Welcome to PatsFans.com

Obama addresses House GOP conference

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by JackBauer, Jan 29, 2010.

  1. JackBauer

    JackBauer Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,328
    Likes Received:
    324
    Ratings:
    +808 / 6 / -9

    I just wanted to pass along the video: Daily Kos: State of the Nation

    This is pretty fascinating stuff. It's 86 minutes long, but very much worth watching. It starts with some prepared remarks, but there's a Q&A session at the end, as well.

    If you're at all interested in politics, you'll probably want to watch this. Can't really say I've seen anything like this in my (relatively short) lifetime.

    Really the best part of the whole thing, from Marc Ambinder:

    See, we really can all get along.
     
  2. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,784
    Likes Received:
    250
    Ratings:
    +631 / 17 / -16

    #24 Jersey

    He'll get Republicans to work with him when he's ready to work with them. If he deals with bi-partisan issues in a bi-partisan way then he'll get decent support from them. However if everything goes the way of the healtcare fiasco he won't. It's really very simple.
     
  3. JackBauer

    JackBauer Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,328
    Likes Received:
    324
    Ratings:
    +808 / 6 / -9

    Depends what your definition of bipartisan is. If it's, as it has been, "all or nothing," then no, that dog won't hunt.

    You should really watch the video, since he addresses that point.
     
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2010
  4. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,536
    Likes Received:
    239
    Ratings:
    +392 / 15 / -14

    Boy, Obama is smart, even brilliant, and I don't expect any conservative to find this video enjoyable. In fact, I heard Fox News, unlike the other news stations, actually cut away from it. LOL.

    It's nice to see the Republicans for a change commit a political blunder, by giving Obama this kind of forum. I guess they really bought into the nonsense that Obama can't talk without a teleprompter. Felled by their own lies.
     
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2010
  5. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,784
    Likes Received:
    250
    Ratings:
    +631 / 17 / -16

    #24 Jersey

    I heard decent length parts on the radio. He didn't give much of an answer to Paul Ryan other than confusing mandatory and discretionary spending. Regardless, "my way or the highway" will get him the highway.
     
  6. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,536
    Likes Received:
    239
    Ratings:
    +392 / 15 / -14

    Not sure what you're talking about. Here's the transcript. If you don't mind, do a search for "discretionary" and show me where you think he confused it:

    President Obama House Republicans Transcript

    Frankly, he was brilliant, and I certainly did not agree with many of his objectives.
     
  7. ljuneau

    ljuneau Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2007
    Messages:
    1,286
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    I watched most of the video. I have to hand it to the President - he didn't have to attend the conference, it was a politically brave move on his part. Something that should be done more often in the future.

    My hope is that it was not all for show - that something of substance comes out of it. I'm not sure if it will bridge the many differences between the left and right, but I think it is a start.

    No matter, it was a good thing for the President to do.
     
  8. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,784
    Likes Received:
    250
    Ratings:
    +631 / 17 / -16

    #24 Jersey

    Ryan asked about the 84% increase and obama babbled about mandatory (without saying the word) increases. When Ryan said the 84% was discretionary, obama refused to answer :

    CONGRESSMAN RYAN: . . . The spending bills that you’ve signed into law, the domestic discretionary spending has been increased by 84 percent.

    THE PRESIDENT: Let me respond to the two specific questions, but I want to just push back a little bit on the underlying premise about us increasing spending by 84 percent . . . were not as a consequence of policies that we initiated but instead were built in as a consequence of the automatic stabilizers . . .

    "CONGRESSMAN RYAN: I would simply say that automatic stabilizer spending is mandatory spending. The discretionary spending, the bills that Congress signs that you sign into law, that has increased 84 percent.

    THE PRESIDENT: We’ll have a longer debate on the budget numbers, all right?"


    obama's full answer is too long so I cut and pasted. But Ryan asked about the 84%, obama gave an answer about mandatory spending, Ryan pointed out the 84% was discretionary and obama said "no mas".
     
