I heard about Van Jones today (Obama's green jobs czar)

[Guest]

Not knowing anything about the guy I just googled his name. The only thing I can say after reviewing his so called "past"....what is it that I am missing when the POTUS annoints a person of this character to one of his loyal direct reports?

I do need to be enlightened. It is rather disturbing that this could be done so blatantly by Obama. What is the message?

btk

[Guest]

Not knowing anything about the guy I just googled his name. The only thing I can say after reviewing his so called "past"....what is it that I am missing when the POTUS annoints a person of this character to one of his loyal direct reports?

I do need to be enlightened. It is rather disturbing that this could be done so blatantly by Obama. What is the message?

btk

I don't think that we have seen anything yet. POTUS Obama is just getting warmed up.

Yoda

A member of the loyal opposition

[Guest]

It all evens out. According to VK, GW was just as radicle on the right as BO is on the left. Of course I don't recall GW firing CEO's, nationalizing banks, auto industries, appointing dozens of czars and having Communists as political advisers. None the less GW was no saint but he's no radicle either. Although I guess these days if you embrace freedom, capitalism, right to life and smaller government you are a radicle.

There is no right and wrong, no good and evil, it's all ok one way or another... to some.

Nothing in this administration resembles anything even remotely American.

[Guest]

Obama and his closest advisors mind set when they were in the decision process to appoint Jones and others like him.
They clearly understand how things work. They clearly must have understood the risks to a background like Jones'. They knew for certain an individual with a background like Jones would not, could not pass under the scrutiny of a Congressional or Senate review.

Yet it was done anyway. That should bother ALL Americans.

Out of all the millions of qualified people to be able to do whatever that position was tasked to do......why? WHY? Step out on a limb for Van Jones?

Because as he (Obama) states far too often, "I am the President"!

We the people should raise substantial amounts of furor with our representatives and the media until it gets too loud even for Obama.

I would like to hear from a staunch Democrat who supports Obama on the person of Van Jones.

btk

[Guest]

Good idea and lets add all the tax cheaters and other socialists appointed by obama.

[Guest]

I would like to hear from a staunch Democrat who supports Obama on the person of Van Jones.

btk

You will be waiting a long time.

[Guest]

OK, I'm wading into murky waters here, but I automatically discount anything that Glen Beck or Rush Limbaug have to say about anything! When Beck was pressed by Jon Stewart about his "facts or truth telling" Beck said, "I'm not a reporter, I'm a commentator." That told me a lot. He really doesn't feel he has to back up his tirades with facts at all.

Times are changing and this is the one thing the extreme right is not getting! Soon, you will be hard pressed to find anyone, Republican or Democrat, that didn't have some kind of a past coming out of the 60's and 70's. Whether it be drugs or alcoholism (Bush) or a tie to some radical group. It was a turbulent time. Why I remember that wearing army shirts and fake bullet belts with jeans was the fashion for awhile. I can't speak for small rural towns, but certainly in urban areas.

And it's going to get worse. Soon... maybe not in our years, but in years to come... you won't be able to find a person without a relative or friend tied to some gang. And drugs are still running rampant. Look at Michael Phelps.

People are changing, demographics are changing. And all the extreme right is doing is yelling, like the Wicked Witch in the Wizard of Oz... because they are shrinking. "I'm melting...I'm melting."

No, sorry, I don't think that Van Jones will lose his job. Nor do I think he should. At least not over anything Glen Beck has to say. :oops:

http://www.examiner.com/x-5738-Political-Buzz-Examiner~y2009m9d5-Video--Republicans-predicting-the-firing-of-Van-Jones-but-they-may-be-disappointed

[Guest]

So even though VJ's history is factually true and there for all to see you still dismiss it?

Soon, you will be hard pressed to find anyone, Republican or Democrat, that didn't have some kind of a past coming out of the 60's and 70's.

That's about as cynical a statement I've ever heard. I'd venture to say that most coming out of the 60's or 70's are not radicle Communist activists. But I guess even if they were you'd be ok with them running our government. wow #1

And it's going to get worse. Soon... maybe not in our years, but in years to come... you won't be able to find a person without a relative or friend tied to some gang.

All I can say to that is WOW #2 :shocked: Guess I hang with a different crowd because I don't know any and doubt I ever will. Not in my circle of family and friends.

[Guest]

So even though VJ's history is factually true and there for all to see you still dismiss it?



That's about as cynical a statement I've ever heard. I'd venture to say that most coming out of the 60's or 70's are not radicle Communist activists.



All I can say to that is WOW! Guess I hang with a different crowd because I don't know any and doubt I ever will. Not in my circle of family and friends.

Jones just resigned. That should make you very happy. Now you can sleep better knowing some "communist" is not going to come knocking at your door.

If there's one thing I'm not... It's cynical! I have the "audacity of hope" always. ;) Remember?

However, I am a realist. I specifically said, "perhaps not in our years... but soon." Yet, I commend you on having such squeeky clean people around you. So, no one you know, are related to, or ever hung around with -- even for a brief time -- has any skeletons in their closet? hmmmm.... I guess we'll never know because they're not in the public eye. Welllllll... maybe I am a little cynical ... because I could swear I hear bones rattling!:eek:

[Guest]

We can thank Glenn Beck and his watchdogs for outing this "czar" and others surrounding POTUS. We all need to watch and support Beck on Fox News because he is unafraid to show us the truth in "their" own words.
Mrs tghoul

[Guest]

Jones has resigned in name only. As gibbs admitted even tho jones resigned he continues to work for the government and in paticular for obama and his plans to "change" america.

