For posterity, these quotes are being saved for future reference:
"We proved that this government — a government of the people and by the people — still works for the people." President Barack Obama
"We will be joining those who established Social Security, Medicare and now, tonight, health care for all Americans." Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi
"This is the civil rights act of the 21st century." Representative Jim Clyburn
"The president was and the Congress were sent here to address the problems that people face in this country, and that's what voters want us to see." WH Press Secretary Robert Gibbs
"We have failed to listen to America and we have failed to reflect the will of our constituents." Representative John Boehner
"It's very unusual that you have a major policy that doesn't have a majority of support in the public." George Edwards, Texas A&M University presidential historian
For the record (from the Associated Press):
A Gallup poll showed more Americans believe the measure will make things worse rather than better for the country as a whole and for them personally.
And most polls show most people don't like the plan although some surveys showed Americans giving high marks to individual elements.
Over For Now.
Main Street One
Showing posts with label Robert Gibbs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Robert Gibbs. Show all posts
Monday, March 22, 2010
Monday, August 17, 2009
Choice and Competition and Government
As reported by the Associated Press, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said yesterday, "What I am saying is the bottom line for this for the president is, what we have to have is choice and competition in the insurance market."
I was not aware that there were no choices existing at present.
Nor was I aware that there was no competition.
As I search the web there are a vast number of insurance companies and when one looks through the healthcare plans offered it seems there are many from which to choose.
What I do understand is that the cost of insurance is becoming higher and higher.
And what I also understand is that there are no elected representatives willing to tackle Tort Reform in an attempt to curtail the rising cost of insurance.
Why is it that people, speaking particularly of politicians at this point, have to make things overly complex and employ smoke and mirrors.
An example of overly complex is that reforming the healthcare system requires that government must enter that field (which, perhaps, may not now be the case, unless, of course, that portion of reform is tacked back into the bill at actual voting time) to ensure people have a choice.
And the smoke and mirrors utilized in this endeavor are ample. One of the best is stating that healthcare reform is necessary for our economic recovery. That is such a blatant lie it is laughable, except that we are dealing with taxing, literally, the resources of every taxpaying citizen of Main Street USA.
It is also worthy of note that AP describes the Obama administration "embrace insurance cooperatives over a government-run plan" decision as "Bowing to Republican pressure and offering political cover to fiscally conservative Democrats."
Bowing to the other political party…offering cover to your own party?
What ever happened to what the people (those residents Main Street USA) want and do not want? Those who do not want more government, do not want to end up paying for every little thing some politician wants to get in his/her district (i.e., earmarks), do not want government to make decisions for us, etcetera?
What ever happened to the people in the "of the people, by the people, and for the people" equation?
While it is true that our Founding Fathers could not have envisioned life and all of its intricacies in the 21st Century, they did certainly have a handle on people and government and what people in government could attempt.
One example of this knowledge of humankind is from John Adams, "There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty."
Another, from James Madison: "Since the general civilization of mankind, I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people, by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpations."
Perhaps each and every one of our elected officials (and their appointed and hired staff) should be required to do a refresher course in Government 101, as taught by our Founding Fathers, prior to accepting their post, their post of public trust.
Over For Now,
Main Street One
I was not aware that there were no choices existing at present.
Nor was I aware that there was no competition.
As I search the web there are a vast number of insurance companies and when one looks through the healthcare plans offered it seems there are many from which to choose.
What I do understand is that the cost of insurance is becoming higher and higher.
And what I also understand is that there are no elected representatives willing to tackle Tort Reform in an attempt to curtail the rising cost of insurance.
Why is it that people, speaking particularly of politicians at this point, have to make things overly complex and employ smoke and mirrors.
An example of overly complex is that reforming the healthcare system requires that government must enter that field (which, perhaps, may not now be the case, unless, of course, that portion of reform is tacked back into the bill at actual voting time) to ensure people have a choice.
And the smoke and mirrors utilized in this endeavor are ample. One of the best is stating that healthcare reform is necessary for our economic recovery. That is such a blatant lie it is laughable, except that we are dealing with taxing, literally, the resources of every taxpaying citizen of Main Street USA.
It is also worthy of note that AP describes the Obama administration "embrace insurance cooperatives over a government-run plan" decision as "Bowing to Republican pressure and offering political cover to fiscally conservative Democrats."
Bowing to the other political party…offering cover to your own party?
What ever happened to what the people (those residents Main Street USA) want and do not want? Those who do not want more government, do not want to end up paying for every little thing some politician wants to get in his/her district (i.e., earmarks), do not want government to make decisions for us, etcetera?
What ever happened to the people in the "of the people, by the people, and for the people" equation?
While it is true that our Founding Fathers could not have envisioned life and all of its intricacies in the 21st Century, they did certainly have a handle on people and government and what people in government could attempt.
One example of this knowledge of humankind is from John Adams, "There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty."
Another, from James Madison: "Since the general civilization of mankind, I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people, by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpations."
Perhaps each and every one of our elected officials (and their appointed and hired staff) should be required to do a refresher course in Government 101, as taught by our Founding Fathers, prior to accepting their post, their post of public trust.
Over For Now,
Main Street One
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Headline AP: Obama Lets NKorea’s Kim Save Face
If that doesn't take the cake!
The White House, under their very vocal spokesperson, Robert Gibbs, emphatically stated that Former President Bill Clinton was not sanctioned by the US Government when he flew to North Korea to negotiate with Kim Jong II the pardon of two Americans senteced to 12 years of hard labor.
Gibbs even, while the discussions were in progress and was asked about Clinton delivering a message from President Obama, flatly denied it, claiming that Clinton had no message to deliver.
So, how is it that Obama allows North Korea to save face?
How does the WH claim this "victory" when they denied Clinton was acting on their behalf?
