TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Change you can believe in
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Change you can believe in  

post #1 of 27
Thread Starter 
I thought Barack was against lobbyists.

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/1...ansition-team/

Quote:
Barack Obama campaigned on a pledge to change Washington, vowing to upend the K Street lobbying culture he encountered when he joined the U.S. Senate.

But more than a dozen members of President-elect Obama's fast-growing transition team have worked as federally registered lobbyists within the past four years. They include former lobbyists for the nation's trial lawyers association, mortgage giant Fannie Mae, drug companies such as Amgen, high-tech firms such as Microsoft, labor unions and the liberal advocacy group Center for American Progress.

How is Barack Obama any different that the same old, same old in Washington?
Answer: He is no different at all.
The Pork and earmarks will keep on rolling.
post #2 of 27
Maybe he was against them before he was for them.
post #3 of 27
He has also removed his entire agenda from his web site.

I suspect that he's seen reality, in all its ugliness.
post #4 of 27
Thread Starter 
He knew reality, he just lied. Took down his agenda? That didn't take long did it?
post #5 of 27
I voted for Obama, mostly because I just couldn't see Palin as President is something happened to McCain, but I don't know that one is any better than the other. On politics I may be a little skeptical, I have worked for the Gov.too long to pay attention to anything that is promised. You have to wait and see what really happens It doesn't usually have anything to do with what they said.
post #6 of 27
It's important for us all to remember that the government, for most of us, isn't the President, but rather all the people who work in all the offices, as you do.
post #7 of 27
Thank you, what is hard for many of is when we have to follow what is passed down, no matter if we feel it wrong or right and try to do the best we can. The lives of most people are affected and not always for the best. Let's hope that it will be for the good mostly this time.
post #8 of 27
I honestly don't see how Washington could function without lobbyists. It's a nice dream but it will never happen. There will always be special interest groups out there trying to influence legislation and that's just the way it is. Anybody that actually believed that has never paid attention to any other election in the past, or is too young to remember past elections. Promises are made to be broken, regardless of the party. The political machine that is Washington is much bigger than one person and he can only do so much.
post #9 of 27
Thread Starter 
It is the blatant hypocrisy that I have the problem. Of course Obama won't do much of what he promised. But he knew that when he promised it. I think that shows the lack of character on his part.

While McCain would have done what he said, cut taxes, personal and corporate, have a totally transparent administration. Have a moratorium on all new spending programs unless vital, veteran's and one other I think he said.

And one of my all time favorites, veto ALL bills with pork and/or earmarks and in addition to the veto, out the porkies and "make them famous"
He would have done that.
post #10 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
It is the blatant hypocrisy that I have the problem. Of course Obama won't do much of what he promised. But he knew that when he promised it. I think that shows the lack of character on his part.

While McCain would have done what he said, cut taxes, personal and corporate, have a totally transparent administration. Have a moratorium on all new spending programs unless vital, veteran's and one other I think he said.

And one of my all time favorites, veto ALL bills with pork and/or earmarks and in addition to the veto, out the porkies and "make them famous"
He would have done that.
I don't think either one COULD have done what they promised. Both of them painted a fairy tale but it isn't entirely up to them. It is a political machine and the president is just one cog. No one person can change how that machine runs because they don't have the final say in most things.

EVERY presidential candidate says they will cut taxes or at least not raise them. But, it's hard to run a country on lower taxes when we are as far in debt as we are. The issue at that point is who is going to raise them more.

As for vetoing every bill that has earmarks....then NOTHING would get passed and nothing would get done. EVERY bill has something attached to it. It would be wonderful if they didn't, but it's a fact of life.

I agreed with McCain on most things, but even if he had been elected he wouldn't have been able to do everything he wanted to do. It's Washington.
post #11 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by calico2222
I honestly don't see how Washington could function without lobbyists. It's a nice dream but it will never happen. There will always be special interest groups out there trying to influence legislation and that's just the way it is. Anybody that actually believed that has never paid attention to any other election in the past, or is too young to remember past elections. Promises are made to be broken, regardless of the party. The political machine that is Washington is much bigger than one person and he can only do so much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
It is the blatant hypocrisy that I have the problem. Of course Obama won't do much of what he promised. But he knew that when he promised it. I think that shows the lack of character on his part.

While McCain would have done what he said, cut taxes, personal and corporate, have a totally transparent administration. Have a moratorium on all new spending programs unless vital, veteran's and one other I think he said.

And one of my all time favorites, veto ALL bills with pork and/or earmarks and in addition to the veto, out the porkies and "make them famous"
He would have done that.
You believe he would have done that, but he would have been faced with the same realities Obama will soon be facing.

You're going to be just thrilled with all the "pork" involved in the planned infrastructure projects, aren't you? Just keep in mind that much of that pork keeps people working, and a lot of people are losing their jobs right now.
post #12 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by calico2222
As for vetoing every bill that has earmarks....then NOTHING would get passed and nothing would get done. EVERY bill has something attached to it. It would be wonderful if they didn't, but it's a fact of life.
That's why there has been such a huge need for a line item veto.
post #13 of 27
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcat View Post

You believe he would have done that, but he would have been faced with the same realities Obama will soon be facing.