[Guest]

Now you can sleep better knowing some "communist" is not going to come knocking at your door.

I will sleep better, only 20 or 30 more to go.

Yet, I commend you on having such squeeky clean people around you. So, no one you know, are related to, or ever hung around with -- even for a brief time -- has any skeletons in their closet? hmmmm..

Well, I can honestly say that absolutely none of my friends or family are radicles, gang members, communists, socialists or tax cheats.

As for skeletons? I did have an uncle once that voted Democrat but we forgave him.

[Guest]

allows some to vent on him and distort the intention of the thread. I guess fortunately or not, I did not hear it from Glenn Beck, but did google as well as other research. There is ONLY one litany after another about the man's hatred for whites and hatred for America....a bonifide, multiple source confirmation being a radicle activists in his beliefs.

The profile of way too many of the incumbents in political office today is bad enough and they need to be replaced. In their defense, none could be bad enough to match Jones' dis-qualifications. The man would not, could not pass any investigative process. There is no way he would be elected to anything by we the people.

And I am glad to see we the people begin to speak up.

The party line on Jones is typical of most executive situations where folks are actually going to be fired, but to make it palatable for their futures they are given the opportunity to resign. Then the smoothing external announcement that they will still be around.....which they will not. Except for perhaps some investigation into him further.

Unfortunately Obama will slip away with almost no criticism or investigation as to why he would appoint some one such as Van Jones, KNOWING his back ground. Ooops, I stand corrected. He was appointed because Obama did know his background.

At some point the Obamas pasts in conjunction with example after example of the types he has surrounded himself in the past, match the types he is currently surrounding himself with. This accumulation of character (or not) will weigh heavily against him in his remaining years as POTUS and possibly assure a one term presidency.

With millions to choose from, why would anybody choose the likes of Van Jones for anything. This should not be a partisan issue at all. Dregs are dregs regardless ones affiliation!!!

btk

[Guest]

allows some to vent on him and distort the intention of the thread. I guess fortunately or not, I did not hear it from Glenn Beck, but did google as well as other research. There is ONLY one litany after another about the man's hatred for whites and hatred for America....a bonifide, multiple source confirmation being a radicle activists in his beliefs.

The profile of way too many of the incumbents in political office today is bad enough and they need to be replaced. In their defense, none could be bad enough to match Jones' dis-qualifications. The man would not, could not pass any investigative process. There is no way he would be elected to anything by we the people.

And I am glad to see we the people begin to speak up.

The party line on Jones is typical of most executive situations where folks are actually going to be fired, but to make it palatable for their futures they are given the opportunity to resign. Then the smoothing external announcement that they will still be around.....which they will not. Except for perhaps some investigation into him further.

Unfortunately Obama will slip away with almost no criticism or investigation as to why he would appoint some one such as Van Jones, KNOWING his back ground. Ooops, I stand corrected. He was appointed because Obama did know his background.

At some point the Obamas pasts in conjunction with example after example of the types he has surrounded himself in the past, match the types he is currently surrounding himself with. This accumulation of character (or not) will weigh heavily against him in his remaining years as POTUS and possibly assure a one term presidency.

With millions to choose from, why would anybody choose the likes of Van Jones for anything. This should not be a partisan issue at all. Dregs are dregs regardless ones affiliation!!!

btk


HIS ENTIRE LIFE...ALL of it...he has associated with radicals, followed radical thinking. It is only since his campaign for the WH that he had anyone on his staff or around him who MIGHT be considered non radical.

Before CHELS jumps in and proclaims how wonderful it is to be radical and that there is nothing wrong with it OR that everyone who walks now will have this kind of stuff in their background...I respectfully submit that the radicals our President is enamored with were unamiously anti america and most flirted with or were blatant communists !

[Guest]

Bucco, you've been hell bent on the character assassination of President Obama since day one. I'm quite sure you don't even believe he was born in America. Well, that's your prerogative.

But here's the thing you're reeeeeally wrong on. I'm not a radical. And as stated before, I'm not cynical. And I'm not an extremist. In fact, I'm not even sure what the difference is between a radical and an extremist. I'm a realist. I'm not looking for conspiracy theories around every corner. I don't for one minute think this country is being steered toward socialism or communism. I don't for one minute think anyone wants to "pull the plug on Grandma." This kind of silly rethortic makes my toes curl!

My hope is that when Obama lays out his plans on Wednesday, he will indeed, include such things as allowing people to buy insurance across state lines, boosting competition. (Romney) and some tax credits for businesses (McCain) and especially pay-for-performance. If you don't think our doctors and health care system in general has gotten slovenly and greedy, you're not looking hard enough. However, I'm not going to give up on a Public Option and I will be very disappointed in him if he does. I won't mind if it's delayed and not taken on at this time, but brought up again in the near future. I get it, give and take. But, I do believe that good Health Care should be a right of every American.

