Buy My Book Here

Fox News Ticker

Please check out my new books, "Prosecutors Gone Wild: The Inside Story of the Trial of Chuck Panici, John Gliottoni, and Louise Marshall" and also, "The Definitive Dossier of PTSD in Whistleblowers"

Saturday, September 26, 2009

Point Counter Point Weekly Addresses

This week's presidential address was all about the UN and G20 meetings that just took place. You gotta hand it to the president. He immediately said that in those meetings the world took "tangible steps to meet the world's challenges". He the spent the better part of the next four minutes being as vague as ever. He said that the world agreed to a series of reforms to make sure that boom and bust economies wouldn't occur anymore. What those reforms were though he didn't say? He touted a non enforceable resolution in which the Security Council agreed to destroy all loose nuclear material in four years. He also touted the meeting between Abu Mazen and Bibi Netanyahu in which the two agreed that they should keep speaking and not much else.

The president also said the world was "united" in making sure that Iran would not get a nuclear weapon. This followed the revelation that Iran has a second nuclear reactor that appears to only have a military purpose. The world seems to always be "united", in words that is, about the fact that Iran can't get a nuclear weapon. Yet, the world doesn't seem to do too much with that unity and that frankly goes back to the Bush administration and before that. The only tangible thing that President Obama said was an agreement to cut $300 billion in world wide subsidies for fossil fuels. Beyond that, the entire address was full of nice sounding but nebulous words like "reform", "unity", and "global agreement", and frankly none of them meant anything of substance. If there was a tangible step made toward world peace I missed it in this address because all I heard was vague soaring rhetoric.

Johnny Isakson, senator from Georgia, delivered the Republicans' response. His address focused on health care and we heard the exact same talking points we've heard from the Republicans throughout this debate. He slammed the Democrats plan as costing too much, being a government takeover, and being a burden on the states. He repeated the reforms the Republicans are for portability, allowing insurance to be sold across state lines, and tort reform.

Isakson slammed the Baucus proposal as essentially more of the same. He said the Baucus bill paid "lip service" to tort reform while it was yet another expansion of government. He also slammed the Democrats for demonizing the town hall attendees and for trying to put a gag order on Humana. There was nothing new here but since the Republicans are winning the debate there really didn't need to be.


Anonymous said...

Frankly, I think people are tuning the Republicans out. Every single thing they have said has been exposed as a deliberate fallacy. The American People don't like being played for chumps.

The Tea-Party is over.

mike volpe said...

What you think and reality are two different things. Tort reform, selling across state lines, and portability of insurance have not been exposed as anything because they are sensible solutions to the problem. So, that appears to be your opinion and not that of anywhere near the majority.

Anonymous said...

The only critique that has gotten any traction is people losing their the insurance they have now. That very prospect is the CENTERPIECE of the what little the Republicans have proposed for health care reform.

mike volpe said...

The cost of health care reform hasn't gotten any traction. Yeah. Death panels, insurance for illegals, tax payer funded abortions, those are all things the president is still saying are lies and has to counter them. The president even paid lip service to tort reform. I don't know where you are coming from with these comments.

Anonymous said...

I haven't heard the word "death panel" for weeks. Its almost like the media is ashamed to admit they helped perpetuate that lie.

Cost? Maybe you should have thought about that before you used the CBO to bludgeon the Democrats over the head earlier this year, because they're reporting savings for both Baucus' plan and the Public Option.

Maybe the idea that the Democrats shot down enforcement amendments for the no-undocumented immigrants subsidy gained some traction, but now that Baucus agreed to implement those ideas its drawing more attention to how badly written it was. The way its written now there will be more legal immigrants denied coverage than anything else.

The President's numbers are bouncing, health care reform's numbers are bouncing, the public option's numbers have ALWAYS been high, even with Republicans.

mike volpe said...

I'm proud of you except you are only one of three hundred million people. The president mentioned them in his speech and in his whirlwind sunday morning tour. So, that's a week. I haven't tracked it for a week but that's all I'll give you.

As for the CBO, that hasn't been scored, but you are confusing two issues. It may very well be revenue neutral but that doesn't mean it won't cost money. There will be added taxes and cuts to Medicare to make up for the costs, but it will cost in the neighborhood of a trillion over the next decade.

Again, if you are going to claim something back it up. Health care has been bouncing in the low 40's. The public option isn't popular with Reps that absurd. It isn't popular with the public. If everything you say were true, we'd already have a law by now.