# Barney says it like it is



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Love him or hate him, on this one Barney got it right...

Here he is showing his fellow Democrats how it should be done:






Hello, Democratic members of Congress? Be like Barney, please. Nowhere is it written that Democratic elected officials have to be ceaselessly polite to lunatics-whether they're showing up at town hall meetings, sitting in Congress themselves, or ranting away on cable news. Your sane constituents will applaud you for calling BS on the politically and criminally insane.

Grow a collective set already.

And to top it off.... When I watched it, the next "suggested YouTube clip" was of Hannity's show. In it, they showed clips of Barney standing up to the mob with an introduction of "listen to how Rep. Frank responds to perfectly legitimate questions about deficits and gov't control of healthcare." Not once did they actually play the "you're a Nazi" comments from the audience, they just assured us that the audience was concerned citizens with reasonable questions and that elitist Frank was attacking them.

I don't watch alot of Fox News so although I know they are often a 24hr right wing lie machine, I figured there was no way (or need ) to spin this story.... sadly I discovered this wasn't true. I was surprised at how bad it was; I guess I should have known better....

:eyeroll:

.


----------



## swift (Jun 4, 2004)

typical classless and clueless Barney Frank.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

yeah ... his reply was really off base. I mean that question that was posed to him, and his reply mentioning the signs being displayed were completely off base.... considering how completely sane and thought provoking her highly in depth question was to him. right?

yeah... sorry I missed the obvious lack of class and tact in his reply given the question(s) and comment(s) thrown his way... you know... considering how classy and tactful the original question was presented to him.

yeah...

sorry 'bout that. :lame:


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Barney is in a lock district, where he will die or retire to not be re-elected, hence he does not have to tell the truth, answer question etc.. they will vote D even if the person was catch raping a child!!!!!!

That being said if you watch the other clips from this event it is clear, that he had no real answers to real questions. The give and take regarding the hyperbole is not a representation of the meeting. It was clear the attendees knew much more than he did, and that they also do not want the Gov to get into the HC business any more than it already is!!!!!!!

Oh by the way Ryan where are the poll numbers for Dem Congress and your Messiah going? Where are the trust factors going as well?

They are about to do in 2 years what it took GW 8 years to do!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Here is my take on this.

1. He is an elected official he should not have made the comments he did. He should have not have directed comments directly at the lady. He should not have said that he could not have an intelligent conversation with the lady. he totally down graded her. That is very unprofessional.

2. I understand he probably was under attack the whole meeting but elected officials should understand that they will hear comments from both side for and against an issue. He should learn how to deal with it.

3. He did not have answers to questions asked and he gave people the run around. So that will anger a crowd even more since they were on edge to begin with.

So to sum up...
1. acted unprofessional 
2. Let the heat of the moment get to him. 
3. Was not informed enough to answer questions asked to him.

Now tell me is this what you want in an elected official supposed to represent the people?

One thing now a days these elected officials think that once elected they only have to listen or please the people who elected them.....wrong. They are still representing the entire state not just the 60% or what ever voted them into office. Just like now....Obama is still representing the whole country....not just the people who voted for him. Sad to say it he is still my leader. Will I faithlessly and blindly follow him...no. But he is the president of the United States he represents me and all citizens of this country.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

Frank and Specter are a lot alike, they get mad and yell back at people, typical of a defenseless position as a politician.

Obama is vilifying the insurance companies, because he doesn't have any fresh ideas, other than government control of a system he doesn't understand and a plan to ration care, so illegal aliens can be admitted for coverage right next to legal citizens. you don't think there will be massive demonstrations and outrage when this happens? got news for you and Obama, he may be impeached over this before it is enacted into law.


----------



## API (Jul 14, 2009)

Ron Gilmore said:


> Barney is in a lock district, where he will die or retire to not be re-elected, hence he does not have to tell the truth, answer question etc.. they will vote D even if the person was catch raping a child!!!!!!


Barney's ditrict must be like Pelosi's. CA 8 http://www.house.gov/pelosi/8thdistrict/CA8thMap.html is populated by a bunch of selfish scummy low life types that have no recognition of what common decency and national best interest really is.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

And then we have a cute little retort from that famous Conservative drug abuser Rushie...