I guess my point is that I sincerely feel that President Obama tries to work across party lines and my guess is his final decision will be something from both sides of the aisle. And that's OK. My grip is with the Republicans (and don't fool yourself, they're out there) that will categorically oppose any and everything put out by this Administration. The Republicans haven't been labeled the party of "NO" by accident.

I'm not going to sit here and defend Van Jones. Quite frankly, he could have been the best man for the job, but I personally don't know that. What I can't tolerate is all of this character assassination. It's slimy and insulting to the American public in general. I don't care what side of the aisle does it.

And before you say it, yes, I stand guilty of the same thing. I will take that responsibility for some of my previous posts. I've always been the kind of person that when proven wrong will be the first to admit it, or the first to apologize.

But, lately I've been wondering.... When did this country get so mean-spirited? Maybe that's a question we should debate. :shrug:

[Guest]

Here's what you don't understand. It's not about character assassination, it's about policy assassination. Their policies are BAD for America. But speaking about character assassination, that's something the left almost has a monopoly on. Sarah Palin whether you agree with her politics or not was ripped to shreds along with GW, Joe the Plumber and many other conservatives... and still are to this very day. Even you can't mention George Bush's name without putting alcoholism in (parenthesis) so don't lecture about charter assassination. The Democrats mastered the art of character assassination.

[Guest]

Here's what you don't understand. It's not about character assassination, it's about policy assassination. Their policies are BAD for America. But speaking about character assassination, that's something the left almost has a monopoly on. Sarah Palin whether you agree with her politics or not was ripped to shreds along with GW, Joe the Plumber and many other conservatives... and still are to this very day. Even you can't mention George Bush's name without putting alcoholism in (parenthesis) so don't lecture about charter assassination. The left mastered the art of character assassination.

Perhaps you didn't read my post closely enough. I pointed out that I too had been guilty of this. Please re-read.

It's clear DK, that you and I will never agree on anything. The left is far from holding the monopoly on character assignation. My God, do you remember Bush coming out at McCain during that primary??? Wow, you couldn't get much nastier. And then the swiftboating of John Kerry? All of those allegations proved to be false. And now all of this Obama socialist crap!

See that's where we will never connect DK. You can't admit any failures on the right's part. None! If you re-read my post, my question was... "When did this COUNTRY get so mean-spirited???" Not, when did the right get so mean-spirited.

[Guest]

You're wrong again. I never liked Bush that much and didn't support a good number of his policies.

[Guest]

You're wrong again. I never liked Bush that much and didn't support a good number of his policies.

Hahahah! OK, this is getting silly DK. Are you just not reading the posts or are you just looking for a reason to call me "wrong." I think I'm just going to cut this off here. :D

[Guest]

Wait a minute here, you just said to me

See that's where we will never connect DK. You can't admit any failures on the right's part

Other than a few things I think GW was largely a failure. So how am I being silly directly addressing an incorrect assumption you made about me?

[Guest]

Wait a minute here, you just said to me



Other than a few things I think GW was largely a failure. So how am I being silly directly addressing an incorrect assumption you made about me?

I find this very interesting. Can you please post why YOU think GW was largely a failure??? I'd be interested.

[Guest]

He was a horrible communicator, he didn't strengthen the party, his immigration policy stunk, boarder security stunk, I didn't like his budget or his stimulus just to name a few. On the other hand I liked his tax cuts, the fact that he kept our country safe for eight years after 9/11, he killed a lot of terrorists, and the economy was pretty strong for most of his two terms. I guess failure maybe too strong a word but I was not generally happy with him. That came mostly in the later years. When it comes to politics I thought he needed to grow a spine and take to back to the libs that were pounding him every single day for eight years. He never did and lost his base.

[Guest]

He was a horrible communicator, he didn't strengthen the party, his immigration policy stunk, boarder security stunk, I didn't like his budget or his stimulus just to name a few. On the other hand I liked his tax cuts, the fact that he kept our country safe for eight years after 9/11, he killed a lot of terrorists, and the economy was pretty strong for most of his two terms. I guess failure maybe too strong a word but I was not generally happy with him. That came mostly in the later years. When it comes to politics I thought he needed to grow a spine take to back to the libs that were pounding him every single day for eight years. He never did.

Thank you. I'm not going into Bush bashing here, I'll just say I agree with all you didn't care for and I also disagree with all you thought he accomplished. Enough said. Old news. But thanks for replying.

[Guest]

Bucco, you've been hell bent on the character assassination of President Obama since day one. I'm quite sure you don't even believe he was born in America. Well, that's your prerogative.

But here's the thing you're reeeeeally wrong on. I'm not a radical. And as stated before, I'm not cynical. And I'm not an extremist. In fact, I'm not even sure what the difference is between a radical and an extremist. I'm a realist. I'm not looking for conspiracy theories around every corner. I don't for one minute think this country is being steered toward socialism or communism. I don't for one minute think anyone wants to "pull the plug on Grandma." This kind of silly rethortic makes my toes curl!

My hope is that when Obama lays out his plans on Wednesday, he will indeed, include such things as allowing people to buy insurance across state lines, boosting competition. (Romney) and some tax credits for businesses (McCain) and especially pay-for-performance. If you don't think our doctors and health care system in general has gotten slovenly and greedy, you're not looking hard enough. However, I'm not going to give up on a Public Option and I will be very disappointed in him if he does. I won't mind if it's delayed and not taken on at this time, but brought up again in the near future. I get it, give and take. But, I do believe that good Health Care should be a right of every American.

