![Popcorn :pop:](./images/smilies/popcorn.gif)
LGP Political Discussion Thread
-
- NHL Fourth Liner
- Posts: 20572
- Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 1:53 am
- Location: Feeling like I want to rage...right now.
Re: LGP Politcal Discussion Thread
shafty with a typical Republican response ![Popcorn :pop:](./images/smilies/popcorn.gif)
![Popcorn :pop:](./images/smilies/popcorn.gif)
-
- NHL First Liner
- Posts: 60559
- Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:10 pm
- Location: Amish Country
Re: LGP Politcal Discussion Thread
deja vu....Kicksave wrote:shafty with a typical Republican response
![Razz :P](./images/smilies/icon_razz.gif)
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 28922
- Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 9:10 am
- Location: Pittsburgh
Re: LGP Politcal Discussion Thread
You just need to suck it up and take your medicine....Bush ran massive deficits, got us into one (maybe two) unwinnable wars, and was in charge during the largest financial collapse since probably the great depression...shafnutz05 wrote:deja vu....Kicksave wrote:shafty with a typical Republican response
His tenure got a ton of democrats elected....for as much as people complained about Bush...nothing matches the amount of complaining you do about obama...
-
- NHL First Liner
- Posts: 60559
- Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:10 pm
- Location: Amish Country
Re: LGP Politcal Discussion Thread
Again, Bush is the reason that we are in this mess. If it wasn't for his horrid incompetence over the last several years especially, the Democrats would not have total control of the country right now. As far as that post I just put up, I am just keeping people appraised of the facts. Before his election, Obama promised transparency, and vowed eight separate times to broadcast the healthcare bill negotiations on CNN. Instead, we are left with another broken promise, bribery, and outright corruption? Is it complaining? I guess...but if highlighting blatant criminality is complaining, then you will be hearing a lot of it.
-
- NHL First Liner
- Posts: 60559
- Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:10 pm
- Location: Amish Country
Re: LGP Politcal Discussion Thread
And you have to give me credit...I haven't hung Obama in effigy yet. How many hundreds of times was Bush's effigy hung/burned etc? But it happens to Obama once, and we have to hear about the "underlying racism" in America. Yawn...
-
- NHL Fourth Liner
- Posts: 20279
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:08 am
- Location: its like bologna with olives in it
Re: LGP Politcal Discussion Thread
Come on; there are obvious historical and contextual facts surrounding lynchings and effigies as to blacks in America that you cannot simply ignore because "they did it with Bush."shafnutz05 wrote:And you have to give me credit...I haven't hung Obama in effigy yet. How many hundreds of times was Bush's effigy hung/burned etc? But it happens to Obama once, and we have to hear about the "underlying racism" in America. Yawn...
Of course doing it to Bush is stupid and disrespectful as well, but to say "Yawn" in light of the reality that he is black and there is a history is a simplistic way of looking at it.
-
- NHL First Liner
- Posts: 60559
- Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:10 pm
- Location: Amish Country
Re: LGP Politcal Discussion Thread
I agree with you in the context that there is a definite history there. I guess I have grown a little tired of legitimate critics of the president being lumped in with the Ku Klux Klan....and being labeled an "angry white man" by so many in the establishment simply because I a criticizing a president that just so happens to be black. Believe me, if JC Watts was running for president, I would campaign for him.slappybrown wrote:Of course doing it to Bush is stupid and disrespectful as well, but to say "Yawn" in light of the reality that he is black and there is a history is a simplistic way of looking at it.
I will note that much of the "racism" talk has died down...it's hard to bolster that argument when over half the country disapproves.
-
- NHL Fourth Liner
- Posts: 20279
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:08 am
- Location: its like bologna with olives in it
Re: LGP Politcal Discussion Thread
I dont know many people in my day to day life who say that criticizing the President when you happen to be white means you are an "angry white man" or that your criticism is predicated on his race. I hope you dont, if only because that is ridiculous.shafnutz05 wrote:I agree with you in the context that there is a definite history there. I guess I have grown a little tired of legitimate critics of the president being lumped in with the Ku Klux Klan....and being labeled an "angry white man" by so many in the establishment simply because I a criticizing a president that just so happens to be black. Believe me, if JC Watts was running for president, I would campaign for him.slappybrown wrote:Of course doing it to Bush is stupid and disrespectful as well, but to say "Yawn" in light of the reality that he is black and there is a history is a simplistic way of looking at it.