You stay classy Rushie... you stay classy


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

One thing though ryan.....Rushie is not an elected official. It is like saying Howard Stern needs to be classy. They are radio/tv/entertainment personalities. Not elected officials.

How would you or the other media be if a Republican acted in this way? You would be all over it too.

For four years the Dems or Liberal media has been bashing bush. Now that it is on the other foot and the Reps or conservative media is bashing obama and others they seem not to take it that well.

Again. If any elected political officail acted like the first video clip no matter what the situation and calling someone unintelligent is wrong. Period.


----------



## Sportin' Woodies (Jun 26, 2006)

barney frank is a piece of shat.
now that it's ok to throw out personal insults.


----------



## API (Jul 14, 2009)

R y a n said:


> And then we have a cute little retort from that famous Conservative drug abuser Rushie...
> 
> You stay classy Rushie... you stay classy


Criticizing Rush doesn't change the fact that Barney's an idiot *******.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

One can never guess what might come out of Barney's mouth, or go in. However, it is without doubt he is one of the most corrupt people in Washington. He forced the banks to give shaky loans, then pushes to take them over when they fail. He puts one group against another and claims to be for both. He, Pelosi, Reid, and a bunch of others need to all go before this country can run right.


----------



## NDTerminator (Aug 20, 2003)

swift said:


> typical classless and clueless Barney Frank.


I would add criminally negligent scumbag punk with an overinflated sense of importance... :eyeroll:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

It's interesting that the liberals don't get the Hitler implication. I guess they don't pay attention to Hitler. Hitler's first move was to take over health care. Marx said that people are the most vulnerable to relinquishing thier liberty in exchange for a secure health care program. Even if that health care program only appears secure.
Health care and gun control are the cornerstones of socialist and communist take over of free nations. If you look at the history of the past 100 years you will find those two things implemented prior to every fall of freedom.

Maybe the liberals do get the Hitler implication, they just pretend not to in the hopes idiots will not get it. After all the vote of an idiot is just as good as the vote of a genius.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Come on guys give Ryan a break!!! After all this is the first bit of what he could call good news in a while!!!!!! Heck he needs a public option health care program to pay for the depression meds that he has to take since his Messiah has fallen in the polls faster than any Pres before him!!!!!!!!

His circle of Kum by Ya singers is done to just him and he is lonely!!!!!!!!


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> I don't watch alot of Fox News


They are number one. Not watching them is perhaps why most people are way ahead of you on information. You can't just bury your head in those tabloid things.
It's sort of like this. If I want to know about politics I will ask Ron, Hunter, NDTerminator, Chuck, DecoyDummy, etc etc. If I want to know about crop circles and octomoms I'll ask the people who don't watch FOX. 

If you think carrying a sign is bad what do you think about the liberals when they riot and overturn cars and burn them? Do you remember the laws that Denver had to enact before the democrat convention? Do you remember they had to write in no throwing of excrement? I guess the liberals throw feces like less monkeys rather than act like more evolved conservatives.  On a more serious note though the liberals are much more vocal, and much more violent when they protest.


----------



## DecoyDummy (May 25, 2005)

All this dust will begin to settle in the ballot booths on November 2, 2010.

We won't know the true intent of the American People til then. We have 14 more months of this craziness.

These Politicians will be in a heavier campaign mode next year which might make it easier to hold the line.

All I can say is if the confusion between now and then helps protect our 
Constitution from additional attack, I'm a happy boy.


----------



## Longshot (Feb 9, 2004)

Or maybe you prefer to continue to listen to Clinton. His first few comments about made me sick.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Our toxic assets are Obama, Pelosi, Reid, etc.

The way Clinton lays it out sure makes it look like they have planned the demise of the banks for a long time. Barney did his best to create bad loans, then liberals used the bad loans and bank troubles to take over the banks. The banks didn't create the problem, they were forced into it by Barney and people like him. This looks like all a planned move to full fledged socialism. 
Can you believe Clinton made fun of Putin for saying we are destroying capitalism. Putin warned we would destroy our free market and our economy if the government takes over the banks, and Clinton said he favors those things Putin warns of. Who ever thought a communist would make more sense than our own leaders?


----------



## omegax (Oct 25, 2006)

They picked up on this last night on The Daily Show. I don't remember the exact quote, but Stewart was ripping on the extreme logical stretch it takes to conflate a gay jew with the Nazis.