I guess my point is that I sincerely feel that President Obama tries to work across party lines and my guess is his final decision will be something from both sides of the aisle. And that's OK. My grip is with the Republicans (and don't fool yourself, they're out there) that will categorically oppose any and everything put out by this Administration. The Republicans haven't been labeled the party of "NO" by accident.

I'm not going to sit here and defend Van Jones. Quite frankly, he could have been the best man for the job, but I personally don't know that. What I can't tolerate is all of this character assassination. It's slimy and insulting to the American public in general. I don't care what side of the aisle does it.

And before you say it, yes, I stand guilty of the same thing. I will take that responsibility for some of my previous posts. I've always been the kind of person that when proven wrong will be the first to admit it, or the first to apologize.

But, lately I've been wondering.... When did this country get so mean-spirited? Maybe that's a question we should debate. :shrug:

The first thing I will say is that I have NEVER EVER said anything negative about this President's CHARACTER....NEVER !!! I have made it very clear at all times that I oppose and have opposed his entire ideaology and his entire plans for my country which have been evidenced by his past.

I have NEVER EVER brought up on here or anywhere else ANY KIND OF CONPISRACY THEORY or questioned his citizenship...NEVER EVER NOT ONE TIME !!

I certainly have questioned MOST of his relationships (From Rev Wright to Van Jones) as they speak VOLUMES about what he really believes.

I have tried to call attention to the many lies he told during the campaign, ESPECIALLY those about not playing politics, as it is not a matter of opinion but of fact that this is thus far the most political WH in many many years.

I agree, as do most on both sides of the aisle, that there is a problem in health care costs and I will also agree with you that a lot of misinformation is being spread, and ON BOTH SIDES....Example the President constantly saying how many uninsured there are and he is not even close especially when he includes statements about NOT insuring illegals but then including them in his count.

One more thing...you constantly allude to Fox news or commentators from the network. I do not think in all the posts I have made here with sources I have ever used Fox news...I am sure I never quoted a commentator from ANY NETWORK !

And as for character assassination I oppose that also, and without using the tactic you use all the time, but simply bringing up the calls of our President as a drunk....accusations about dope...his intelligence,and that is simply the start. I HAVE NEVER MENTIONED ONE SINGLE THING ABOUT THIS PRESIDENT ON A PERSONAL LEVEL..NOT ONE TIME !

In addition, it is not character assassination when it is true ! If you want a man who is an avowed communist(speaking of Van Jones), and he is...and all the other baggage he carries in any postion in your government then you can make your point about how that is ok, but I cannot. There are others in this administration hidden behind the Czar tag so they never have to face any questioning that are going to be brought out also as time goes on.

I understand your comment saying that the Rep party is the party of NO...I think that saying began during the last administration and refered to the Democrats, however having said that I am against that kind of political game 100%.

What you just do not understand is that there are folks who were not happy with George Bush, but are not filled with hate and did not vote a negative vote in November. Much of what you are referring to as the party of NO is many folks in congress DID NOT AGREE with Bush, and not feel much more free to contest the big massive spending, WHICH BUSH DID ALSO but not even in the same ballpark as this administration !

You see I absolutely am not what you folks call a Bushie...I am also not someone who attacks ANYONE personally....I also have been saying the same thing about this President since before he was a candidate (when you called him an "empty suit). I have not changed my mind, nor has he given me any reason to consider that !

Please...I do not make PERSONAL attacks as you call them. Whatever I have said I welcome your input to show me where I am wrong !

[Guest]

and in real life, during the last year (or so) prior to the election, y'all remember during the height of the Bush bashing mania, there was never a feeling of meanness in America.

Now however, when anything about or by the current administration is either challenged or not blindly accepted, there is a feeling of meanness in America.

I do believe there is a definite mixture of bias and hypocritical tendency in the air.

btk

[Guest]

and in real life, during the last year (or so) prior to the election, y'all remember during the height of the Bush bashing mania, there was never a feeling of meanness in America.

Now however, when anything about or by the current administration is either challenged or not blindly accepted, there is a feeling of meanness in America.

I do believe there is a definite mixture of bias and hypocritical tendency in the air.

btk

Actually, the Bush bashing did not stop at the Oval Office....they were after his wife as well on many occassions as well as the two daughters !

To your point BTK.....I am not sure where I heard this but it was today on one of the news interview shows. Someone said...that total disrespect for the Presidency began IMMEDIATELY after the 2000 election and has not stopped.

I still believe the wide gap between parties started with the 2000 election and to this day permeates everything. It certainly was the start of the Sooros money, the Acorns, etc !

[Guest]

I love that lefties are still bashing Bush. How long is that going to fly? The country is steadily going down the tubes and the trillions of dollars being spent is not stopping it. This is not happening under Bush. Also in the weeks that Glenn Beck has been sounding the clarion call on his "czars" no one has disputed one fact he came up with. The White House just wants him to stop calling them "czars". What does that tell you?

