PDA

View Full Version : Beck & Repubs Such Disgusting Liars



Gayle in MD
03-04-2010, 03:25 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> No, Obama didn't promise to pass health care reform only with a supermajority
March 03, 2010 3:57 pm ET by Matt McLaughlin

Another Andrew Breitbart-hyped video from the Naked Emperor News website is bouncing around the right-wing echo chamber. As usual, it doesn't live up to the hype -- on the campaign trail before the 2008 election, Barack Obama didn't promise that he would pass health care reform only with a supermajority of support -- but that isn't stopping conservatives from using it to attack President Obama.

Last week, Media Matters documented how a Naked Emperor video, hyped by Breitbart, pushed by the Drudge Report, and echoed by Glenn Beck, advanced the falsehood that "the nuclear option" refers to the budget reconciliation process. Right-wingers used the falsehood to accuse Democrats -- who had complained in 2005 when Republicans considered changing Senate filibuster rules in what the GOP at the time called the "nuclear option" -- of hypocrisy for considering using reconciliation to pass health care reform. But there wasn't any inconsistency in Dems' wanting to use a process that has been employed repeatedly to pass legislation, including major health care reforms, after having criticized Republican plans to change the Senate rules.

This time, right-wingers are claiming the new video shows Obama promising that he won't pass health care reform without a supermajority. Here's Glenn Beck from his radio show today:


BECK: New audio for you from Barack Obama saying that we cannot, cannot pass it with a simple majority vote. Health care has to be supermajority, has to be done that way. You can't just slip it by the American people, which they are now saying they're going to do. Yet another broken promise from Barack Obama.

The video itself shows several clips of Obama on the campaign trail in 2006 and 2007 discussing how he expected to pass health care reform. For example, in a September 2007 speech, Obama says of health care reform, "This is an area where we're going to have to have a 60 percent majority in the Senate and the House in order to actually get a bill to my desk. We're going to have to have a majority to get a bill to my desk that is not just a 50-plus-1 majority." In another clip, Obama discusses how he wanted to campaign in a way that brought more than a "50-plus-1" majority because "you can't govern" after such a victory and predicts that "you can't deliver on health care. We're not going to pass universal health care with a 50-plus-1 strategy." In a 2006 speech, Obama says, "If we want to transform the government, though, that requires a sizable majority."

What he's saying in these clips is that he expected it would be more difficult to govern (such as passing health care reform legislation) without broad support. Whether health care reform has such broad support may depend on how you interpret various polls and how you expect Congress to vote on upcoming bills. But what Obama is not saying in those clips is that he promises not to pass health care reform without a supermajority.

Of course, this hasn't prevented right-wingers from claiming that he made such a promise. Blogger Jim Hoft posted the video at his Gateway Pundit site and wrote: "But, of course, like everything else Obama promised, this statement came with an expiration date. Today Obama will announce that democrats will force their unpopular nationalized health care bill through Congress using a simple majority to ram it through."

Similarly, Breitbart.tv, the Drudge Report, the Fox Nation, and the Jawa Report all posted the video and claimed that Obama said, in Breitbart's words, "Democrats Should Not Pass Healthcare With a 50-Plus-1 Strategy." Did Obama say Dems "should" pass health care reform only with more than that 50-plus-1? That's not what the video shows him saying.
<span style='font-size: 20pt'>
Somehow, I doubt they'll come to realize that the Naked Emperor video, er, has no clothes. </span>Tags: The Drudge Report, Glenn Beck, Glenn Beck Program, Premiere Radio Networks, Andrew Breitbart, Fox Nation, Gateway Pundit, breitbart.tv
</div></div>

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201003030029

eg8r
03-05-2010, 01:44 PM
Really what you are trying to say is that in 2005 (or around that time) when Obama verbally against reconcilliation he did not know about his future opportunity of using such a powerful tool to pass a healthcare bill no US citizen really wants.

eg8r

Deeman3
03-05-2010, 01:49 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> "This is an area where we're going to have to have a 60 percent majority in the Senate and the House in order to actually get a bill to my desk. We're going to have to have a majority to get a bill to my desk that is not just a 50-plus-1 majority." In another clip, Obama discusses how he wanted to campaign in a way that brought more than a "50-plus-1" majority because "you can't govern" after such a victory and predicts that "you can't deliver on health care. We're not going to pass universal health care with a 50-plus-1 strategy." In a 2006 speech, Obama says, "If we want to transform the government, though, that requires a sizable majority."

</div></div>

<span style="color: #FF0000">So, to our fearless leader, 60 plus is not a supermajority or that "you can't govern" on the 50 plus vote is not clear?

I never thought there wouold be anyone attempt to spin words so clearly spoken, mnay time over. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

I was wrong! </span>

Gayle in MD
03-05-2010, 02:11 PM
First of all Ed, it is simply not true that no Americans wants this bill to pass. That is, at least, a gross exaggeration.

