• on a comment on An Earful in Pittsburgh over 4 years ago

    "
    Leadership is about getting your voice heard and laying down a plan, he did nothing"

    Oh what Rubbish. He actually laid down a deadline. He was insisting on it till the last week of July. He got 4 out of 5 committees to pass a bill. What could he do about Baucus or the fact that Kennedy was sick?

    How about the leaders in Congress stand up and do something? They have more actual control than the prez. Obama doesn't have magic pixie-dust that enables everything he wants to magically happen.

  • on a comment on An Earful in Pittsburgh over 4 years ago

    I support democrats because I have seen the opposition it's scary as hell. If that makes me a cheerleader so be it.

  • on a comment on An Earful in Pittsburgh over 4 years ago

    [i]"I just don't get WHY almost NO ONE in congress will adress that?

    All we need to do is roll back those rates to PRE-BUSH, not even PRE-CLINTON and the funding gap is cut in half?."[/i]

    That's a good question to ask. Consider a couple of things:

    1) Most people think their taxes are going up, even though Obama & Congress cut taxes earlier this year.

    2) The Bush tax cuts for folk making over 250K will expire next year and not be renewed.

    So why congress refuses to use this as a funding mechanism is beyond me.

  • on a comment on An Earful in Pittsburgh over 4 years ago

    The DOW is an indicator, not a predictor. When the DOW collapses it means your in the sh!t. It can't tell you how bad things are going to get, but it can tell you where you are now (financially speaking).

  • on a comment on An Earful in Pittsburgh over 4 years ago

    Sure, because a GOP pres is much more likely to support a PO. I mean that kind of thinking worked out so well for Nixon and Reagan.

    The problem is with Congress. Elect some more liberals like Kennedy in there, but don't give up the prez!

  • on a comment on An Earful in Pittsburgh over 4 years ago

    Congress is writing the Bill, not Obama.

    Obama also said the best way to fund the bill would be by reducing tax exemptions for the wealthy - he mentioned this several times. Congress ignored him.

    There was no betrayal - he had softened his stance on mandates prior to the election. He knows that insurance for pre-exisiting conditions can't be provided without a mandate.

    If Congress gets a bill with a public option to his desk, he will sign it. The Ball is with Congress, there is only so much he can do.

  • on a comment on An Earful in Pittsburgh over 4 years ago

    Or take an example closer to home - it's not like after Medicare was passed Dems didn't loose the WH.

    Medicare signed - 1965

    Nixon Elected - 1968

    sure it's "popular" but that's not all there is too it.

  • on a comment on An Earful in Pittsburgh over 4 years ago

    No, Bruh has no interest in answering. He also misses the point, it's not like Obama is opposed to the public option, or is campaigning against it.

    The problem lies in Congress - with the 30-40 Blue Dogs and the 8-12 Dem Senators who have opposed it or still refused to state a clear position.

Diaries

Advertise Blogads