You're going to be just thrilled with all the "pork" involved in the planned infrastructure projects, aren't you? Just keep in mind that much of that pork keeps people working, and a lot of people are losing their jobs right now.
Hey, if people want "The New Deal" again, just come out and say it.

If you want Big Brother to take over everything, just admit it and we can turn this into a communist country and be done with it.

And if I am supposed to be in favor of pork and earmarks to keep people working, I don't think so. That is NOT the way to keep people working IMO
post #14 of 27
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Essayons89 View Post
That's why there has been such a huge need for a line item veto.
Another thing that McCain was in favor of.
post #15 of 27
Thread Starter 
McCain never applied for earmarks/pork and the State of Arizona hasn't disintegrated.
post #16 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Hey, if people want "The New Deal" again, just come out and say it.

If you want Big Brother to take over everything, just admit it and we can turn this into a communist country and be done with it.

And if I am supposed to be in favor of pork and earmarks to keep people working, I don't think so. That is NOT the way to keep people working IMO
What does "Big Brother" have to do with it? Communism has been dead and gone on most of the globe for nearly a generation.

You don't think that expanding (or in many places, establishing) mass transit systems is a good idea, in view of dependency on foreign oil? The car industry is in a shambles. Why shouldn't GM, Ford or Chrysler be encouraged/forced to make buses, trolleys or train cars, and more fuel-efficient vehicles?

I don't know what public transport is available in Las Vegas or its surroundings, but surely there's some room for improvement? My sister's kids (raised in Nebraska), with the exception of her eldest, who has lived on the East Coast for extended periods, have never taken a train or a bus other than a school bus. To them, somebody who has is "exotic". My sister and I grew up in southeastern Pennsylvania, which has a somewhat decent public transit system that could bear much improvement, and I now live in a little one-horse town in Germany, but can commute to work (50 miles a day) by train, which is both much cheaper and faster than commuting by car.

Developing mass transit in greater metropolitan areas would certainly add jobs, reduce the U.S.'s oil/gasoline consumption, and decrease the harm done to the environment. I can't see how that's being "communist".
post #17 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Essayons89 View Post
That's why there has been such a huge need for a line item veto.
I agree. And bills with line item vetos have been sent back to house and congress time and time again. So, the bills are caught up in the "process".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line-item_veto

It would be nice, but again, I'm not betting the farm on it.
post #18 of 27
Thread Starter 
Wow, China isn't a Communist Nation anymore? Who knew.
post #19 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Wow, China isn't a Communist Nation anymore? Who knew.
Where have you been, Cindy? They started transitioning from a command economy to a market economy almost three decades ago. The country became a member of the World Trade Organization in 2001.
http://www.ustr.gov/Document_Library...anization.html
post #20 of 27
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcat View Post
Where have you been, Cindy? They started transitioning from a command economy to a market economy almost three decades ago. The country became a member of the World Trade Organization in 2001.
http://www.ustr.gov/Document_Library...anization.html
Oh yes, their great strides in the area of human rights has been amazing.
post #21 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Oh yes, their great strides in the area of human rights has been amazing.
You're comparing apples and oranges. Or do you believe that there haven't been any capitalist dictatorships?
post #22 of 27
China is more of a socialist republic than a true communist state like there was with the Soviet Union. However, the country is still ruled by the Communist Party of China who retain a very tight control of all things political.
post #23 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Essayons89 View Post
China is more of a socialist republic than a true communist state like there was with the Soviet Union. However, the country is still ruled by the Communist Party of China who retain a very tight control of all things political.
Exactly my point. You have to distinguish between political and economic. I believe Deng Xiaoping called the (modern) Chinese system a "social market economy". That always reminded me of Hungary's "goulash communism" during the waning days of the Cold War.

However, we could all still get into a discussion about Venezuela's future.... talk about learning little or nothing from history.
post #24 of 27
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Essayons89 View Post
However, the country is still ruled by the Communist Party of China who retain a very tight control of all things political.

Yep, and that is what I was talking about. Thank you
post #25 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Yep, and that is what I was talking about. Thank you
You might want to update your terminology, Cindy, as otherwise your point might be missed.
post #26 of 27
Quote:
Communism has been dead and gone on most of the globe for nearly a generation.
....
However, we could all still get into a discussion about Venezuela's future.... talk about learning little or nothing from history.
Hope you don't mind quotes from two different posts - that's why I edited out the reference link. But I think these two statements tie together. And it's precisely why Communism has been dead for a generation that it could be a threat again, because the new generation doesn't know it first-hand.
post #27 of 27
As this thread has evolved into a discussion of a Detroit bailout, I've split it, and am closing this portion of it.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
This thread is locked  
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Change you can believe in