Dishonest Democratic Politicians - Page 4

I totally agree with this statement, and it doesn't matter if the government is Democrat or Republican. The reason (in my opinion) they can't run anything and can't be trusted to run anything is that its all about the next campaign, the next election, and how they can maintain or return to power. Also because a lot of our elected officials aren't the brightest bulbs in the box either.

On the other hand, I'm not sure private industry can be trusted to run things either, because with them its all about the bottom line and the bonuses.

Basically, we're all just screwed no matter what.

We need health care reform, but I don't believe the crap we're getting out of Washington is going to do it.

I've just heard that they aren't going to do the deem and pass thing, whatever the heck that is.

I don't think this is a great bill, but I don't think its a total government takeover either. I haven't had the energy to read the entire bill, but it seems like that total government takeover business has just been used to scare people into opposing it. You hear so much spin from the right and from the left, its hard to know what to believe these days.

Its a crisis of epic proportions for the democrats who want to keep their jobs and figure they gotta do something NOW. Something should have been done about health care ages ago, but I don't think politicians should be in charge of deciding what's to be done.

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/mar...ns18-2010mar18

Personally, I don't see why it makes any difference.

Regarding funding abortions. How are they paid today? If any insurance policy pays for them today, then in reality, every person who pays premiums to those insurance companies are paying for abortions. Why not boycott the insurance companies?

What about people who don't want a victim of rape and/or incest, or an unenlightened 14-year-old, being forced to bear a child because their taxes can't be used to pay for an abortion? There are also a lot of pro-choice tax payers.

I know this is long and winding and full of legal stuff, so I'm bolding the most important parts if you don't want to or get confused by it all.

Re: Public funding for abortion. The argument is that if the government is funding purchase of insurance policies that cover abortions with no limits outside of legal limitations (i.e. late-term abortions), they see it as government funding of abortion. Take it or leave it, your choice. That is their belief. From how I see it, the pro-life/anti-choice (however you see it again) want insurance companies to remove this option from their plans IF they accept people who receive government subsidies for premiums, which would be any of them, by law.

However...according to the 1974 Budget Act, if there is any impact to the social security revenues (which there certainly seems to be) in a bill, that bill is not eligible for reconciliation. The first bill that the House is voting on is the Senate bill with no changes. Then they will vote on the Reconciliation, which will stop the Cornhusker Kickback and the Louisiana Purchase, and it will suspend the high-end insurance policy taxes for unions for 5 years, yada yada yada. Mitch McConnell (R) has been pleading with Harry Reid to take this provision to Parliamentarian to see if the Reconciliation would even be legal, and there is no assurance that the Senate would even take the Reconciliation up for a vote, and even if they do it could/would be struck down. In essence, the House Democrats that are agreeing to vote for the Senate Bill because of the Reconciliation may be being duped. The Reconciliation will not become law! Basically, one person in the Senate would take up a Point of Order for this Reconciliation to override the 1974 Budget Act, which they would have to have 60 votes to pass (which they don't have), in order for them to even consider the Reconciliation Bill, which may or may not pass it. If it doesn't pass, they would have to start all over with new legislation to get these "fixes" to this bad bill into law.

President Obama has also promised that he will sign an Executive Order that will not allow federal funding of abortion. However!!! Presidential Executive Orders cannot override federal legislation. So without the Reconciliation, that Executive Order would "not be worth the paper it's written on" according to legal commentators. SO, again, the House Democrats who are agreeing to vote for the Senate Bill because of the Executive Order are being duped!

Confused yet? Yeah, I had to rewind and re-listen to this stuff, as well as look up the 1974 Budget Act to make sure these commentators weren't blowing smoke. Thing is that the House Democrats who are making up their minds are not hearing any of this because they are listening to arguments in the House before voting.

Oh, and by the way...this savings that is being touted? The savings that we are supposed to see aren't until the 2nd decade of this legislation!

BUT - there are now THIRTY-SEVEN states' Attorney Generals who are planning to challenge the Legislation in Federal Court as soon as it is the law of the land (when it is signed by the President), which will tie it up in the courts for possibly years. If it is challenged and in the court and the court (ANY of the Federal Courts) agrees to hear it, then most likely the law will be suspended.

Just one more thing to add to the "don't want my taxes paying for..." list; right up there with tax exempt pedophile hiding institutions and orchestrated wars.

Sooo; Stupak was against the bill, but changed his vote when the President agreed to sign an order that, apparently, won't do anything!?

Politicians must be aliens.

I'm guessing that either he doesn't know the legal issues with it, considering the issues with the Reconciliation and the Executive Order, OR he wanted to have the "out" for his constituents that he was given assurances from the highest authority (Obama) that there would be no federal funding for abortion, so it's not really his fault if there were issues beyond the control of himself and the President...

Frankly I'm not sure which one I would be more likely to believe. He is, after all, a politician.

Well, in any case, politicians still could be aliens. By normal human standards, they've got to be stupid to want that job, where your every eyebrow twitch gets dissected in the media.

Good point!

Frankly I've only seen one truly honest politician in my life spend time in Washington, get re-elected multiple times, and make it back with his sanity and integrity in tact. He did switch parties in the middle of it because of this kind of thing - the backdoor dealings, underhanded dealings to get something done. Which made the party he switched over to see exactly where he stood on that kind of thing. He stood with his constituents, period. Makes me pine for the way things used to be... (Sad thing is that I'm only 37 years old!)

\t \t\t \t\t Not only that, but on to the multiple lawsuits that will be filed within hours if not days of it being signed into law.

that will be fantastic. yes yes yes

I think Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner will be a big part of that fight based on what he said yesterday. What he said proves Obama doesn't even know the limitations of an executive order. Newflash Barack, it's not the end-all-be-all that you think it is!

I guess the real question is, what parts of this bill take effect immediately? I think the only thing I know about are some taxes and a prohibition on denying coverage to children with pre-existing conditions. I don't think much of anything else kicks in for four years.

I completely agree with the fact that we are financially supporting the goverment which is why I am against my tax dollars being used to finance the lifestyle of "crank out babies, stay on the public dole." If a woman can't afford to have an abortion, she certainly can't afford to raise a child. More and more I see this religious types having babies because it's the only thing they're capable of doing to earn a living - off the taxpayer! Talk about rewarding bad behavior!

Speaking of dishonesty; now that the bill has passed, we need to get a volunteer network going to keep track of Rush Limbaugh. The first time he goes to his US Doctor, he can be called out as a liar.