[Guest]

[...snip]...
I'm a realist. I'm not looking for conspiracy theories around every corner. I don't for one minute think this country is being steered toward socialism or communism.
.....Then i suggest that you review some dictionaires to clarify socialism/communism. The American Heritage dictionary defines socialism this way: "Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy." Based on that definition it is my opinion that all of Obama's policies are taking the USA down that path...financial industry, auto industry, health care industry -the majority parts of our economy - all being controlled by a centralized government.
I don't for one minute think anyone wants to "pull the plug on Grandma." This kind of silly rethortic makes my toes curl!
...I agree that no one wants to do that, but the unfortunate fact is that the House policy was developed to provide that care plans would be tightly controlled; the men who developed the policy were published as saying that health care should be carefully distributed to the parts of the population that can best benefit the population as opposed to those who are a drain on the population; such information is enough to cause those who are seen as a drain on the population to fear for their lives. The House policy lacked specifics and left too much room for possibilities.

My hope is that when Obama lays out his plans on Wednesday, he will indeed, include such things as allowing people to buy insurance across state lines, boosting competition. (Romney) and some tax credits for businesses (McCain) and especially pay-for-performance.
...Such is the hope of many; but Pres. Obama no longer inspires me to hope for the good that he campaigned for; I now fear his proposals rather than hope for them.

If you don't think our doctors and health care system in general has gotten slovenly and greedy, you're not looking hard enough. However, I'm not going to give up on a Public Option and I will be very disappointed in him if he does. I won't mind if it's delayed and not taken on at this time, but brought up again in the near future. I get it, give and take.
...A Public Option owned and distributed by the government should never be brought up again! Such an option clearly eliminates the right of our citizens to one of our founding principles - the right to free enterprise. This option needs LOTS of rework that will provide for private enterprise participating with public protection. Let the gov't develop a minimum coverage policy that must be distributed by private enterprise.

But, I do believe that good Health Care should be a right of every American.
...We disagree. Good health care should be available to every American not a right of every American. Clinics and emergency rooms already meet that goal...and gov't $$ could be distributed to improve that avaliability. The infrastructure is already in place for that and does not require the creation of another federal bureaucracy.

I guess my point is that I sincerely feel that President Obama tries to work across party lines
...We disagree again. I do not feel that he has encouraged the two parties to work together. I cannot recall one decision where he has relied on input from the loyal opposition. Further, he has done nothing to curtail the likes of Nancy Pelosi and other members of his party from making their disparaging remarks. My opinion their is that he is letting them throw the snowballs and enjoying every toss. He has failed to behave as a professional individual much less a president by allowing the playground bullying to exist.

and my guess is his final decision will be something from both sides of the aisle. And that's OK. My grip is with the Republicans (and don't fool yourself, they're out there) that will categorically oppose any and everything put out by this Administration. The Republicans haven't been labeled the party of "NO" by accident.
...I believe we could have avoided the tea parties and the town meetings of this summer if the President had taken ownership of a health care policy from the git-go and then assigned it to a bi-partisan group for fine tuning. But he chose to toss it out to individual committees that developed four policies - not at all consistent with each other. However, I must say that as a member of the conservative side of politics, I thoroughly enjoyed the name-calling and disparagement that made fools of the participants.
...I must also agree with Bucco where he states "I understand your comment saying that the Rep party is the party of NO...I think that saying began during the last administration and refered to the Democrats"... That label has been around for a while - it is just the Republicans turn to behave like a speed bump - but you know, sometimes speed bumps are a good thing.

I'm not going to sit here and defend Van Jones. Quite frankly, he could have been the best man for the job, but I personally don't know that. What I can't tolerate is all of this character assassination. It's slimy and insulting to the American public in general. I don't care what side of the aisle does it.
...and here I agree with ..snip.. It's not about character assassination, it's about policy assassination. Their policies are BAD for America. But speaking about character assassination, that's something the left almost has a monopoly on. Sarah Palin whether you agree with her politics or not was ripped to shreds along with GW, Joe the Plumber and many other conservatives... and still are to this very day. Even you can't mention George Bush's name without putting alcoholism in (parenthesis) so don't lecture about charter assassination. The Democrats mastered the art of character assassination.
..snip..

But, lately I've been wondering.... When did this country get so mean-spirited? Maybe that's a question we should debate.
...I cannot speak for others, but I can sure show my mean streak when someone tries to take away the things that I have worked my a** off for years to attain. I traded in my registration as a Democrat for one of the Republican pursuasion when I began to see my $$ redirected to policies I could not support because they benefitted individuals who would not take the same initiatives that I did when they were presented to me as opportunities.
:shrug:

Thanks for your post; it has given me a chance to get a lot off my chest. I could never have voted for Obama for President, but I could not help but hope that he would honor his campaign promises - especially the one about transparency. I am still hoping, but every day I am more disappointed in his performance.

In my book Obama is still a community organizer who thinks that the rich do not deserve what they have and that he must take it away from them and give it to someone who doesn't have. Sorry, I don't buy it - not a dollar's worth. You may wonder how we got to be 'mean-spirited' but I wonder when we got away from the promise that if we worked hard and lived a good life we would be rewarded. Taking from me and giving to another is not what I worked for all of my life...that is not my definition of reward.