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2010
  9. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,784
    Likes Received:
    250
    Ratings:
    +631 / 17 / -16

    #24 Jersey

    BTW, I think Paul Ryan will be an outstanding Presidential candidate in either 2012 or 2016. I realize he's "just" a house member and could run for the Senate first but when people laugh at the blank slate that is the future of Republican Presidential candidates, he is very impressive.
     
  10. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,784
    Likes Received:
    250
    Ratings:
    +631 / 17 / -16

    #24 Jersey

    Oh my lord. I just saw Chrissy, Odorman and Madcow playing the segment I quoted above and orgasming over each other because of all the words obama used but not noticing he got the answer wrong. LMAO at MSNBC, what a bunch of morons.
     
  11. Stokes

    Stokes In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,423
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Yeah, Ryan totally owned him on that one, Obama got it dead wrong didn't he?

    Patters, I'm SHOCKED that you think he knocked it out of the park. This guy could take a sh1t on the whitehouse lawn and you would fawn over how great a statement he made.

    Also nice that he took the time to admonish Republicans for accepting earmarks and coming down on the side of getting rid of them now that he is no longer a Senator accepting more earmarks than anyone.

    Also an interesting tidbit I've taken from reading the Reagan diaries was the staggering amount of time he spent talking with and courting Congressional democrats, making good faith negotiations to pass what he saw as his critical reforms. He didn't always get what he wanted, but it was a great example of a President really working in a bipartisan manner. Much better than admonishing the other party at the SOTU.
     
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2010
  12. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,536
    Likes Received:
    239
    Ratings:
    +392 / 15 / -14

    Most everyone thinks he did a great job. He demonstrated a great command of the facts, was consistent in his call for bipartisanship (which I largely disagree with), and over and over exposed the pettiness of the Republicans sound-bit questions. People who watched it, including Republicans, were very impressed.

    And where are you getting your info from about him admonishing the Republican Party for earmarks when what he said is:

    "I will tell you, I would love for Congress itself to show discipline on both sides of the aisle. I think one thing that you have to acknowledge, Paul, because you study this stuff and take it pretty seriously, that the earmarks problem is not unique to one party."

    I'd love to know where you're getting your info because you've been misinformed.
     
  13. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,536
    Likes Received:
    239
    Ratings:
    +392 / 15 / -14

    I think Obama wants to see how Ryan came up with the 84% number. My guess, Ryan is including the stimulus bill and the bailouts and treating them as normal budget items. I can find nothing on that 84% anywhere except from Ryan's comments in the speech. What makes you think the number is correct and fair, when there's absolutely no source? Blind faith in Ryan?
     
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2010
  14. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,784
    Likes Received:
    250
    Ratings:
    +631 / 17 / -16

    #24 Jersey

    Ryan is very highly regarded for his knowledge on budgets, obama does NOT want to get into it with him.

    That aside, that is clearly not the intent because obama acknowledges the 84% (see my quotes above) but misleads where the 84% comes from.
     
  15. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,536
    Likes Received:
    239
    Ratings:
    +392 / 15 / -14

    I think the only way you come up with the 84% is to include the stimulus money, but if I'm correct then Ryan's statement, "You now want to freeze spending at this elevated beginning next year," wouldn't make sense (unless he believes Obama plans another stimulus bill).

    I know nothing about Ryan, but I suspect he's not on solid ground with his claim. Here's a chart from the Heritage Foundation, which I suspect is a thinktank you would generally respect. It would seem to support Obama's point more than Ryan's. Can you explain Ryan's point in light of this chart?

    [​IMG]

    Mandatory Spending Has Increased Five Times Faster Than Discretionary Spending
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2010
  16. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    40,799
    Likes Received:
    231
    Ratings:
    +870 / 2 / -9

    Tea Party's & Scott Brown are stirring the Hornets up.

    He addressed them because he's starting to panic, nobody faints when he blows his nose anymore and his Obamacare is dead.

