Who writes a 1000 page medical care bill or a 1000 page bill of any
kind? Believe it or not, much of the legislation is written by the
special interest groups the legislation will affect.

On Aug 3, 11:17 am, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote:
> dick,
>
> You are attempting to not understand that it is our political system
> itself that is corrupt and broken. To not realize that for a long time
> American voters only choice has been the fucking bum they thought
> would to the least amount to damage. You feign shock and dismay at
> finding out professional politicians exaggerate and even lie as if you
> were a 6 year old being told Santa Claus is not real. Republicans are
> not going to "fix" any problems "caused" by Democrats. They will just
> replace them with "problems" for us all that THEY like. Same thing
> goes for the Democrats.
> And, trust me on this, CONGRESS is NOT going to reform CONGRESS.
> Some of you guys want to pretend our political system was just
> invented 6 months or so ago. ridiculous. I'll be deliriously happy if
> this administration is just a TINY BIT more transparent that the past
> one.
>
> On Aug 3, 9:50 am, dick thompson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > For a change I can agree with you.  However the devil is in the details
> > with these people.  Your last paragraph is why I look for some
> > Cincinnatus to come on the scene and do the right thing.  I certainly
> > don't expect it from this crew.
>
> > I found it interesting that the congressman from upstate New York was
> > quoted in the media lately that he would no longer hold town hall
> > meetings since he could not get a good dialogue going - meaning that the
> > people who showed up told him what he was supporting was not what they
> > elected him to support.  He did not like having to answer for what he
> > was doing - and he was a Blue Dog Democrat.
>
> > Then there was the senator from Missouri who called the cops when the
> > constituents got too rowdy  in complaining about what she was doing in
> > DC.  Guess she couldn't handle the opposition of her own constituents.  
> > Another Democrat.
>
> > But we are having an administration and a congress dedicated to
> > transparency, don'tcha know.  Nothing hidden at all.  No siree Bob,
> > nothing hidden anywhere.  Just czars and tiny little people who get so
> > puffed up about how important they are.
>
> > Hollywood wrote:
> > > dick,
>
> > > Hmmmm, don't let anyone with a degree in law be invilved in writing
> > > ANY bill.  Make it law that bills must be written using language an
> > > average citizen with a public High School education can understand.
>
> > > I want that as well. But good luck getting those Republican AND
> > > Democratic assholes to take any sort of responsibility for their
> > > actions. Cinyers is right in his statement. Could YOU read and
> > > understand a 1,000 page bill in 48 hours? I couldn't it.
> > >  Bills are all about keeping people from knowing what you're REALLY
> > > doing, the REAL effect it will have on your life. You just give them
> > > noble-sounding titles so people will be afraid to go on record as
> > > having voted against them.
>
> > > On Aug 3, 8:49 am, dick thompson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > >> What good would that do.  All they would talk about was the high points
> > >> that San Fran Nan and Waxman wanted - and even then it is the wording of
> > >> the bill that causes the problems.  You need to actually see how it is
> > >> worded so you can tell what the real significance of the various parts
> > >> of the bill are - and also whether you have one part canceling another.  
> > >> Why put it on PBS.  I can just see the commentary from PBS on that one.  
> > >> Daniel Schorr telling yu what he wants you to hear.  No, I want the
> > >> congressman to actually read and understand what he is voting for.  
> > >> Another point is what good would the questioning be at the testimony.  
> > >> It would be like the priests in the Middle Ages reading to the peasants
> > >> what the Bible said and they interpreted it in the way to make the most
> > >> money for the Church.  The questioning could only be based on what they
> > >> were told and not on the tricky parts of the bill.
>
> > >> Hollywood wrote:
>
> > >>> dick,
>
> > >>> How about this? Someone wrote that bill, or it would not exist. Have
> > >>> those people testify in public in front of an appropiate Congressional
> > >>> committee as to what is in that bill. The key it that the testimony
> > >>> must be given UNDER OATH and put that testimoney on the internet and
> > >>> on PBS. And then prosecute to the fullest any lies caught with no
> > >>> statute of limitations.
>
> > >>> On Aug 2, 8:48 pm, dick thompson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > >>>>     Too Big to Pass
> > >>>>     <http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/08/024175.php>
>
> > >>>> <http://twitter.com/home?status=Reading:%20Too%20Big%20to%20Pass%20at%...>
> > >>>>   Share Post 
> > >>>> <http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/08/024175.php#>
> > >>>>   Print
> > >>>> <http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/08/024175.php?format=print>
> > >>>> August 1, 2009 Posted by John at 6:44 PM
>
> > >>>> One of the most notorious news stories of the past week was Democratic
> > >>>> Congressman John Conyers' ridiculing
> > >>>> <http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,535244,00.html> of the idea that 
> > >>>> he
> > >>>> and his fellow legislators should actually read bills--here, the health
> > >>>> care "reform" act--before voting on them:
>
> > >>>>     I love these members that get up and say, Read the bill! Well, 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've 
> > >>>> read
> > >>>>     the bill?
>
> > >>>> The version of the health care bill that passed the House's Energy and
> > >>>> Commerce Committee on a 31-28 vote is here
> > >>>> <http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090714/aahca.pdf>. I've
> > >>>> spent some time looking at it and, unlike most people, I am
> > >>>> professionally qualified, in theory, to understand it. But, at over
> > >>>> 1,000 pages, it's a pretty hopeless task.
>
> > >>>> So I would propose a simple, bright-line rule. In recent months many
> > >>>> observers have said that if a company is too big to fail (i.e., in a
> > >>>> pinch the government will bail it out), then it is too big to exist. I
> > >>>> think there is a lot of merit to that idea. Here is my corollary: if a
> > >>>> bill is too vast for a Congressman to read and understand, it is too 
> > >>>> big
> > >>>> to pass. If a Congressman can't read the bill, he shouldn't vote for 
> > >>>> it.
> > >>>> The appropriate response to any such legislation is: just vote "No."
>
> > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/08/024175.php-Hidequoted
> > >>>>  text -
>
> > >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to