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.
I just want straight answers to my and other questions that have been asked.
I don't need the politician avoiding the question, and then elaborating on about how great it is going to be. I have already had those with Bush. That is why I voted for a change. A change that I did not expect.
I want answers.
Then when you ask the questions, you should listen to the answers, correct? And if you still feel that your question hasn't been answered, get in line to pose it differently to the speaker. Do you think shouting in outrage when you don't hear what you want to hear is the appropriate response? Do you think the other people trying to ask questions like it when you push them aside to scream and belittle the speaker?
What troubles me is . . . it plainly states throughout the legislation (both the Kennedy/Dodd bill and HR3200) that various details would be decided later. Of course, the language is so contorted, these "details" are worded as stuff like "to be appointed by the committee created under section xx, of xx, in accordance to xx and no later than 180 days after xx."
If it weren't so obviously an attempt to hide the details, it would be laughable. As it is, no one really can possibly understand exactly what the legislation means. This leaves room for interpretation - and ultimately, confusion, on the part of Congressmen as well as constituents.
Not to mention, why would anyone vote a blank check to congress in this manner. Vote on it without knowing the details? That is why there is such a thing as a no vote.
And I thought the guy who took his place promised CHANGE and TRANSPARENCY.
Did Bush win a third term?
No, Bush said criticizing his policy was un-American.
Since this thread is about calling criticizers un-American, I think it is pertinent to the discussion. Why? You want to hide and bury the history of Bush?
Is it any surprise that these clowns have the lowest approval ratings in history and yet expect us to roll over and let them give us this boondoggle. Shut up Nancy and go buy another Gulfstream. Leave us alone.
This is exactly why i cannot stand either the democrats or the republicans. It is the same s%t with them just a different day attitude. When Bush was getting questions about the war the attitude was it is Un-American to challenge the decisions of the pontiff and it is the same thing with the Obama adminstration. Eh, this is just getting old and i'm sick of it! It never ends, it is always the same stuff no matter what with these two political groups. They offer no change whatsoever and yet they're able to keep people bickering over the stupidest most insignificant things, that really do not have any real impact on their lives.
WAKE UP WAKE UP WAKE UP!!!
PS Pelosi is an idiot too!!! She is just as stupid as Rush etc!!
If you're not a moderate at this point in politics you're a (fill in the blank) too!
What troubles me is . . . it plainly states throughout the legislation (both the Kennedy/Dodd bill and HR3200) that various details would be decided later. Of course, the language is so contorted, these "details" are worded as stuff like "to be appointed by the committee created under section xx, of xx, in accordance to xx and no later than 180 days after xx."
If it weren't so obviously an attempt to hide the details, it would be laughable. As it is, no one really can possibly understand exactly what the legislation means. This leaves room for interpretation - and ultimately, confusion, on the part of Congressmen as well as constituents.
And there wouldn't need to be a WH War Room which instructs Congressmen on how to answer questions at these town hall meetings if there were clarity.
This is exactly why i cannot stand either the democrats or the republicans. It is the same s%t with them just a different day attitude. When Bush was getting questions about the war the attitude was it is Un-American to challenge the decisions of the pontiff and it is the same thing with the Obama adminstration. Eh, this is just getting old and i'm sick of it! It never ends, it is always the same stuff no matter what with these two political groups. They offer no change whatsoever and yet they're able to keep people bickering over the stupidest most insignificant things, that really do not have any real impact on their lives.
WAKE UP WAKE UP WAKE UP!!!
PS Pelosi is an idiot too!!! She is just as stupid as Rush etc!!
If you're not a moderate at this point in politics you're a (fill in the blank) too!
There is a way you can change things:
I've come across a truly interesting site that I'd suggest you consider. It is called GOOOH (for Get Out Of Our House), and pronounced like the word go.
They have an intriguing plan to evict the 435 politicians from the U.S. House of Representatives. I hope you'll check it out.
Why don't you answer the question? I suspect you cannot, but try anyway with dodging it.
To repeat: If labeling dissent as Un-American during the Bush years was wrong, why is it acceptable for Democrats (and you) to do so now?
It is not acceptable for Democrats or anyone else to label dissent as Un-American. And that is not what Pelosi and her cohorts have done. They've simply pointed out that when you go to a town meeting, you go there to participate in an EXCHANGE of ideas. And an exchange does not mean you go, shout out your idea, and then don't listen to what other people have to say. You express your point of view, and politely listen to other persons' points of view. You can disagree with someone, and be quite affective at getting across your ideas without chanting and trying to shut other people up. It is that, the attempt to silence the people you don't agree with, that is being called un-American. And it should be clarified, that Bush's complaints were a bit more complicated as well. Bush equated opposition to the war with a failure to support troops. And that failure he considered un-American. He felt that once we were committed to a war or action, it was unpatriotic to pull back on that commitment, because, for him, success requires a full and unwavering commitment to a cause, no matter what the venture.
Yes, display the final bill- all thousands of pages of it- on TV and go through it line by line, Ross Perot style.
There is no "final bill" right now.
In fact, there is no single bill; there are several bills coming out of different committees, all of which are still a work in progress.
I have a suggestion. If you have a specific question that you can't find the answer to, call your representative's office and ask. If you don't know how to reach them, let me know who they are and I will get their phone number(s) for you.
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.