Get Rid of Incumbent Politicians

[leaving the soap box now - need to quench my thirst after all that 'speaking'! ;)

[Guest]

Nicely done njbchbum. I would only quibble on the term socialist. The present administration is really by definition going down a fascist path. Socialism is where the government owns everything and dictates who gets what. Fascism is where businesses are ostensibly owned by the private sector but controlled by the government; which is closer to the scenario that is unfolding in our country.

[Guest]

Thanks for your post; it has given me a chance to get a lot off my chest. I could never have voted for Obama for President, but I could not help but hope that he would honor his campaign promises - especially the one about transparency. I am still hoping, but every day I am more disappointed in his performance.

In my book Obama is still a community organizer who thinks that the rich do not deserve what they have and that he must take it away from them and give it to someone who doesn't have. Sorry, I don't buy it - not a dollar's worth. You may wonder how we got to be 'mean-spirited' but I wonder when we got away from the promise that if we worked hard and lived a good life we would be rewarded. Taking from me and giving to another is not what I worked for all of my life...that is not my definition of reward.


Get Rid of Incumbent Politicians

[leaving the soap box now - need to quench my thirst after all that 'speaking'! ;)

Very well said. Of course, I completely disagree with everything you said, but I respect your right to say it. Although I seem to be often called a "leftie" I actually consider myself an Independant. I did vote for Reagan and still admire him. My husband, on the other hand, who was always a Republican, turned in his card the minute McCain named Sarah Palin as his running mate.

I'm still squarely behind this President. You would wonder, by this particular forum, how he got elected at all! Yet, the majority of American people did vote for him. And, as of today, it's not a vote I'm ashamed of.

I know you're convinced that someone is trying to take your toys away and give them to others, less fortunate. OMG! What a thought! At any rate, that's not what I'm seeing at all. hmmmm..... guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

But, don't put your soapbox away ... even though the townhall meetings are starting to fizzle. From your vantage point, I'm sure you'll be needing it for at least the next 3 years if not more.

[Guest]

Very well said. Of course, I completely disagree with everything you said, but I respect your right to say it. Although I seem to be often called a "leftie" I actually consider myself an Independant. I did vote for Reagan and still admire him. My husband, on the other hand, who was always a Republican, turned in his card the minute McCain named Sarah Palin as his running mate.

I'm still squarely behind this President. You would wonder, by this particular forum, how he got elected at all! Yet, the majority of American people did vote for him. And, as of today, it's not a vote I'm ashamed of.

I know you're convinced that someone is trying to take your toys away and give them to others, less fortunate. OMG! What a thought! At any rate, that's not what I'm seeing at all. hmmmm..... guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

But, don't put your soapbox away ... even though the townhall meetings are starting to fizzle. From your vantage point, I'm sure you'll be needing it for at least the next 3 years if not more.

chelsea24 -
Your post and your reply are why I enjoy this forum...agreeing to disagree spawns some great thought-provoking moments for me - and I always come away enlightened. I'll hang onto the soapbox!

It's true that Obama was elected by a majority, but it squarely was not a vast majority - there are still lots of voters to be upset by his actions and policies - and they are finally making their voices heard - about time we came out from under wherever we have been!

If it were my toys that were being given to someone less fortunate that would be okay - but it is my money!!!! When is enough - enough?!

I am a product of a Catholic school education and was taught long ago about the necessity to care for my "brothers and sisters" and I do. I also learned about the bullies who lurk around the playground. It's time to call for Sister St. Veronica Ann! She'd box Obama's ears if corporal punishment hadn't been done away with [after I graduated, of course!] ;)

It's okay to be an Independent - but even so, you do lean to the left ;) But that's okay too - if you didn't, who would hold up those of us leaning to the right?! Just goes to show that the resolution is somewhere in the or with the center!

Can't say as I blame your husband!

Get Rid of Incumbent Politicians

[Guest]

Nicely done njbchbum. I would only quibble on the term socialist. The present administration is really by definition going down a fascist path. Socialism is where the government owns everything and dictates who gets what. Fascism is where businesses are ostensibly owned by the private sector but controlled by the government; which is closer to the scenario that is unfolding in our country.

Thanx for the thought, RichieLion. And regardless of how we define the slippery slope on which this administration has put us, it scares me! I place my faith in the fact that policies can be revised the same way that promises are broken.

Get Rid of Incumbent Politicians

[Guest]

Originally Posted by chelsea24
[...snip]...
I'm a realist. I'm not looking for conspiracy theories around every corner. I don't for one minute think this country is being steered toward socialism or communism.
.....Then i suggest that you review some dictionaires to clarify socialism/communism. The American Heritage dictionary defines socialism this way: "Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy." Based on that definition it is my opinion that all of Obama's policies are taking the USA down that path...financial industry, auto industry, health care industry -the majority parts of our economy - all being controlled by a centralized government.
I don't for one minute think anyone wants to "pull the plug on Grandma." This kind of silly rethortic makes my toes curl!
...I agree that no one wants to do that, but the unfortunate fact is that the House policy was developed to provide that care plans would be tightly controlled; the men who developed the policy were published as saying that health care should be carefully distributed to the parts of the population that can best benefit the population as opposed to those who are a drain on the population; such information is enough to cause those who are seen as a drain on the population to fear for their lives. The House policy lacked specifics and left too much room for possibilities.