Secondly, I am sixty-five years old, and have been an avid political reader, and researcher, for decades, before you were even a glint in you daddy's eye, as you often like to remind me. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

That said, I have never witnessed this kind of obstructionism from any political party, in my lifetime.

Now I do some research work for a pretty prominent hostorian, part time, and he also agrees, that he has never seen this grid lock to this degree.

So to call this president a hypocrite, is a stretch, IMO, given the overall behavior of Republicans at this time. When can you ever remember such shabby behavior as what is in that power point d3emonstration used by the Republican fund raisers, for example, depicting the President in white face?

I believe, that this president, given the mess he took over when he got in there, has had THE most shabby treatment of any president, ever, and believe me, I have studied all of them.

So no, I think he tried very hard for some bi-partisanship, and couldn't get ANY! This is a crises, and he has decided to address it according to the "Conditions Prevailing" as any reasonable president would do in the midst of a national crises, in the midst of which people are dying.

Now, may I ask you to answer my questions?

G.

Gayle in MD
03-05-2010, 02:15 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> "This is an area where we're going to have to have a 60 percent majority in the Senate and the House in order to actually get a bill to my desk. We're going to have to have a majority to get a bill to my desk that is not just a 50-plus-1 majority." In another clip, Obama discusses how he wanted to campaign in a way that brought more than a "50-plus-1" majority because "you can't govern" after such a victory and predicts that "you can't deliver on health care. We're not going to pass universal health care with a 50-plus-1 strategy." In a 2006 speech, Obama says, "If we want to transform the government, though, that requires a sizable majority."

</div></div>

<span style="color: #FF0000">So, to our fearless leader, 60 plus is not a supermajority or that "you can't govern" on the 50 plus vote is not clear?

I never thought there wouold be anyone attempt to spin words so clearly spoken, mnay time over. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

I was wrong! </span> </div></div>

I think you understand the position this president finds himself in, and no, he has never stated any such thing, nor have I.


However, I think this is a very good opportunity for all of us to see which representatives are owned by corporate interest, against the best interests of the country, and to what degree they are in the back pockets of their contributors, at a time when American Citizens are dying in a health care crises, every day, and/or losing everything they have worked for all of thier lives.

I know I am recording their disgraceful behavior, and from both parties.

G.

Deeman3
03-05-2010, 02:26 PM
Actually, American Citizens are not dying left and right over lack of health care coverage. Those who don't have it, get it, albeit at a much more expensive cost.

I think you are misunderstanding the political motives here. While a very few may vote for their lobbists, most are either true believers that the proposed system is worse than the present one, that 500 billion will be stolen from Medicare and given to others or, more simply, many are frightened that not listening to their voters will make thme have to leave Washington next fall.

You can see evil anywhere you want, and you will, but if there was a majority of Americans clamoring for very expensive government takeover of HC, it would be voted in about 15 minutes.

2,532 pages? How can you pretent that this is gonna help America? How can you pretend it is not just an expensive ploy for control of health care by politicians?

They do not have to tax for 10 years to pay for 6 to make it look cost effective if it was real cost savings. you know that.

Gayle in MD
03-05-2010, 02:55 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Actually, American Citizens are not dying left and right over lack of health care coverage.
<span style="color: #000066">Well do educate me. Forty-five thousand a year, now how many is that a day? </span>

Those who don't have it, get it, albeit at a much more expensive cost.

<span style="color: #000066">No they don't get it, at all, nor do you, I might add. They represented 62% of the people who defaulted on their home loans, because they came down with serious health issues, and couldn't afford health insurance, let alone the medical care that might have saved their lives. Do you have the figure on how many of those lives could have been saved, had they had the necessary health care to get medical help in time?

Did you see the entire meeting room in the White House, filled with doctors and nurses?

Have you studied the statements made by former health insurance executives, such as Mr. Potter?</span>

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07312009/profile.html

<span style="color: #000066">Are you familiar with the thoroughly accurate information to come out of the best clinics in this country, the Mayo Clinic, for one?</span>
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/05222009/profile2.html

I think you are misunderstanding the political motives here. While a very few may vote for their lobbists, most are either true believers that the proposed system is worse than the present one,

<span style="color: #000066">BWA HA HA HA...oh my, now tyheir all angels? LMAO!</span>that 500 billion will be stolen from Medicare and given to others or, more simply, many are frightened that not listening to their voters will make thme have to leave Washington next fall.
<span style="color: #000066">
Actually, you are revealing how little you know about the bill. Nothing will be stolen from Medicare. I've posted that information, before, with the government links.</span>

You can see evil anywhere you want, and you will,

<span style="color: #000066">I'd say that is precisely what you are doing. </span>


but if there was a majority of Americans clamoring for very expensive government takeover of HC, it would be voted in about 15 minutes.