Reductio ad Hitlerum: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

I hope you are not getting info from John Stewart. Because his "news" show is on a Comedy Network. So about 1/8 of what he says might be facts the rest is written to make jokes.

But if you look at history and how Hitler came to power. You can make distinctions with Obama. They (both of them) came to power during economic down cycles of their respected country's. They both implemented goverment control over institutes (banking, industry, health, military, etc). They have socialistic ideals. ETC....So comparing them is not as "crazy" or "insane" as people say it is.

Now do I think Obama will break into my home and drag me out at gun point and throw me into camps, etc. NO. But does he want control over everything.....Lets looks at it ....Banking- YES....industry (auto)-Yes. Health Care....Not yet. Military - He is the commander and chief. So to compare him with Hitler is not crazy because he is doing the same things Hitler did in his rise to power. Goverment control. The only difference is that Hitler did not have a Congress. But now with the congress that has "complete" power and can push legislation through if they feel fit.

Now with all that said....Hitler did bring germany out of their economic down turn. He made them i a world power. But with his rise also came his fall. Even if he did not the horrific things that he did. The country economic structure fell because of socialism. Look at the USSR. Contact people over there ask them how they are doing.

So a shift towards socialism could ruin this nation.

Remember for those of you who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

Hitler identified and rounded up his opponents as well and exterminated them. so far Obama has started a "list", on what grounds would he begin to round up people? identifying them as political terrorists? gun owners?
yeah, all this bull$hit is right around the corner.....if he gets his way.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> I hope you are not getting info from John Stewart. Because his "news" show is on a Comedy Network. So about 1/8 of what he says might be facts the rest is written to make jokes.


Chuck, tell me it aint so.  How about Saturday Night Live? That's sort of a documentary right? :rollin: Wow, what can I say?

I just watched a rerun of Stewart on OReilly. He admitted that OReilly was not an ideologue and that he (Stewart) got paid to take cheap shots at people. He said it wasn't a bad gig. So there you go fellas, right from the horses aaaahhhhh ---- mouth.


----------



## omegax (Oct 25, 2006)

It's satire, not news.

As far as Stewart only taking cheap shots: http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0809/Conservatives_flock_to_Daily_Show.html



> [Bill] Kristol, a frequent guest, is also influencing other conservatives, like former GOP spokesperson Cliff May, to take a chance on the show.
> 
> [May] had a change of heart after soliciting advice from his friend Bill Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard. "Kristol told me: 'You'll be pleasantly surprised. He doesn't take cheap shots. Jon is smart. You'll do just fine.'" Kristol proved to be right. Stewart's interview of May - a crackling, lengthy debate about where to draw the line between freedom and security - produced one of the most clarifying discussions about torture on television. "Literally, this is the best conversation I've had on this subject anywhere," May told Stewart.


Kristol is actually my favorite guest. He's reasonable. He's fairly funny. He's smart enough to hold his own, usually (Stewart got him to admit that the US government runs the best healthcare system in the world last time he was on). The best discussions always seem to be disagreements between smart, reasonable people.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

> I hope you are not getting info from John Stewart. Because his "news" show is on a Comedy Network. So about 1/8 of what he says* might be* facts the rest is written to make jokes.
> 
> Chuck, tell me it aint so. How about Saturday Night Live? That's sort of a documentary right? Wow, what can I say?


Plainsman....I should have highlighted the words *MIGHT BE*.

Omegax



> The best discussions always seem to be disagreements between smart, reasonable people.


I agree 100% Jon Stewart is very smart guy and I have always liked him. But that is part of the problem is people take his show as "news" with a comic side. They quote him like they would the NY Times.

Here is my thing. If you are a Lib. You should still watch Fox. If you are a Cons. you should still watch Msnbc. Because both sides do not portray the news 100% accurately. Just the delivery of the news by a reporter can sway to one side of an disagreement. Hand jesters, tone of voice, facial expression, etc can distort news.

Now with that said I will say last night I was watching Fox and MSNBC. O'Reily was giving Obama and the Dems credit with some of the stuff in the HC bill. He was taking it point by point agreeing and disagreeing. Then I was watching MSNBC and Rachel Maddow was on. Talking about Health Care bill. She had a guest on saying that 80% of the country wanted a public option. When all the polls say it is not so. Hmmm....who is trying to distort the news.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> Here is my thing. If you are a Lib. You should still watch Fox. If you are a Cons. you should still watch Msnbc.