I will note that much of the "racism" talk has died down...it's hard to bolster that argument when over half the country disapproves.
-
- NHL First Liner
- Posts: 60559
- Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:10 pm
- Location: Amish Country
Re: LGP Politcal Discussion Thread
This was pretty prevalent in the establishment media in mid to late 2009. Like I said, it has definitely died down a little going into 2010....after a while, it becomes impossible to defend someone from attacks by pulling the race card.slappybrown wrote:I dont know many people in my day to day life who say that criticizing the President when you happen to be white means you are an "angry white man" or that your criticism is predicated on his race. I hope you dont, if only because that is ridiculous.
-
- NHL Fourth Liner
- Posts: 20279
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:08 am
- Location: its like bologna with olives in it
Re: LGP Politcal Discussion Thread
Personally, the 2008 election wasn't particularly appealing in terms of my options. My liberal friends all said I was "turning conservative" because I didn't really buy the Obama hype. The whole Hope/Change thing was just politics as acting/marketing -- thats not specific to Obama (and has been the way our presidential elections have worked since 1960), just well executed on his part. I found him a more palatable option because I generally lean left on most social issues and am generally middle of the road when it comes to economic issues. His intelligence and considered nature having been a law professor was also appealing after 8 years of leadership style that was more, lets kindly say, impetuous (Guinness would sub "imperious" I supposeshafnutz05 wrote:This was pretty prevalent in the establishment media in mid to late 2009. Like I said, it has definitely died down a little going into 2010....after a while, it becomes impossible to defend someone from attacks by pulling the race card.slappybrown wrote:I dont know many people in my day to day life who say that criticizing the President when you happen to be white means you are an "angry white man" or that your criticism is predicated on his race. I hope you dont, if only because that is ridiculous.
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
So far though, I'd be lying if I didn't find the early returns somewhat disappointing. I wasn't an Obama fanatic in the first place, so I didn't expect to be all lollipops and rainbows starting in January 2009, but I would give him a preliminary grade of C as compared to the B+ he game himself (and by the way, that Oprah interview was disgusting to watch -- I know she's not an investigative journalist, but my God woman, have some self-respect). There are some signs that the economy is turning around a little bit, and he still has three years to go, so I remain cautiously optimistic as I have since he was elected. I just think its too early to make sweeping statments about his "success" or "failure."
-
- NHL First Liner
- Posts: 60559
- Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:10 pm
- Location: Amish Country
Re: LGP Politcal Discussion Thread
Very well said....it is very easy for me to forget that we are barely a year into his first term
. I am not surprised he gave himself a B+ (and had the gall to say it would be an A, if he got the healthcare bill that no one wants passed). Since he initially came on the national stage, he has been propped up as a messianic celebrity figure. Every time he would go on interviews, the "journalist" or entertainer would gush over him and continuously praise him. Oprah is one of the biggest offenders, as you pointed out, but what made it worse was that supposedly nonbiased news reporters started to swoon for him as well.
So for several years, Obama enjoyed an almost cult-like level of worship among his adamant supporters (not talking about routine supporters like yourself), in which his actions and words were loyally unquestioned and unchallenged. Now, with the way his approval has plummeted among independents and mainstream Americans, he is finding himself under heavy fire, and I don't think he knows how to handle it. If you have watched his conferences and speeches lately, he has not sounded anything like he did during the campaign. He sounds bitter, angry, and his temper is extremely short. This is a man that is not used to being questioned, vetted, or challenged, and now they are coming from all sides.
The problem with propping someone up as an artificial messiah is that once they fall to the Earth, it's really, really ugly. I don't see any change over the next three years, largely due to the policies that he continues to advocate (reckless spending, costly healthcare, cap and trade, amnesty, etc). I hope I am wrong, but I doubt it.
