has the White House and Congress become totally delusional and schizophrenic?

I just finished the daily papers and my dose of world, national and economic news from various networks as a warmup to the Sunday main course. I read or heard that:

My president and Congress somberly announced this week that Social Security and Medicare are going bankrupt. They even provided dates of collapse.

In the same week, they gleefully announce that in 10 weeks time they will have a new national health program for every American. $$$$$$$$$$$$$

Shouldn't we solve the Social Security and Medicare Crisis's before we allow the government to create and muck up another national folly?

Oh yeah...I forgot...the White House is using George Bush's playbook on detainee tribunals. The same Obama team that maligned the Bush Administration's military commission system during the campaign, has now signed on to it.

My wife received a $250 check from the government but will pay more then 10 times that back when we get hit with "cap and trade" pass on costs for energy.

Earlier Janet, from another planet, Napolitano,Homeland Security Secretary, apologized to veterans after a report issued by her department said troops returning from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were at risk for being recruited by right-wing extremists. She said, "This was an assessment, not an accusation," She said all this was meant to do was to give law enforcement what we call 'situational awareness.' Talk about mixed messages. I'm sure our heroic, brave and honorable veterans who served are relieved that it was not an accusation, but rather just an assessment. Where do the libs find these people?

Don't even get started on illegal immigrant welfare.

If you caught Nancy Pelosi's performance this week, she is the personification of the afflictions suffered by the White House and Congress.

Is there any wonder that I left DC as fast as I could? I was afraid the insanity might be catching.....

Originally Posted by cabo35

has the White House and Congress become totally delusional and schizophrenic?

You forgot paranoid.

Anybody read "Boomsday"?

You know, I think I might be getting a little paranoid myself with all this talk about SS and Medicare. "Boomsday" is a satire on what to do about the high cost of the aging boomers. It is actually a satire within a satire. I fear the movie rights. Many in the movie audience may not recognize a satire. They may think it is a great idea.

All I want is a moderate solution to this stuff.

No wonder I am starting to question my own sanity, as well as that of the nutjobs on the hill.

I am a front end Boomer and I think like a moderate Republican. I think I might qualify as an endangered species on both those counts. No wonder I am paranoid.

Hey, is it really paranoia if they really are out to get me?

Boomer the Boomer

They've only just Begun.

Yoda

A member of the loyal opposition

was reference to opening Medicare to those 55-65.
There must be something we don't know eh?
At home I am relegated to what is in my check book and if financed I have to prove that I have sufficient resources to make payment and or have assets to cover the future.
Now how is it the federal government can continue to act as though they have an endless supply of money? Where are all the intellectuals? Why do we not hear about the mortgaging of our future? Even Obama said this week the spending is not sustainable...BUT...that doesn't seem to deter anybody.

How about a solution to the Social Security system that is paying out more than coming in....defunct in 2015...should we not be attending to the woes of the existing system or at least if they are not worthy...shut them down.

Loose cannons would be a polite tag. They are incompetents that do not have an ounce of business sense in the whole group.

The piper will have to be paid at some point....we the people will have to wake up at some point....the followers of Pied Piper Obama will have to wake up soon also.

Americans expectations are not much to be too proud of in any of the above...I resurrect a term not many like....they are sheeple nothing more!!!

BTK

Well, what's happened in the past couple weeks, it scares the crap outta me. All these thousands of jobs that BHO promised to create seems to be in a backward spiral... all those billions money to bail out the automotive industry, for what??? Might as well been flushed it down the toilet. I'm just waiting for the day that all the Obama supporters and those who voted this socialist into office will realize what a mistake they made by believing all his retoric.

I like some of the things President Obama has accomplished so far. But, being a fiscal conservative and a social moderate, there's a whole lot I don't like, as well. While I'm in disagreement with some of his policies, he's the first President in a long time that seems to be acting consistent with his campaign promises. That part is refreshing, at least.

But railing and ranting on the performance of the administration so far doesn't get us where people may want to be. Somehow, methinks, our discourse needs to address what the major campaign planks, the real core values, should be for GOP Congressional candidates in the mid-term elections and for the GOP candidate that will attempt to turn out President Obama after one term.

At this point, the GOP hasn't come close to getting their act together. Big tent, small tent, litmus on religious issues, real fiscal conservatism, foreign policy, homeland security, and on and on? Other than "No, we don't like what the Obama administration is doing", the GOP hasn't come up with many understandable and consistently communicated alternatives. Or even more disturbingly, a list of things that are fundamental for what the party stands for. From what I can see, the Republican Party appears to be badly broken and no one's very active in fixing it.

