Obama promising to televise health care on C-span

Re: Obama promising to televise health care on C-span

PostBy: tvb On: Sat Jan 09, 2010 1:35 pm

Richard S. wrote:
tvb wrote:Can you cite any examples from previous administrations where the negotiations of merging house and senate bills have been broadcast or generally not behind closed doors?


News flash, this is not the previous administration and I don't recall Bush making such a promise.


News flash - I think they should be publicized. It's a great way for America to learn how obstructionist the Republicans really are. In any case, I was just wondering if there was precedent.
tvb
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Alaska
Stove/Furnace Model: Channing III

Re: Obama promising to televise health care on C-span

PostBy: coalkirk On: Sat Jan 09, 2010 1:39 pm

tvb wrote:News flash - I think they should be publicized. It's a great way for America to learn how obstructionist the Republicans really are. In any case, I was just wondering if there was precedent.


News flash! The dems have control of congress. They don't need the republicans to pass healthcare or any other legislation. The repubs have not been included in the process so it's pretty hard for them to obstruct. All the dems need is legislation that isn't objectionable to 70% of the people. You see there's a little thing called the 2010 election that has dems worrying about their gravy trains. There's the rub.
coalkirk
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Harman VF3000
Coal Size/Type: antrhcite/rice coal

Re: Obama promising to televise health care on C-span

PostBy: tvb On: Sat Jan 09, 2010 2:11 pm

coalkirk wrote:
tvb wrote:News flash - I think they should be publicized. It's a great way for America to learn how obstructionist the Republicans really are. In any case, I was just wondering if there was precedent.


News flash! The dems have control of congress. They don't need the republicans to pass healthcare or any other legislation. The repubs have not been included in the process so it's pretty hard for them to obstruct. All the dems need is legislation that isn't objectionable to 70% of the people. You see there's a little thing called the 2010 election that has dems worrying about their gravy trains. There's the rub.


I'm guessing you were gone fishing when the republicans tried and failed to mount a filibuster on the defense spending bill last month in an effort to block the health care reform debates? And also during the filibuster they did engage in on the health care reform debates just before Christmas? Are you claiming a filibuster isn't obstructionist? Do you recall when the republicans threatened a "nuclear option" by changing the very rules the Senate has operated under for a couple hundred years when the Dems threatened to filibuster some of Bushco's judicial nominees?
tvb
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Alaska
Stove/Furnace Model: Channing III


Re: Obama promising to televise health care on C-span

PostBy: spc On: Sat Jan 09, 2010 2:23 pm

tvb wrote:Are you claiming a filibuster isn't obstructionist?


Are you?

"Burris Threatens To Filibuster Health Care Without Public Option"

That's Burris with a (D)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/0 ... 85677.html
spc
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Leisure Line
Stove/Furnace Model: Pioneer

Re: Obama promising to televise health care on C-span

PostBy: tvb On: Sat Jan 09, 2010 2:34 pm

It is obstructionist regardless of who does it and yes, there are a handful of blue dog dems who are quite capable of mucking things up. I'm a strong believer in the public option but I didn't agree with Burris and others holding the entire process hostage to get their way.
tvb
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Alaska
Stove/Furnace Model: Channing III

Re: Obama promising to televise health care on C-span

PostBy: spc On: Sat Jan 09, 2010 3:04 pm

Do judicial nominees count? :roll:
spc
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Leisure Line
Stove/Furnace Model: Pioneer

Re: Obama promising to televise health care on C-span

PostBy: tvb On: Sat Jan 09, 2010 4:30 pm

I had to think about that for a bit, spc.

I'm a bit more tolerant of filibustering judicial nominees or any nominees of any appointments for that matter, provided they are based upon reasonable objections. There are some real whackos nominated for positions they are totally unqualified for by both parties at times (You're doing a heckuva job, Brownie). On the other hand, holding up a nominee like is going on with the head of the TSA (not a filibuster though) over some imagined desire on his part to unionize the TSA is not right. Now, if they filibustered over his glossing about his past indiscretions of using private records for personal gains, yes, I think it is probably justified particularly given the power of his position. I wish the republicans had filibustered Geithner for instance. Perhaps Obama would have found another candidate who wasn't as chummy with wall street as Geithner is.