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
So for several years, Obama enjoyed an almost cult-like level of worship among his adamant supporters (not talking about routine supporters like yourself), in which his actions and words were loyally unquestioned and unchallenged. Now, with the way his approval has plummeted among independents and mainstream Americans, he is finding himself under heavy fire, and I don't think he knows how to handle it. If you have watched his conferences and speeches lately, he has not sounded anything like he did during the campaign. He sounds bitter, angry, and his temper is extremely short. This is a man that is not used to being questioned, vetted, or challenged, and now they are coming from all sides.
The problem with propping someone up as an artificial messiah is that once they fall to the Earth, it's really, really ugly. I don't see any change over the next three years, largely due to the policies that he continues to advocate (reckless spending, costly healthcare, cap and trade, amnesty, etc). I hope I am wrong, but I doubt it.
-
- NHL Healthy Scratch
- Posts: 11465
- Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 7:30 am
- Location: At the pub
Re: LGP Politcal Discussion Thread
To say the least. Looks like we're going to get - shockingly - more of the same.slappybrown wrote:after 8 years of leadership style that was more, lets kindly say, impetuous (Guinness would sub "imperious" I suppose ).
![Wink ;)](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
slappy, I didn't figure you for one to buy into the Keynsian nonsense?There are some signs that the economy is turning around a little bit, and he still has three years to go, so I remain cautiously optimistic
I don't.I just think its too early to make sweeping statments about his "success" or "failure."
![Wink ;)](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
Fail.
Of course, I can't imagine that my standard for success could be met by anyone not named 'Ron Paul'.
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
-
- NHL Fourth Liner
- Posts: 20279
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:08 am
- Location: its like bologna with olives in it
Re: LGP Politcal Discussion Thread
Well, I'm not sure what to think about the economic policies being used to fight the current global crisis. On the one hand, you can point to Japan's lost decade as evidence that this type of Keynesian response is necessary -- and especially necessary for the US gov't to take more aggressive countermeasures as compared to those taken by Japan in the early 90s to prevent this country from facing our own wasted decade. The whole debate about gov't spending and its role in pulling countries out of economic tailspins is something that I just don't know can be answered -- authors are still churning out books analyzing the Great Depression and the escape -- was it the New Deal? Military mobilization in light of WWII? Naturally occurring market forces? To some extent, I don't think anyone has any bleeping clue as to what shapes and moves the economies of the world, especially as a result of increased globilization (crap, I hate that I sound like that clod Friedman whenever I use that word). I fall somewhere between the spectrum of full laissez faire and what we currently have -- helpful, I knowGuinness wrote:To say the least. Looks like we're going to get - shockingly - more of the same.slappybrown wrote:after 8 years of leadership style that was more, lets kindly say, impetuous (Guinness would sub "imperious" I suppose ).
slappy, I didn't figure you for one to buy into the Keynsian nonsense?There are some signs that the economy is turning around a little bit, and he still has three years to go, so I remain cautiously optimistic
I don't.I just think its too early to make sweeping statments about his "success" or "failure."![]()
Fail.
Of course, I can't imagine that my standard for success could be met by anyone not named 'Ron Paul'.
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
I have some strong libertarian views like you do. Smoke drugs, have sex with whoever you want presuming consent, eat what you want, etc. -- but I think that the crisis facing libertarianism is that the realities of this world sometimes make "their" answers the equivalent of sticking your head in the sand. A lot of time, with my more libertarian friends, I find myself saying, yes it SHOULD be like that, but it isnt, and it wont realistically be like that at any time in the foreseeable future -- what you propose is not a realistic solution. Their response to me usually includes the word "lapsed"
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
-
- NHL Healthy Scratch
- Posts: 11465
- Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 7:30 am
- Location: At the pub
Re: LGP Politcal Discussion Thread
There are some pretty relevant differences, as I understand it, between us and Japan's lost decade. I'm by no means an economist, but I go to the folks who called this current pickle... if you haven't, check out The Mises Institute. Shyster put me on to the Daily Reckoning (http://www.dailyreckoning.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, I think), as well.slappybrown wrote: Well, I'm not sure what to think about the economic policies being used to fight the current global crisis. On the one hand, you can point to Japan's lost decade as evidence that this type of Keynesian response is necessary -- and especially necessary for the US gov't to take more aggressive countermeasures as compared to those taken by Japan in the early 90s to prevent this country from facing our own wasted decade. The whole debate about gov't spending and its role in pulling countries out of economic tailspins is something that I just don't know can be answered -- authors are still churning out books analyzing the Great Depression and the escape -- was it the New Deal? Military mobilization in light of WWII? Naturally occurring market forces? To some extent, I don't think anyone has any bleeping clue as to what shapes and moves the economies of the world, especially as a result of increased globilization (crap, I hate that I sound like that clod Friedman whenever I use that word). I fall somewhere between the spectrum of full laissez faire and what we currently have -- helpful, I know.