At the risk of starting the 2012 Presidential Campaign waaay too early, are there any Republican candidates that might make sense? Are there any that can be relied on to actually govern based on their campaign promises, if elected? Are there any who might conduct a positive and informative campaign and avoid the advice of "attack dog" campaign advisors?

If faced with the choice of a candidate and a party with no plan, no strategy, a few disconnected and ideology-based core values and who no one can reasonably project into the role of most powerful leader in the free world, it might be hard to vote against the incumbent, who does have a strategy and is getting things done--even though many of us don't agree with all the steps he's taken so far.

I hope and pray we have some real choices in 2010 and 2012.

I don't get why you are all surprized. Go back to his campaign speeches and he told you exactly what he was going to do. You had to know with a favorable House and Senate he would do it. Read his books, understand what he stands for. He was elected, he has a Congress and Senate that will pass what ever he wants, a media that pushes it, and he is on a high speed march to socialism. Be prepared for that to happen.

effort to destroy our precious America....we start with sending a message during the 2010 elections.
And as VK pointed out, who are the candidates. If the Repubs could just put forth some fresh new faces. The platform(s) should be easy....stop the run for socialism and returning America back to it's prior pride and glory....this has to happen before we become a hopeless also ran.
The rest of the world will soon be taking advantage of the stupidity and destruction of principals underway here in the USA.

BTK

I see several states already passing laws that directly challenge the over reaching authority of the federal government. It's not just Obama, the federal government is totally out of control and for years has been operating so far out of it's Constitutional authority it's frighting. Now that the left wing radicals have gained power it's accelerating at an unbelievable pace.

Guess I'm a 9/12'er.

http://912project.com/

...what are those "values and principles of the greatest nation ever created"?

Someone--some candidate--needs to refresh our memories. If that candidate can convince people that he will actually govern consistent with those principles, he'll almost certainly be elected!

Let me start with a couple that would appeal to me...

1) Pass legislation immediately that will require that the federal government not spend any more than it takes in--reinstate PayGo.

2) Pass legislation that will immediately eliminate the ability of lobbyists to influence elections and elected officials. That's a mouthful, but I'm sure some legislation could be crafted.

3) Somehow eliminate the integration of religious values into the process of electing representatives and governing at any level. This country was founded largely on the principle of the separation of church and state, and those governing us should remain true to that cause.

Any others?

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

...what are those "values and principles of the greatest nation ever created"?

Someone--some candidate--needs to refresh our memories. If that candidate can convince people that he will actually govern consistent with those principles, he'll almost certainly be elected!

Let me start with a couple that would appeal to me...

1) Pass legislation immediately that will require that the federal government not spend any more than it takes in--reinstate PayGo.

2) Pass legislation that will immediately eliminate the ability of lobbyists to influence elections and elected officials. That's a mouthful, but I'm sure some legislation could be crafted.

3) Somehow eliminate the integration of religious values into the process of electing representatives and governing at any level. This country was founded largely on the principle of the separation of church and state, and those governing us should remain true to that cause.

Any others?

Let's take these one-by-one:

1. Getting some congressperson to submit a bill is not a problem at any time. Getting the bill to clear committee, convincing the Speaker (all revenue bills must originate in the House) that the bill should be scheduled for a vote, and then duplicating the process in the Senate - odds are very thin, especially with a House/Senate leadership that very much wants money for everything under the sun.

2. What is a lobbyist? In fact, it's a private citizen with an agenda - the only difference is that the lobbyist is a paid representative acting on behalf of many like-minded private citizens. Eliminating them automatically puts ALL influence solely in the hands of the Party leadership. That to me is more frightening than legions of lobbyists, because that's how the Communists in Russia & China, the Ba'aath in Iraq the Nazis in Germany, and other such dictatorial entities where self-proclaimed free elections occurred were able to rule without dissent.

3. All morality and ethics are religious-based. Without a defining basis of right-and-wrong enforced by a "higher authority," the State becomes omnipotent in definition and practice of what "leadership" believes best suits their efforts to achieve their goals. Lack of such morality and ethics brought the world the Nazi social-cleansing actions, the killing fields of Laos, and other such state-initiated abominations.

Separation of Church and State means no state-mandated or preferred religion. It does not mean no state recognition that God exists and that we answer eventually to a higher authority how we enact and enforce laws, and how we treat our neighbor. Separation of Church and State does not mean state preference for agnosticism or atheism - as neither of them espouse moral and ethical behavior.