It's the same with judicial nominees. I don't think judges should have a known political agenda. Using abortion as an example, I'm not happy to see someone who is on the record as opposing abortion based upon religious beliefs because I think that has the potential to cloud his or her judgment on any abortion related cases that may come before the court. I want any cases to be judged upon what the law and precedent carries, not what the bible says because we don't live in a theocracy. I feel the same with judges who may hold known political views on the death penalty. I'm against it but would prefer any court cases that may arise from it be ruled on the word of law, not the rule of gut reaction. If it takes a filibuster to expose those potential biases, I'm okay with it.

It may be the one conservative bit in me.
tvb
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Alaska
Stove/Furnace Model: Channing III

Re: Obama promising to televise health care on C-span

PostBy: tvb On: Sat Jan 09, 2010 4:47 pm

I should add however, that the republicans are now trying to weasel out the agreement they struck with the democrats back when Bushco was in charge. That was the agreement which arose out the the threatened "nuclear option" which would have changed the way filibusters are ended in the senate from requiring the vote of 60 senators to a simple majority of 51 votes. You may recall that agreement was that no filibusters would take place on judicial nominees. It was agreed to by the so-called "Gang of Seven" comprised of seven Dems and seven reps who came up with that idea.

Well, in November of last year, the reps conveniently forgot about that agreement and filibustered an Obama nominee because he worked as an Acorn canvasser for two weeks 30 years ago. That nominee, David Hamilton, was actually praised by Sen. Lugar (R-IN) and the Indiana chapter of the Federalist Society.

Kind of ironic for a party that claimed the judical filibuster to be unconstitutional back 2005, dontchya think?
tvb
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Alaska
Stove/Furnace Model: Channing III

Re: Obama promising to televise health care on C-span

PostBy: baldeagle On: Mon Jan 11, 2010 8:28 pm

Stockingfull -- I have not looked at the site for a long time, last time I was looking at your opinions on AGW -
I'd be interested how you are reacting to "climategate" and our winter of '09? baldeagle
baldeagle
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Hitzer 354
Stove/Furnace Model: Hitzer 503

Re: Obama promising to televise health care on C-span

PostBy: stockingfull On: Mon Jan 11, 2010 10:28 pm

baldeagle wrote:Stockingfull -- I have not looked at the site for a long time, last time I was looking at your opinions on AGW -
I'd be interested how you are reacting to "climategate" and our winter of '09? baldeagle

b-eagle -- Nice to see you back. As you might suspect, a lot's been written here about "Climate-gate", mostly here:

http://nepacrossroads.com/about13476.html

Bottom line, some believe it's "news" and others believe it's the normal "sausage factory" of science and thus has no real impact, one way or the other.

Now that Copenhagen has come and gone, it's off the front burner, if you'll pardon the pun. :D
stockingfull
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Yellow Flame
Stove/Furnace Model: W.A. 150 Stoker Furnace

Re: Obama promising to televise health care on C-span

PostBy: coalkirk On: Tue Jan 12, 2010 12:20 am

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... -here.html

Not even on the burner. Artic ice has increased 26% in the last two years. We're heading into at least a 30 year cooling cycle. Longer would be my guess looking at historical climate data and trends.
coalkirk
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Harman VF3000
Coal Size/Type: antrhcite/rice coal

Re: Obama promising to televise health care on C-span

PostBy: stockingfull On: Tue Jan 12, 2010 4:41 pm

Terry's citation points out just how distorted the discussion has become.

For, if the Arctic icecap had shrunk 90% in the, say, 25 years before 2007, and then increased just 2.6%, that very same 2.6% would constitute a 26% increase from 2007, because the 2007 basis was just 10% of the original basis. It's really just "glass half-empty or half-full" stuff, as applied to statistics.

So what we've learned in all this is that not only can the scientific process be made to look corrupt but also the statistics easily can be manipulated to suit the wishes of the proponents of the various sides of the argument.

Few things are as simple as they seem, or as we may wish.
stockingfull
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Yellow Flame
Stove/Furnace Model: W.A. 150 Stoker Furnace