I agree, unfortunately, that it won't be as it should be any time soon. My view of that is that just because something isn't likely doesn't mean we shouldn't work toward it. That's the old, "settling for the lesser of two evils" conundrum.I have some strong libertarian views like you do. Smoke drugs, have sex with whoever you want presuming consent, eat what you want, etc. -- but I think that the crisis facing libertarianism is that the realities of this world sometimes make "their" answers the equivalent of sticking your head in the sand. A lot of time, with my more libertarian friends, I find myself saying, yes it SHOULD be like that, but it isnt, and it wont realistically be like that at any time in the foreseeable future
I think what we'll find is that the way we're organizing our society now, and the direction we have been heading for some time, will reveal itself to be what is actually untenable, and that realities of this modern world aren't really realities at all, such as our economic system.
-
- NHL Healthy Scratch
- Posts: 11465
- Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 7:30 am
- Location: At the pub
Re: LGP Politcal Discussion Thread
Dodd Bails Out ![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
I link to the LRC blog post, rather than the article itself, because the bloggers there have taken to a pretty humourous method of indicating a pol's true consituency:
Chris Dodd (D-Wall Street Banksters)
Rather than the 'traditional':
Chriss Dodd (D-Connecticut)
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
I link to the LRC blog post, rather than the article itself, because the bloggers there have taken to a pretty humourous method of indicating a pol's true consituency:
Chris Dodd (D-Wall Street Banksters)
Rather than the 'traditional':
Chriss Dodd (D-Connecticut)
-
- NHL Fourth Liner
- Posts: 20279
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:08 am
- Location: its like bologna with olives in it
Re: LGP Politcal Discussion Thread
I agree with you that because its currently not the way it should be, we shouldnt settle and just be on our merry way -- my point is just that working towards that end cannot always be an all or nothing absolute, and that compromise to that end is particularly distasteful to libertarians.Guinness wrote:There are some pretty relevant differences, as I understand it, between us and Japan's lost decade. I'm by no means an economist, but I go to the folks who called this current pickle... if you haven't, check out The Mises Institute. Shyster put me on to the Daily Reckoning (http://www.dailyreckoning.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, I think), as well.slappybrown wrote: Well, I'm not sure what to think about the economic policies being used to fight the current global crisis. On the one hand, you can point to Japan's lost decade as evidence that this type of Keynesian response is necessary -- and especially necessary for the US gov't to take more aggressive countermeasures as compared to those taken by Japan in the early 90s to prevent this country from facing our own wasted decade. The whole debate about gov't spending and its role in pulling countries out of economic tailspins is something that I just don't know can be answered -- authors are still churning out books analyzing the Great Depression and the escape -- was it the New Deal? Military mobilization in light of WWII? Naturally occurring market forces? To some extent, I don't think anyone has any bleeping clue as to what shapes and moves the economies of the world, especially as a result of increased globilization (crap, I hate that I sound like that clod Friedman whenever I use that word). I fall somewhere between the spectrum of full laissez faire and what we currently have -- helpful, I know.