<span style="color: #000066">Pardon me, but that is ridiculous. AGain, you reveal how little you have studied the issue. The nay sayers are exactly the same representatives who have gotten the most money from the corporate fascist pigs, who are completely unaffected by the people the take money from, and care ONLY about their bottem line. That, in and of itself, is a crises. Health care for profit, is a JOKE! </span>

2,532 pages? How can you pretent that this is gonna help America?
<span style="color: #000066">Since you haven't read it, how can you pretend to know if it will or won't. Republicans have had months and months to read this bill, how hard is it for them to study it? </span>
How can you pretend it is not just an expensive ploy for control of health care by politicians?

<span style="color: #000066">How can you pretend that it is? I'm seeing one party concerned about people's health care, and their exorbitant costs for insurance, and their worries about getting ill, and losing everything.

I can assure you, you and your loved ones are no more protected from the disgusting tactics of health insurance for profit corporations, than I am, or any of those people who have lost everything, because they became ill. </span>

They do not have to tax for 10 years to pay for 6 to make it look cost effective if it was real cost savings. you know that. </div></div>

<span style="color: #000066">The costs will be made up by removing subsidies.

I suggest you watch both programs I have provided in this post.

G. </span>

eg8r
03-05-2010, 02:58 PM
Back to what I said, in 2005 Obama said reconcilliation is wrong, flash forward he likes the idea. The polls prove America does not want this bill but Obama is not interested in what Americans want he is interested in "making history". Very very sad.

eg8r

eg8r
03-05-2010, 03:02 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well do educate me. Forty-five thousand a year, now how many is that a day? </div></div>Not a single one of those died because of not having healthcare. They died due to a sickness. Every one is able to head right on in to the hospital to be seen without being turned away.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
03-05-2010, 03:11 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Back to what I said, in 2005 Obama said reconcilliation is wrong, flash forward he likes the idea. The polls prove America does not want this bill but Obama is not interested in what Americans want he is interested in "making history". Very very sad.

eg8r </div></div>

Americans want health care reform. What you are saying is inaccurate.

You refuse to realize that among those who are dis-satisfied, many of them want a stronger bill, with a public option, or with single payer.

You see two right here, both Sack and I, would prefer the bill to include one of those.

As the President stated, when you poll the people about each part of the bill, they want all of the provision provided in it.

It's like Republicans, when you poll them, they want a balanced budget. When you ask them if they're willing to pay more taxes to balance the budget, they say NO.

LMAO

People don't like change. They have been fear mongered by the RW pundits, and no president would have an easy time addressing this complex issue. Presidents have know this was coming for over forty years. Amny have tried to get the ball rolling. We've come further this time, than ever before, with the bill passing both houses, and I believe it will be passed one way or other.

There are so many lies out there, most people do not have a clue about what is in the bill.

Obama doesn't have a twenty-four hours a day propaganda channel, as Tom hanks noted.

As Tom Hanks stated, this morning, and I thoroughly agree, as many others do, this president wants to solve problems. He is intelligent, and calm, and doing a fabulous job. OUr Representatives have no desire to run halth care, and the provisions do not include such a policy in the first place.

Are you ever going to answer my questions, or Q's?

G.

eg8r
03-05-2010, 03:28 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Americans want health care reform. What you are saying is inaccurate.</div></div>Don't twist what I said. I said Americans don't want THIS bill. The polls say it, not me.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Are you ever going to answer my questions, or Q's?</div></div>You ignored my post, so why should I answer any of your questions. Obama says reconcilliation is bad but that is only until it is him wanting to force bad legislation down our throats.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
03-05-2010, 03:33 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Americans want health care reform. What you are saying is inaccurate.</div></div>Don't twist what I said. I said Americans don't want THIS bill. The polls say it, not me.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Are you ever going to answer my questions, or Q's?</div></div>You ignored my post, so why should I answer any of your questions. Obama says reconcilliation is bad but that is only until it is him wanting to force bad legislation down our throats.

eg8r </div></div>

<span style="color: #000066">lol, OK, have your tantrum. I answered your questions.

The legislation isn't even finished, yet, lol, but you already know you're against it.

Nothing like an open mind, Ed, and no, the president isn't a hypocrite for doing everything he can to reform this completely hearless healthcare for profit fiasco we have in this country.

G. </span>

eg8r
03-07-2010, 06:17 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The legislation isn't even finished, yet, lol, but you already know you're against it.</div></div>The legislation put forth by both the House and the Senate was rejected by the American people.

eg8r

LWW
03-07-2010, 08:46 AM
And by each other.

If they had the votes this would be done.

LWW

Gayle in MD
03-07-2010, 09:23 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The legislation isn't even finished, yet, lol, but you already know you're against it.</div></div>The legislation put forth by both the House and the Senate was rejected by the American people.

eg8r </div></div>

That means NOTHING! There were supporters of both bills, as well. Both will now be reconsidered, and no one knows right now what will be in the last incarnation, not even you.

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

eg8r
03-08-2010, 01:52 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That means NOTHING! </div></div>Can you define your approach for using poll numbers when it suits you?

eg8r