Politics.
Not statesmanship.
Politics.
Double-faced, double-talk, secret deals, clandestine operations.
Even lying to Main Street USA about what was going on.
At this point, I must agree with a couple of analysts that I have heard saying that the WH was going to use this in an attempt to stop, and hopefully reverse, Obama's falling favorable opinion status.
Our politicians, and their appointed cronies, seem to think that they can say whatever they please, to whomever they please.
Maybe that is a lesson for Main Street USA to learn.
Speaking of lessons, watch out about this national health reform.
From what I hear, not one person in Congress has read the entire bill, all 1,100-plus pages.
So, why to they then get a recess? They only work, what, 184 days a year anyway. That means that have 181 days off a year.
Demand that your ELECTED representative READ the legislation themselves (not one of their people). Then have them tell you what you can expect. And, then ask them what the difference is between how it will affect you and how it will affect them, sitting in their plush DC office, with their staff, their (virtually unmonitored) expense accounts, etc.
I dare say not one of them can guarantee that you will not see your taxes raised when the anticipated revenues fall short and expenses end up higher than projected.
I know this started off about North Korea, but this is the direction my mind went and I let it go.
Over For Now,
Main Street One
The White House, under their very vocal spokesperson, Robert Gibbs, emphatically stated that Former President Bill Clinton was not sanctioned by the US Government when he flew to North Korea to negotiate with Kim Jong II the pardon of two Americans senteced to 12 years of hard labor.
Gibbs even, while the discussions were in progress and was asked about Clinton delivering a message from President Obama, flatly denied it, claiming that Clinton had no message to deliver.
So, how is it that Obama allows North Korea to save face?
How does the WH claim this "victory" when they denied Clinton was acting on their behalf?
Politics.
Not statesmanship.
Politics.
Double-faced, double-talk, secret deals, clandestine operations.
Even lying to Main Street USA about what was going on.
At this point, I must agree with a couple of analysts that I have heard saying that the WH was going to use this in an attempt to stop, and hopefully reverse, Obama's falling favorable opinion status.
Our politicians, and their appointed cronies, seem to think that they can say whatever they please, to whomever they please.
Maybe that is a lesson for Main Street USA to learn.
Speaking of lessons, watch out about this national health reform.
From what I hear, not one person in Congress has read the entire bill, all 1,100-plus pages.
So, why to they then get a recess? They only work, what, 184 days a year anyway. That means that have 181 days off a year.
Demand that your ELECTED representative READ the legislation themselves (not one of their people). Then have them tell you what you can expect. And, then ask them what the difference is between how it will affect you and how it will affect them, sitting in their plush DC office, with their staff, their (virtually unmonitored) expense accounts, etc.
I dare say not one of them can guarantee that you will not see your taxes raised when the anticipated revenues fall short and expenses end up higher than projected.
I know this started off about North Korea, but this is the direction my mind went and I let it go.
Over For Now,
Main Street One
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Negotiating The Release, Stay Away, Gibbs
It was nice to see Former President Bill Clinton at work with North Korea securing a special pardon for our two captive Americans.
Of course, the first thought that popped in my mind when I heard that he was traveling across the globe was about how Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had botched her communications with Pyongyang a couple of weeks ago in what ended up as an argument conducted through the media.
In my opinion, the exchange between the Secretary and North Korea bordered on the childish.
And the State Department is supposed to conduct foreign affairs, generally through statesman-like conduct.
That aside, it was a great effort by President Bill and it was nice to hear a few minutes ago that he, Laura Lynn and Euna Lee are heading back to the United States. I could not imagine 12 years of hard labor in North Korea.
One thing that I certainly did not understand was when, while the negotiations were still on-going, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs announced to the media (which was immediately reported and, I am sure, read by people in North Korea) that Clinton did not take a message from President Obama to Kim Jong II.
Even if it was not true, I doubt that the former President would have made it a very long comment and would absolutely have been something that Obama would have said.
Thus, for Gibbs to shoot off that comment while Clinton and Jong were still in the midst of their talks, was ill-advised, to say the least.
To coin a phrase, Gibbs "acted stupidly."
Why?
Because that comment could have cast a deep shadow on Clinton's trip and his overall credibility as someone negotiating "in good faith." Fortunately, it did not affect the pardon. But, it certainly could have knocked the train off the tracks.
Take a lesson, here, Mr. Gibbs, watch what you say in the future.
Over For Now,
Main Street One
Of course, the first thought that popped in my mind when I heard that he was traveling across the globe was about how Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had botched her communications with Pyongyang a couple of weeks ago in what ended up as an argument conducted through the media.
In my opinion, the exchange between the Secretary and North Korea bordered on the childish.
And the State Department is supposed to conduct foreign affairs, generally through statesman-like conduct.
That aside, it was a great effort by President Bill and it was nice to hear a few minutes ago that he, Laura Lynn and Euna Lee are heading back to the United States. I could not imagine 12 years of hard labor in North Korea.
One thing that I certainly did not understand was when, while the negotiations were still on-going, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs announced to the media (which was immediately reported and, I am sure, read by people in North Korea) that Clinton did not take a message from President Obama to Kim Jong II.
Even if it was not true, I doubt that the former President would have made it a very long comment and would absolutely have been something that Obama would have said.
Thus, for Gibbs to shoot off that comment while Clinton and Jong were still in the midst of their talks, was ill-advised, to say the least.
To coin a phrase, Gibbs "acted stupidly."
Why?
Because that comment could have cast a deep shadow on Clinton's trip and his overall credibility as someone negotiating "in good faith." Fortunately, it did not affect the pardon. But, it certainly could have knocked the train off the tracks.
Take a lesson, here, Mr. Gibbs, watch what you say in the future.
Over For Now,
Main Street One
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)