I agree, unfortunately, that it won't be as it should be any time soon. My view of that is that just because something isn't likely doesn't mean we shouldn't work toward it. That's the old, "settling for the lesser of two evils" conundrum.I have some strong libertarian views like you do. Smoke drugs, have sex with whoever you want presuming consent, eat what you want, etc. -- but I think that the crisis facing libertarianism is that the realities of this world sometimes make "their" answers the equivalent of sticking your head in the sand. A lot of time, with my more libertarian friends, I find myself saying, yes it SHOULD be like that, but it isnt, and it wont realistically be like that at any time in the foreseeable future
I think what we'll find is that the way we're organizing our society now, and the direction we have been heading for some time, will reveal itself to be what is actually untenable, and that realities of this modern world aren't really realities at all, such as our economic system.
I often read the Mises site. I know you are fond of linking to the lewrockwell.com site -- Lew himself is the chairman of the Institute last I checked. A friend of mine is an avid reader of the Daily Reckoning, but I don't visit too often. I will have to check it out more often.
I've read pieces both arguing that Japan's lost decade is a cautionary tale for why we HAVE to do what we are doing, and as evidence that what we are doing is pointless and will only delay recovery, if not further weaken the rotten foundation our current economic system is grounded in. Like you, I am not an economist -- and as I get older, I find the old cliche about the "dismal science" has never been more accurate.
-
- NHL Healthy Scratch
- Posts: 11465
- Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 7:30 am
- Location: At the pub
Re: LGP Politcal Discussion Thread
Yes, compromise is definitely an area we need to work on. It's just that it's very difficult to compromise when you know you're right.slappybrown wrote: I agree with you that because its currently not the way it should be, we shouldnt settle and just be on our merry way -- my point is just that working towards that end cannot always be an all or nothing absolute, and that compromise to that end is particularly distasteful to libertarians.
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
![Wink ;)](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
![Wink ;)](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
Interestingly, since I began reading Mises and LRC, I've become compelled with economics -- I've purchased a couple of books recently, actually. Unsurprisingly, the economists who write for those sites believe that the reason it has become known as the "dismal science" is because of Keynesians and the like who attempt to quantify human action.as I get older, I find the old cliche about the "dismal science" has never been more accurate.
![Wink ;)](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
-
- AHL Hall of Famer
- Posts: 8933
- Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 2:24 am
Re: LGP Politcal Discussion Thread
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01 ... profiling/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
So what are your views of this profiling? I know there are legit constitutional concerns as to searches, scans etc. But my question relates only to profiling. As usual the ACLU has it wrong trying to call it racial profiling part way down the article. Nationality and religion do not equate to race.
So what are your views of this profiling? I know there are legit constitutional concerns as to searches, scans etc. But my question relates only to profiling. As usual the ACLU has it wrong trying to call it racial profiling part way down the article. Nationality and religion do not equate to race.
-
- NHL First Liner
- Posts: 60559
- Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:10 pm
- Location: Amish Country
Re: LGP Politcal Discussion Thread
I am honestly sick and tired of this crap. 99.9% of terrorists in the world today are Muslim jihadists. The vast majority of these said terrorists are Arab or African in appearance, and most of them have names like Muhammad, Jamal, Umir, etc. I'm sorry that I don't think TSA guards should treat an 86 year old grandmother in a wheelchair with the absolute same discretion they would a 25 year old Arab man with a nervous sweat.Geezer wrote:http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01 ... profiling/
So what are your views of this profiling? I know there are legit constitutional concerns as to searches, scans etc. But my question relates only to profiling. As usual the ACLU has it wrong trying to call it racial profiling part way down the article. Nationality and religion do not equate to race.
It's a sad fact that 99.9% of terrorists are Muslims from various countries, but it's the truth. Rather than attack our ability to defend ourselves, maybe some of these "peace-loving" Muslim groups can use their influence to quell the spread of radicalism. I won't hold my breath though.
-
- NHL First Liner
- Posts: 60559
- Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:10 pm
- Location: Amish Country
Re: LGP Politcal Discussion Thread
I know I am treading dangerous ground here
, but Ann Coulter actually wrote a pretty solid (and naturally inflammatory) column regarding the inanity of airport security. Usually she is just lobbing bombs, but she actually makes some good points here with a bit of humor
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=35037
Disclaimer: I know she is a right-wing bombthrower, she just happens to have a good column (IMO) regarding homeland security.
