to make that happen. I've got to care enough about it, to try to persuade others to speak out too. I've got to care enough about an issue to write letters to the newspapers and letters to my elected representatives and letters to representatives that don't represent me but have influence on an issue. I've got to care enough to write and call and e-mail and talk not just once, but over and over and over again. I've got to care enough that even when it looks as if I've lost, I find ways to get back in the game.
And people know this. PETA people, and people opposed to abortion, Greenpeace, and other environmentalists. The people who got prohibition reversed. The women who marched for the right to vote. Government is a process, and whether we like it or not, we are all involved in that process. Silence is just another way of agreeing with what the government does. Using our voice is what the Founding Fathers wanted for us, they opened the doors, the windows, the halls of government wide. We've even expanded on that. But it's up to us to climb the steps, to scramble over the fences, to even push people out of the way to gain entry and to keep our presence in those places of power. And if we aren't willing to break a sweat, to get dinged up on that rush to be heard, then what do we deserve? To say we can't do anything, to assume the role of victim, to take the passive road, and then to complain because we don't have a voice is just to be lazy. We have a voice, we just don't raise it enough.
Obama supported the first bailout...if he felt that strongly about transparency perhaps he should have spoken up?
He did - he and McCain - both Senators then - both called for close oversight of its apportionment (which at that time was a big lump of $700B). Most congresspeople were nervous about handing the entire lot to Bernanke to distribute "alone," but that's what happened if you recall. The decision had to be made so quickly there was no time to stop the train and opine.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