Originally Posted by SteveZ

...the lobbyist is a paid representative acting on behalf of many like-minded private citizens.

Most of the K Street lobbyists are hired guns representing corporate interests with very narrow and often-changing agendas. They are well-paid and heavily-funded with plenty of money to make sure their ideas are both heard and acted upon. Yes, there are some that represent private citizens--AARP, the NRA, even the ACLU--but most of the lobbyists are writing legislation and paying off Congress people and Senators with gobs of campaign contributions to assure that their bills are passed.

I don't think that the lobbyists for the banks, investment banks and real estate companies that made $600,000 in campaign contributions to Ginny Brown-Waite last year did so because they represented any broad group of private citizens. Congresswoman Brown-Waite serves on Barney Frank's finance committee, which I suspect was a much larger reason that she got the contributions than her great job of representing the residents of Sumter County and The Villages in her relatively small Florida district.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

Most of the K Street lobbyists are hired guns representing corporate interests with very narrow and often-changing agendas. They are well-paid and heavily-funded with plenty of money to make sure their ideas are both heard and acted upon. Yes, there are some that represent private citizens--AARP, the NRA, even the ACLU--but most of the lobbyists are writing legislation and paying off Congress people and Senators with gobs of campaign contributions to assure that their bills are passed.

I don't think that the lobbyists for the banks, investment banks and real estate companies that made $600,000 in campaign contributions to Ginny Brown-Waite last year did so because they represented any broad group of private citizens. Congresswoman Brown-Waite serves on Barney Frank's finance committee, which I suspect was a much larger reason that she got the contributions than her great job of representing the residents of Sumter County and The Villages in her relatively small Florida district.

I'm no fan of K Street, and I have friends that work there. They are indeed "hired guns," but I'm more afraid that restrictions on any type of approach methodology to government officials will lead us toward party dictatorialsim. The fact that we can have "hired guns" keeps us free, and any type of "gun control" on private access to inform, influence and hold accountable our government can be politically deadly.

I'm not a supporter of Ms. Brown-Waite solely because she is a 3-term incumbent and I believe in voter-induced term limits. However, the moneys she has received in financial industry contributions is basically chicken-feed in comparison to what was received by Mr. Frank, Mr. Reid, Ms. Pelosi and others. If we want to condemn for receipt of certain campaign contributions, let's do it broad-brush and not be party-selective. It's either a political "sin" or it isn't, and party label doesn't make one holy and the other hell-bound.

The 2010 Congressional election will be interesting. I have no idea if Ms. Brown-Waite will be seeking re-election, but would presume she will. Her opponent(s) have not yet come forward, and who funds him/her/them will indeed be a consideration as to worthiness for receiving my vote. It won't be due to wearing any particular banner saying Republican, Democrat, Whig or anything else, mainly because the parties have all proven to be corrupted by the greed of their leaderships, and that greed has led to selling smoke.

Originally Posted by SteveZ

...I'm more afraid that restrictions on any type of approach methodology to government officials will lead us toward party dictatorialsim...

Without question, a two-party democracy would be best. That's not what we have now and it wasn't any "approach methodology" that got us here. There may be differences of opinion, here and elsewhere, but from what I can see, the Republican Party has been critically injured more by the actions of it's own members than by the Democrats.

While the Democrats committed many of the same transgressions, it was the failure of the GOP to govern based on it's stated core values and actions that cost them the trust of the American electorate over a decade or so. We not only had a President who ran as a "compassionate conservative" and acted otherwise, but an alarming number of elected members of Congress who were indicted, tried, many convicted, and many sentenced for violations involving abuse of their power and position. Their collective actions as those supposed to do "the people's work" has been dismal.

That will present a tough record for the GOP to overcome. But it's got to start. It must begin with party leadership willing to set core values and goals which will include enough of the electorate to win elections. Then they must choose candidates that can espouse those values in a believable way. Candidates that the electorate can project as responsible and respected political leaders.

The recovery of the GOP can't really work otherwise. If those that call themselves Republicans (or even anti-Democrats, I suppose) permit a small group of ideologues set the agenda, we will continue to have a one-party system and all the risks and problems that result from such governance. That won't have very much to do with "approach methodology". It will have more to do with simple electoral arithmetic. There will still be lots of money flowing from K Street if it's permitted and encouraged. That money will flow to those who will legislate to satisfy the desires of the lobbyist's clients--and that's not the Republicans!