My hope is that when Obama lays out his plans on Wednesday, he will indeed, include such things as allowing people to buy insurance across state lines, boosting competition. (Romney) and some tax credits for businesses (McCain) and especially pay-for-performance.
...Such is the hope of many; but Pres. Obama no longer inspires me to hope for the good that he campaigned for; I now fear his proposals rather than hope for them.

If you don't think our doctors and health care system in general has gotten slovenly and greedy, you're not looking hard enough. However, I'm not going to give up on a Public Option and I will be very disappointed in him if he does. I won't mind if it's delayed and not taken on at this time, but brought up again in the near future. I get it, give and take.
...A Public Option owned and distributed by the government should never be brought up again! Such an option clearly eliminates the right of our citizens to one of our founding principles - the right to free enterprise. This option needs LOTS of rework that will provide for private enterprise participating with public protection. Let the gov't develop a minimum coverage policy that must be distributed by private enterprise.

But, I do believe that good Health Care should be a right of every American.
...We disagree. Good health care should be available to every American not a right of every American. Clinics and emergency rooms already meet that goal...and gov't $$ could be distributed to improve that avaliability. The infrastructure is already in place for that and does not require the creation of another federal bureaucracy.

I guess my point is that I sincerely feel that President Obama tries to work across party lines
...We disagree again. I do not feel that he has encouraged the two parties to work together. I cannot recall one decision where he has relied on input from the loyal opposition. Further, he has done nothing to curtail the likes of Nancy Pelosi and other members of his party from making their disparaging remarks. My opinion their is that he is letting them throw the snowballs and enjoying every toss. He has failed to behave as a professional individual much less a president by allowing the playground bullying to exist.

and my guess is his final decision will be something from both sides of the aisle. And that's OK. My grip is with the Republicans (and don't fool yourself, they're out there) that will categorically oppose any and everything put out by this Administration. The Republicans haven't been labeled the party of "NO" by accident.
...I believe we could have avoided the tea parties and the town meetings of this summer if the President had taken ownership of a health care policy from the git-go and then assigned it to a bi-partisan group for fine tuning. But he chose to toss it out to individual committees that developed four policies - not at all consistent with each other. However, I must say that as a member of the conservative side of politics, I thoroughly enjoyed the name-calling and disparagement that made fools of the participants.
...I must also agree with Bucco where he states "I understand your comment saying that the Rep party is the party of NO...I think that saying began during the last administration and refered to the Democrats"... That label has been around for a while - it is just the Republicans turn to behave like a speed bump - but you know, sometimes speed bumps are a good thing.

I'm not going to sit here and defend Van Jones. Quite frankly, he could have been the best man for the job, but I personally don't know that. What I can't tolerate is all of this character assassination. It's slimy and insulting to the American public in general. I don't care what side of the aisle does it.
...and here I agree with
Quote:
Originally Posted by dklassen
..snip.. It's not about character assassination, it's about policy assassination. Their policies are BAD for America. But speaking about character assassination, that's something the left almost has a monopoly on. Sarah Palin whether you agree with her politics or not was ripped to shreds along with GW, Joe the Plumber and many other conservatives... and still are to this very day. Even you can't mention George Bush's name without putting alcoholism in (parenthesis) so don't lecture about charter assassination. The Democrats mastered the art of character assassination.

..snip..

But, lately I've been wondering.... When did this country get so mean-spirited? Maybe that's a question we should debate.
...I cannot speak for others, but I can sure show my mean streak when someone tries to take away the things that I have worked my a** off for years to attain. I traded in my registration as a Democrat for one of the Republican pursuasion when I began to see my $$ redirected to policies I could not support because they benefitted individuals who would not take the same initiatives that I did when they were presented to me as opportunities.


Thanks for your post; it has given me a chance to get a lot off my chest. I could never have voted for Obama for President, but I could not help but hope that he would honor his campaign promises - especially the one about transparency. I am still hoping, but every day I am more disappointed in his performance.

In my book Obama is still a community organizer who thinks that the rich do not deserve what they have and that he must take it away from them and give it to someone who doesn't have. Sorry, I don't buy it - not a dollar's worth. You may wonder how we got to be 'mean-spirited' but I wonder when we got away from the promise that if we worked hard and lived a good life we would be rewarded. Taking from me and giving to another is not what I worked for all of my life...that is not my definition of reward.



Get Rid of Incumbent Politicians

[leaving the soap box now - need to quench my thirst after all that 'speaking'!
Yesterday 02:54 PM

njbchbum, chelsea - well done. You both should be nominated for the TOTV hall of fame of political posts for this one. :eclipsee_gold_cup: Jersey girls rock.....sorry chels....I'm biased, but you already know that. njbchbum is one of the few posters who knows what I'm talking about if I mention the Ebb Tide, PPB, Chadwick Beach, the Osprey, Martell's Tiki Bar or Jenkinson's Pier. :beer3:

[Guest]

chelsea24 -
Your post and your reply are why I enjoy this forum...agreeing to disagree spawns some great thought-provoking moments for me - and I always come away enlightened. I'll hang onto the soapbox!

It's true that Obama was elected by a majority, but it squarely was not a vast majority - there are still lots of voters to be upset by his actions and policies - and they are finally making their voices heard - about time we came out from under wherever we have been!