    His act won't work, he is what he is (partisian hack)
     
  17. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,536
    Likes Received:
    239
    Ratings:
    +392 / 15 / -14

    He addressed them last year. The only difference between this year and last year is that he did a great job making their questions look mean-spirit and disingenuous by offering detailed refutations and repeatedly calling for bipartisanship. If you listened to it, you'd have a fairly hard time criticizing Obama. I think the Republicans fell for the teleprompter b.s. and were caught offguard by his command of the facts and his ability to speak eloquently off the cuff.
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2010
  18. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,784
    Likes Received:
    250
    Ratings:
    +631 / 17 / -16

    #24 Jersey

    Just like obama, I don't know enough about the budget to answer the question - it's like taxes, it's just too complicated. But, again, obama doesn't dispute the 84% in the way you are, he tries to push it off on something else. If it were as simple as including a one time stimulus then obama should have said that and not rambled on about mandatory spending.

    There's no doubt mandatory spending is going to absolutely kill us. Good thing obama is trying to reform them.

    :bricks:
     
  19. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    25,200
    Likes Received:
    124
    Ratings:
    +316 / 9 / -13

    Tood bad the pols never reformed SS and Medicare when the demographics were more favorable now we are in big trobule. Good chart Patters catches the problem perfectly.
     
  20. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,536
    Likes Received:
    239
    Ratings:
    +392 / 15 / -14

    Obama said yesterday,

    THE PRESIDENT: The major driver of our long-term liabilities, everybody here knows, is Medicare and Medicaid and our health care spending. Nothing comes close. Social Security we could probably fix the same way Tip O’Neill and Ronald Reagan sat down together and they could figure something out. That is manageable. Medicare and Medicaid — massive problem down the road. That’s where — that’s going to be what our children have to worry about.

    Now, Paul’s approach — and I want to be careful not simplifying this, because I know you’ve got a lot of detail in your plan — but if I understand it correctly, would say we’re going to provide vouchers of some sort for current Medicare recipients at the current level –

    CONGRESSMAN RYAN: No.

    THE PRESIDENT: No?

    CONGRESSMAN RYAN: People 55 and above –

    THE PRESIDENT: Fifty-five and — well, no, I understand. I mean, there’s a grandfathering in, but just for future beneficiaries, right? That’s why I said I didn’t want to — I want to make sure that I’m not being unfair to your proposal, but I just want to point out that I’ve read it. And the basic idea would be that at some point we hold Medicare cost per recipient constant as a way of making sure that that doesn’t go way out of whack, and I’m sure there are some details that –

    CONGRESSMAN RYAN: We drew it as a blend of inflation and health inflation, the point of our plan is — because Medicare, as you know, is a $38 trillion unfunded liability — it has to be reform for younger generations because it won’t exist because it’s going bankrupt. And the premise of our idea is, look, why not give people the same kind of health care plan we here have in Congress? That’s the kind of reform we’re proposing for Medicare. (Applause.)

    THE PRESIDENT: No, I understand. Right, right. Well, look, as I said before, this is an entirely legitimate proposal. The problem is twofold: One is that depending on how it’s structured, if recipients are suddenly getting a plan that has their reimbursement rates going like this, but health care costs are still going up like that, then over time the way we’re saving money is essentially by capping what they’re getting relative to their costs.

    Now, I just want to point out — and this brings me to the second problem — when we made a very modest proposal as part of our package, our health care reform package, to eliminate the subsidies going to insurance companies for Medicare Advantage, we were attacked across the board, by many on your aisle, for slashing Medicare. You remember? We’re going to start cutting benefits for seniors. That was the story that was perpetrated out there — scared the dickens out of a lot of seniors.

    No, no, but here’s my point. If the main question is going to be what do we do about Medicare costs, any proposal that Paul makes will be painted, factually, from the perspective of those who disagree with it, as cutting benefits over the long term. Paul, I don’t think you disagree with that, that there is a political vulnerability to doing anything that tinkers with Medicare. And that’s probably the biggest savings that are obtained through Paul’s plan.

    And I raise that not because we shouldn’t have a series discussion about it. I raise that because we’re not going to be able to do anything about any of these entitlements if what we do is characterized, whatever proposals are put out there, as, well, you know, that’s — the other party is being irresponsible; the other party is trying to hurt our senior citizens; that the other party is doing X, Y, Z.

    (For anyone wondering, I'm quite certain the President's words are in the public domain and not copyrighted, thus more than four lines.)
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>