BTW, this isn't a new phenomenon, it's been going on for years and needs to stop.

 

Here's a book that might be a good read for some of you:

 

What Makes You Think We Read the Bills by H. L. Richardson

Heck, I thought he was drunk. :idunno:

Unless he said, just kidding, what's it matter?

 

His words: “I love these members, they get up and say, ‘Read the bill,What good is reading the bill if it’s a thousand pages and you don’t have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill?"

 

This is why it matters . . . obviously you didn't watch the entire interview:

 

From Clyde

I watched the entire speech and not just 36 selected seconds. IMO he said that a)the bill is still bad (he's for single payer) and b)if you have to have thousands of pages and lawyers at your side while reading it its a bad bill. He says its too much of the same.

 

This is one more poor example of how the media uses sound bites without providing full context.

 

From Acemona -

If you want to attack someone, be intellectually honest about it. It was quite obvious there was more to it. And again, you guys knew it but thought you would get by with something easy.

This is why it matters . . . obviously you didn't watch the entire interview:

 

From Clyde

I watched the entire speech and not just 36 selected seconds. IMO he said that a)the bill is still bad (he's for single payer) and b)if you have to have thousands of pages and lawyers at your side while reading it its a bad bill. He says its too much of the same.

 

This is one more poor example of how the media uses sound bites without providing full context.

 

From Acemona -

If you want to attack someone, be intellectually honest about it. It was quite obvious there was more to it. And again, you guys knew it but thought you would get by with something easy.

 

If he thinks it's a bad bill I will be interested to see how he votes.

If he thinks it's a bad bill I will be interested to see how he votes.

 

He thought a 1000 page bill was bad. Now it's 2000 so you never know. He admitted he doesn't read them anyway.

This is why it matters . . . obviously you didn't watch the entire interview:

 

From Clyde

I watched the entire speech and not just 36 selected seconds. IMO he said that a)the bill is still bad (he's for single payer) and b)if you have to have thousands of pages and lawyers at your side while reading it its a bad bill. He says its too much of the same.

 

This is one more poor example of how the media uses sound bites without providing full context.

 

From Acemona -

If you want to attack someone, be intellectually honest about it. It was quite obvious there was more to it. And again, you guys knew it but thought you would get by with something easy.

 

I agree w/ you. I actually agree w/ him. If the bill is that large and you don't understand it why read it? He's only voting on it to become the law of the land. Hopefully he either misses the vote or just is present for the vote but doesn't vote yay or nay. I actually hope that anybody that doesn't read it or understand it vote yes.

This is why it matters . . . obviously you didn't watch the entire interview:

 

From Clyde

I watched the entire speech and not just 36 selected seconds. IMO he said that a)the bill is still bad (he's for single payer) and b)if you have to have thousands of pages and lawyers at your side while reading it its a bad bill. He says its too much of the same.

 

This is one more poor example of how the media uses sound bites without providing full context.

 

From Acemona -

If you want to attack someone, be intellectually honest about it. It was quite obvious there was more to it. And again, you guys knew it but thought you would get by with something easy.

:lol:

 

It's a bad bill because he doesn't understand it or didn't fully read it? Correct? Unless you can show me otherwise, it's not I that's being intellectually dishonest nor is it the media just using sound bites. No on had shown that he read the entire bill or understood it. All I have is Clyde saying that in his opinion he was saying two things. I need a little more clarification.

 

Clyde, do you have a link to the entire speech and did you get the impression that he a) read the whole thing or b)he understood it?

 

And ace, if it was true he read the entire thing with lawyers by his side because that's what it took then it just proves how Obama is no different than, say, Bush and how disingenuous Obama really is. I'll be waiting for you to slam Obama on his dishonesty in this case. I'm sure I won't hold my breath though.

I agree w/ you. I actually agree w/ him. If the bill is that large and you don't understand it why read it? He's only voting on it to become the law of the land. Hopefully he either misses the vote or just is present for the vote but doesn't vote yay or nay. I actually hope that anybody that doesn't read it or understand it vote yes.

 

Wow!!!

 

So, we won't people deciding things in our future that don't know what they are voting on?

 

Like someone mentioned above, you don't have time to read it, than make time.