Bingo. Some liberals will not watch FOX simply because they can not stand the truth. No doubt in my mind that some simply don't want us to know the truth either.



> Now with that said I will say last night I was watching Fox and MSNBC. O'Reily was giving Obama and the Dems credit with some of the stuff in the HC bill. He was taking it point by point agreeing and disagreeing. Then I was watching MSNBC and Rachel Maddow was on. Talking about Health Care bill. She had a guest on saying that 80% of the country wanted a public option. When all the polls say it is not so. Hmmm....who is trying to distort the news.


I have seen this many times where only FOX tells the truth. There has to be a reason they are running over the others in numbers of people watching. Were sick of the bias other networks exhibit.

Very good points Chuck. Very good.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

Rachel Madow and Chris Matthews would have to be required viewing before they could ever begin capturing *a fraction *of the audience that views Fox....they are so one sided that no one believes them and only watches because they are just plain ignorant.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Plainsman said:


> > Here is my thing. If you are a Lib. You should still watch Fox. If you are a Cons. you should still watch Msnbc.
> 
> 
> Bingo. Some liberals will not watch FOX simply because they can not stand the truth. No doubt in my mind that some simply don't want us to know the truth either.


Not true. Some liberals won't watch FOX because they obviously only care to pander to the right on all things. FOX rarely even attempts to give an objective point of view.

I watch all the above, amongst a host of other choices too.. (public TV like McLaughlin Group for example) that has folks for both/all sides of the spectrum. Amongst the Sunday morning shows, (I tape all of them btw), I'd have to say that CBS Face the Nation, and ABC w/ Stephanopoluos are the best, as they really try to present balanced commentary, with representative from both parties, and government officials are also brought in. You can't deny that George Will isn't a strong ally of Conservative logic for that show, and what's his name is a huge Conservative ally on McLaughlin.



> Now with that said I will say last night I was watching Fox and MSNBC. O'Reily was giving Obama and the Dems credit with some of the stuff in the HC bill. He was taking it point by point agreeing and disagreeing. Then I was watching MSNBC and Rachel Maddow was on. Talking about Health Care bill. She had a guest on saying that 80% of the country wanted a public option. When all the polls say it is not so. Hmmm....who is trying to distort the news.


Chuck the fact of the truth is that the majority of Americans do want a public option. Not sure where you are seeing information that leads you to believe that as you put it... it "just isn't so"... what it does lead me to believe is that since you are overwhelming presented and barraged with coverage of a vocal MINORITY of dissenters (who try over-representing the weight of their opinion) on Fox News, that you then are led to believe that the opinion presented on the news is indeed the majority. _ Rather_.... the news is putting the freak show on TV, because it is shock TV of screamers that bring the best ratings.



Plainsman said:


> I have seen this many times where only FOX tells the truth. There has to be a reason they are running over the others in numbers of people watching. Were sick of the bias other networks exhibit.
> 
> Very good points Chuck. Very good.


Not sure what "truth" you are referring to Plainsman. Very rarely do I watch Fox, and am shocked at a revelation that I haven't considered before that makes me believe _only they_ are being truthful. Once you start watching all the news shows, and begin to see where they are pandering to a certain slant of politics, and presenting ideas that follow that particular flavor of political idealogue, you begin to see that they are flat out catering to the "base". whether it is Fox or MSNBC.

Ohhh and "the reason" (once again repeatedly pointing this out to you ad nauseum), that Fox has numbers over the others has to do with simple math.

(Note I'm using hypothetical numbers in this example to make a point below)
If there are 4 networks, 3 being something other than Conservative, and 1 being Conservative,.... and then you have the Conservative network (Fox) pulling in a 35% share, and the other networks pulling in 20%, 25%, and 20%, yes indeed... in that scenario you have Fox "Winning"

But you see... Fox has no competition in the Conservative space... the others are all competing with each other for the remainder of the pie.

If you combine all their numbers... as a representative _*overall*_ statistic...