If it were my toys that were being given to someone less fortunate that would be okay - but it is my money!!!! When is enough - enough?!

I am a product of a Catholic school education and was taught long ago about the necessity to care for my "brothers and sisters" and I do. I also learned about the bullies who lurk around the playground. It's time to call for Sister St. Veronica Ann! She'd box Obama's ears if corporal punishment hadn't been done away with [after I graduated, of course!] ;)

It's okay to be an Independent - but even so, you do lean to the left ;) But that's okay too - if you didn't, who would hold up those of us leaning to the right?! Just goes to show that the resolution is somewhere in the or with the center!

Can't say as I blame your husband!

Get Rid of Incumbent Politicians

NJB:

Excellent post. We must have gone to the same school. LOL

[Guest]

That is an excellent post and point. When I was kid having lunch and saw another that had no food I would surly share. If that same kid tried to take it from me by force we'd be scrapping.

The government is the bully waiting around the corner, only now they aren't waiting, they are pouncing.

[Guest]

This is the last paragraph of an editorial in the Wall St Journal today concerning the Van Jones resignation...

"No President is responsible for all of the views of his appointees, but the rise and fall of Mr. Jones is one more warning that Mr. Obama can't succeed on his current course of governing from the left. He is running into political trouble not because his own message is unclear, or because his opposition is better organized. Mr. Obama is falling in the polls because last year he didn't tell the American people that the "change" they were asked to believe in included trillions of dollars in new spending, deferring to the most liberal Members of Congress, a government takeover of health care, and appointees with the views of Van Jones."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203440104574399452969175732.html

The article generallydiscuses how we should not be surprised that Jones was/is part of the Obama adminstration...and this another paragraph from the article....

"As a candidate, Barack Obama was at pains to offer himself as a man of moderate policies, and especially of moderate temperament. He said he would listen to both the right and left, choosing the best of each depending on "what works." He sold himself as a center-left pragmatist. When his radical associations—Reverend Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers—came to light, Candidate Obama promptly disavowed them. Now comes Mr. Jones, with a long trail of extreme comments and left-wing organizing, who nonetheless became the White House adviser for "green jobs." This weekend he too was thrown under the bus."


There is also an article in the Washington Examiner about how the press just ignored this situation much as much of the media continues to ignore many of the czars past.

I recall when George Bush had to explain a DUI right before the election and much was made of it, but we ignore avowed communists in our own government.

Actually, the President deserves much credit for how he has and continues to manage his obvious leanings.

I share many posters fears about where this is going. We WILL HAVE A HEALTH BILL....and it will be a health bill not motivated by what is correct, but by a political motivation to simply pass a health bill. It is very sad because I know of very few on either side who do not think that health costs need to be resolved somehow but you hear very very little about how this will be paid for. This President and this congress are a "perfect storm" to create a climate in this country that I would never have expected in any lifetime.

There appears to be nothing we can do about it either....the DEAFNESS of those who support this is simply amazing..they profess caring about the less fortunate, but care little about the future of this country. I read an article the other day and cant link it but it basically did some math on what is going to happen to charities with the high tax rate on the rich and in fact has already began to have an effect !

AND on the other side, the Republicans are just plain acting stupid. They are giving in to much of the high pitched screaming from the very far right instead of simply laying out the facts on this issue plus others. It seems amazing to me that we are so politically correct that we fear being called racist or other things, but will rely on silly yelling about other petty things. Why dont people wake up and call it what it is without fear...I am speaking of some leaders in BOTH parties who understand that the path being travelled is almost an impossible journey !

Sorry for being so negative and confusing, but just the way I see it and it is not pretty right now.

The change we are getting IS NOT what this President promised....and nobody seems to just plain call him on his lies and constant politial posturizing !

[Guest]

I hear the symbolic discussions regarding pulling the plug on grandma. The party line is to say no one would ever do this. I believe that is junk thinking. If you don't have enough Dr's to handle the load and they have to allocate their time and they ask that laws be made to protect them when they have to make that judgement who do you think will be low on the prioity list for treatments. Of course it will be grandma and grandpa. That is a cool way of fooling the people. Whether you agree to pull the plug or not is not relevant. What is relevant is to recognize what the real world will be. If there are not enough Dr's today to treat the population and the bandwidth doubles or triples within the next 5 years maybe someone can tell me how it will be handled?? Dr's will have to set priorities, they will worry they can be sued if they are discovered neglecting the older population and will look to the gov't to protect them. Thus the laws to pull the plug under some veil of medical allocation. How about opening up more medical schools, taking away the ability for patients to sue over "silly stuff", allow cross state insurance purchasing, pay and reward the nurses who work so hard in order to attrack more to the field, manage the duplication of medical equipment between hospitals, spend funds to pay for new expensive medical equipment within the hospitals so their costs are not allocated across the patient base and there is ridiclous duplication of profits after the equipment has been paid for,
evaluate hospitals costs per patient care and understand those that are
very high and work to get them down to a competitive level. These are just some nutty brain storming but if I can come up with some that do not send a trillion dollars to the tax payer I am sure some greater minds than mine can do a heck of a lot more. The easy answer is to just say the government will pay for everything as it sounds good but don't forget grandma and grandpa.