 

Understand what you are voting on. And that is for all sides. I don't care whether you are a Democrat, Republican, Independent or whatever.

Here's the full speech. Its about 20 minutes in.

 

http://www.press.org/video/player.cfm?type=lunch&id=18298

:lol:

 

It's a bad bill because he doesn't understand it or didn't fully read it? Correct? Unless you can show me otherwise, it's not I that's being intellectually dishonest nor is it the media just using sound bites. No on had shown that he read the entire bill or understood it. All I have is Clyde saying that in his opinion he was saying two things. I need a little more clarification.

 

Clyde, do you have a link to the entire speech and did you get the impression that he a) read the whole thing or b)he understood it?

 

And ace, if it was true he read the entire thing with lawyers by his side because that's what it took then it just proves how Obama is no different than, say, Bush and how disingenuous Obama really is. I'll be waiting for you to slam Obama on his dishonesty in this case. I'm sure I won't hold my breath though.

 

I didn't realize Obama wrote the bill

Wow!!!

 

So, we won't people deciding things in our future that don't know what they are voting on?

 

Like someone mentioned above, you don't have time to read it, than make time.

 

Understand what you are voting on. And that is for all sides. I don't care whether you are a Democrat, Republican, Independent or whatever.

 

My my lst sentence should have said nobody instead of anynody. I think it's a joke that anyone can vote for a bill they don't read or understand. I was trying to lay the sarcasm on thick w/o smiley faces.

I think it's a joke that anyone can vote for a bill they don't read or understand.

 

People vote for everything without reading or understanding. Should we really think the Congress would be any different?

I didn't realize Obama wrote the bill

That's what we call, taking the easy way out... :lol:

 

You know darn well he's ready to sign anything that they put in front of him on this issue, just to try to make it look as if he's actually gotten something done. Many of you will give him all the credit as soon as it's signed and you come at me with "I didn't realize Obama wrote the bill". That's being disingenuous IMO, ace.

 

What happened to the guy that, while he was running, was going to bring change and transparency to government?

 

Remember when he said several times that he intended to negotiate health care reform publicly? In fact, he said, he'd televise the negotiations on C-SPAN, with all the parties sitting at a big table. That way, Americans would be more engaged in the process and insist on real change. Where'd that go? :idunno: Just one of many lies, those that voted for him should feel totally duped.

That's what we call, taking the easy way out... :lol:

 

You know darn well he's ready to sign anything that they put in front of him on this issue, just to try to make it look as if he's actually gotten something done. Many of you will give him all the credit as soon as it's signed and you come at me with "I didn't realize Obama wrote the bill". That's being disingenuous IMO, ace.

 

What happened to the guy that, while he was running, was going to bring change and transparency to government?

 

Remember when he said several times that he intended to negotiate health care reform publicly? In fact, he said, he'd televise the negotiations on C-SPAN, with all the parties sitting at a big table. That way, Americans would be more engaged in the process and insist on real change. Where'd that go? :idunno: Just one of many lies, those that voted for him should feel totally duped.

 

 

Well here is the thing, it would be a violation of the separation of powers for him to tell Pelosi and Reid how to go about writing the bill. He has done a good job of not force feeding what he wants and that has caused some serious issues in the passage. However, he has insisted that he get a bill this year. If he gets a bill and signs it, I will make the assumption that he knows what is in whether Conyers does or not. I will also giving him credit for charging his party leaders in congress with doing something and them getting it done.

 

isn't that the way it should probably work.

Well here is the thing, it would be a violation of the separation of powers for him to tell Pelosi and Reid how to go about writing the bill. He has done a good job of not force feeding what he wants and that has caused some serious issues in the passage. However, he has insisted that he get a bill this year. If he gets a bill and signs it, I will make the assumption that he knows what is in whether Conyers does or not. I will also giving him credit for charging his party leaders in congress with doing something and them getting it done.

 

isn't that the way it should probably work.

 

Do you really think that this President and EVERY OTHER PRESIDENT does not have their hand in bills written at Congress that is coming from their party as well as some influence on the bill coming from the other party that they are supportive?

 

Separation of powers is irrelevant in today's political world of bills getting written.

 

Back at budget and stimulus time, didn't O put his two cents in about pork being added to the bills?