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=35037
Disclaimer: I know she is a right-wing bombthrower, she just happens to have a good column (IMO) regarding homeland security.
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 28922
- Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 9:10 am
- Location: Pittsburgh
Re: LGP Politcal Discussion Thread
shafnutz05 wrote:I know I am treading dangerous ground here, but Ann Coulter actually wrote a pretty solid (and naturally inflammatory) column regarding the inanity of airport security. Usually she is just lobbing bombs, but she actually makes some good points here with a bit of humor
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=35037
Disclaimer: I know she is a right-wing bombthrower, she just happens to have a good column (IMO) regarding homeland security.
lol @ ann coulter
-
- NHL First Liner
- Posts: 60559
- Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:10 pm
- Location: Amish Country
Re: LGP Politcal Discussion Thread
She is pretty outrageous. Half the time I think she is hysterical and dead-on sharp, the other half I amTroy Loney wrote:lol @ ann coulter
![Facepalm :face:](./images/smilies/facepalm.gif)
-
- NHL First Liner
- Posts: 60559
- Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:10 pm
- Location: Amish Country
Re: LGP Politcal Discussion Thread
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100106/ap_ ... e_overhaul
Uh oh.....now Barack is upsetting the unions and Fraulein Pelosi. Trouble in paradise to say the least...
Uh oh.....now Barack is upsetting the unions and Fraulein Pelosi. Trouble in paradise to say the least...
-
- AHL All-Star
- Posts: 6541
- Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:49 am
- Location: Kittanning
Re: LGP Politcal Discussion Thread
Bush did a big part in continuing the mess that began during the Lyndon Johnson/Vietnam/Nixon/Watergate debacle. It has been going on ever since. Reagan and Bubba Red Nose had a few good years in there, but other than that, all downhill.shafnutz05 wrote:Again, Bush is the reason that we are in this mess. If it wasn't for his horrid incompetence over the last several years especially, the Democrats would not have total control of the country right now. As far as that post I just put up, I am just keeping people appraised of the facts. Before his election, Obama promised transparency, and vowed eight separate times to broadcast the healthcare bill negotiations on CNN. Instead, we are left with another broken promise, bribery, and outright corruption? Is it complaining? I guess...but if highlighting blatant criminality is complaining, then you will be hearing a lot of it.
Obama, Bush, McCain, Pelosi, whoever - things are not going to ever change unless people start voting out people from their own party during the primaries. I think the Repubs are starting to do this, to their credit. The problem for them is going to be the fact that many of these new candidates are too far out of the mainstream in terms of their ideology. This country is fiscally conservative and socially liberal, at least to an extent.
I wish like hell we could get a good Liberterian candidate to run and actually have a good shot. But as long as the two parties trade power every four years or so, we'll have nothing left but the illusion of choice. People voted for change, but all they have left is the change in their pockets. Anyone who thinks things would be any different with hillary or McCain in there (still at war, bad economy, high taxes, ridiculous spending) is delusional.
-
- NHL Second Liner
- Posts: 59962
- Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 8:27 am
- Location: Lake Wylie, SC
Re: LGP Politcal Discussion Thread
Anyone see the video of Obama vowing over and over and over again on the stump last year that all health care debate would be televised on C-SPAN? Now I'm not up at 1:00 AM usually, when the Senate passed this a few weeks ago, was it televised? Are the negotiations between Reid and Pelosi being televised? Are the bribes being offered to Nelson and Landrieu getting shown on TV?
I am starting to feel bad for Press Sec. Gibbs, he has to go out and defend what has already become the most inept adminsitration ever and we're not even a year in. He was asked yesterday to address the lies Obama has told about transparency and kept dodging the questions. At the begining, it was just a guy named Jake Tapper asking tough questions, now most of the press pool at the White House are starting to do their jobs.
I am starting to feel bad for Press Sec. Gibbs, he has to go out and defend what has already become the most inept adminsitration ever and we're not even a year in. He was asked yesterday to address the lies Obama has told about transparency and kept dodging the questions. At the begining, it was just a guy named Jake Tapper asking tough questions, now most of the press pool at the White House are starting to do their jobs.