Presidential Policies

While Mr. Obama has the tax payers of this nation in the bend and hold your ankles position for his “F***king Deal”, it is interesting to note what his associates have to say on the matter.

Max Baucus, Democratic Senator from Montana, admitted that ObamaCare was really a wealth re-distribution plan: “Too often, much of late, the last couple three years, the mal-distribution of income in American is gone up way too much, the wealthy are getting way, way too wealthy and the middle income class is left behind,” he said. “Wages have not kept up with increased income of the highest income in America. This legislation will have the effect of addressing that mal-distribution of income in America.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03/26/democratic-senator-health-care-law-address-mal-distribution-income/


Jesse Jackson Jr., Democratic Congressman representing Illinois, suggests existing government programs will suffer in order to pay for ObamaCare: “Let me be clear: There’s probably going to have to be a significant reform of other social programs as the Federal Government assumes more responsibility for health care for the nation’s people, there are other social programs that are probably going to undermine some elements of social cohesion, there’s no doubt about that.”

http://www.educationnews.org/mobile/breaking_news/79444.html


Phil Hare, a Democratic Congressman from Illinois, position is: “I don't worry about the Constitution on this” meaning ObamaCare. When pressed on the constitutionality of ObamaCare, Hare stated that he didn't know which part of the Constitution justified the ObamaCare, and went on to say that the Constitution guaranteed a citizen’s right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” — which of course comes from the Declaration of Independence. Hare’s response, when corrected? “Doesn't matter to me. Either one.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Obain3h-qo&feature=player_embedded


If this weren’t enough, Hank Johnson, Democratic Congressman from Georgia, during the course of a meeting of the Armed Services Committee on March 25, had an perplexing discussion with Robert Willard, commander of the United States Pacific fleet. The topic was Guam. With no indication that he was speaking metaphorically or ironically, the Honorable Mr. Johnson confounded listeners with his concern that a large influx of Marines and their families might cause the tiny island to “tip over and capsize.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9R-cQ_A_6w

Perhaps it is time to ship the entire congressional delegation to Guam, and hope his understanding of geography is correct. Yet, I am sure the Chamorros would object to being confined with so many idiots.

Also of note, if you do a web search of each of these incidents you will not find a single comment by CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN, NYT, or the AP; yet it is all documented as happening. As Arte Johnson used to say: “Wery interesting!”

Giz, since it is an election year, I suggest we each write the various contenders in our respective districts and demand they make ideas like yours part of their campaign platform. We’ve nothing left to lose and everything to gain—and we need to do it while Louisiana still has nine votes.

I still say the POTUS should not be our main target for criticism! He/she can't do dick without a willing Congress! (that inclues GWB!)
- 2 Term Limits for both Houses of Congress
- 28th Amendment , stating no legislation ever becomes law, that doesn't equally and completely apply to government employees as it does the tax paying citizens.... and vice/versa!
- End of lifelong pensions and Preferred Health Care benefits for Congressional Members!
- If Social Security is good enough for the general population.... it's more than good enough for all the Millionaires leaving Congressional Jobs.
- Campaign Reform.... BIGTIME.... using CLEAR , SIMPLE LANGUAGE!!
- Every Bill which comes before a vote in Congress shall be read in it's entirety on C-SPAN (and explained after numerous public hearings).
- Prison Terms for Congressional Members found guilty of fraud and deceipt with the public's money!
Originally Posted by MrGiz

Could agree with the majority of those, but would add
-release of claimed income for 2 years prior to running for office.

-3 year ban after congress from joining lobbying firms or firms that have direct dealings with congressional lobbiest. Think there is some hold on certain levels of government, not sure it applies directly to congress, but also needs to be included for cabinet level appointees.

Would disagree with the "explained after numerous public hearings" part. Inevitably, no matter who does the explaining, some group of people will claim bias and lack of information, see Fox haters and MSNBC haters. There has to be personal responsibility about attempting to understand some legislation.

I mean even putting a public reading of a bill on cspan would have an peak audience of 3 people. If a bill can't be made into a 30 second sound byte it will be generally ignored by all sides. Which is why all bills get turned in to "tax cuts for evil billionaires who eat poor people for dinner with a $4000 a glass cup of wine" or "soul crushing, god hating, america hating tax increases that satan approves of". I think most people on both sides don't really want to know, it is all too complicated.

Giz you are perfectly right and I think most of America is seeing it also. I think the elecitons in Nov. will reflect how this country feels about congress. They better hold on to their asses.

Most people who "hate congress" keep reelecting their particular representative. I hope Stormy does run (I think she will).

....... If a bill can't be made into a 30 second sound byte it will be generally ignored by all sides.... Originally Posted by daarakan

Agreed.... All the more reason to use CLEAR & SIMPLE LANGUAGE!! Anything else leans toward bullshit anyway!

MrGiz. Does the G stand for genuis? You are dead on.

MrGiz. Does the G stand for genuis?..... Originally Posted by Blazer57

Shhhhhhhhh.... that's supposed to be a secret!