Fox loses as the Conservative channel gets 35% and the liberal channels get the remaining 65%.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

> Chuck the fact of the truth is that the majority of Americans do want a public option. Not sure where you are seeing information that believes you it "just isn't so"... it leads me to believe that since you are overwhelming presented with coverage of a vocal MINORITY of dissenters (who try over-representing the weight of their opinion) on Fox News, that you then are led to believe that the opinion presented on the news is indeed the majority. Rather.... the news is putting the freak show on TV, because it is shock TV of screamers that bring the best ratings.


I am seeing people at town hall meetings, democrates now balking at the public option (even obama), reading in news papers, watching tv (all media not just fox, msnbc, cnn, etc). One of the out rages is the public option. People feel it will bankrupt our nation. I also have emailed my elected officials both state and at the federal level. I have heard back from 2 of the federal.....they say they are not 100% on board for the public option. Some of my state level officials have said they will try to over rule a federal option saying it infringes on States rights. So what I am personally seeing is that 80% is not an accurate number. So where I live in the midwest I don't see people wanting the public option. But maybe where you live you are....different regions.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

> Not true. Some liberals won't watch FOX because they obviously only care to pander to the right on all things. FOX rarely even attempts to give an objective point of view.


I guess you did not see O'Riley last night. He was commending Obama on many things. Not only HC issues but on how he is not withdrawing troops and is letting that play out accordingly and other international affairs.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

But back on the original topic....

Do you think the actions of Barney Frank were correct for being an elected official? Did he act with the class that elected officials should?

Like I posted before what if this was a republican spouting off calling someone unintelligent and that they could not hold a conversation with them. Is that professional. Like I said I am sure he was getting screamed at, ridiculed, etc. But he is an elected official he needs to take the good with the bad.  He needs to act professional. In this clip he is not.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Chuck Smith said:


> > Chuck the fact of the truth is that the majority of Americans do want a public option. Not sure where you are seeing information that believes you it "just isn't so"... it leads me to believe that since you are overwhelming presented with coverage of a vocal MINORITY of dissenters (who try over-representing the weight of their opinion) on Fox News, that you then are led to believe that the opinion presented on the news is indeed the majority. Rather.... the news is putting the freak show on TV, because it is shock TV of screamers that bring the best ratings.
> 
> 
> I am seeing people at town hall meetings, democrates now balking at the public option (even obama), reading in news papers, watching tv (all media not just fox, msnbc, cnn, etc). One of the out rages is the public option. People feel it will bankrupt our nation. I also have emailed my elected officials both state and at the federal level. I have heard back from 2 of the federal.....they say they are not 100% on board for the public option. Some of my state level officials have said they will try to over rule a federal option saying it infringes on States rights. So what I am personally seeing is that 80% is not an accurate number. So where I live in the midwest I don't see people wanting the public option. But maybe where you live you are....different regions.


Yes Chuck you are seeing people at town hall meetings. No doubt. You are being manipulated with all of this "shock coverage"

The sad fact is that these folks are presented as representing "the majority", when in fact the majority is sitting at home.

Consider how many folks in these bigger cities being shown on TV have for populations. Yet you only see 100 people at a meeting... not truly representative.

You are being lied to concerning the "public option" Chuck. Try watching some other coverage and learning just what the proponents mean by public option. It will not bankrupt anyone. That is a scare tactic. Look at the huge profits being made by current private insurance. Will it reduce their overall profits, if a certain percentage of their business migrates to a public option? Sure. Will it bankrupt them? Doubtful.

Just remember that private insurance is paying HUGE $$$$ to special interest lobbyists to sway your opinions with ads. And you are falling in line ... hook, line and sinker.

Just remember that millions of older Americans are currently using a public option with MediCare. You think they are willing to give up their public option? Why not?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> I watch all the above, amongst a host of other choices too..


Ryan, I am amazed you know so much, yet understand so little.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Chuck Smith said:


> > Not true. Some liberals won't watch FOX because they obviously only care to pander to the right on all things. FOX rarely even attempts to give an objective point of view.
> 
> 
> I guess you did not see O'Riley last night. He was commending Obama on many things. Not only HC issues but on how he is not withdrawing troops and is letting that play out accordingly and other international affairs.


The problem with O'Reilly is that he only occasionally makes these concessions, in order to maintain a "air" of objectiveness.

In reality he rarely makes those statements, and is deeply partisan most days.

One thing I'll give you is Glenn Beck's recent attempts on his show trying to break down and interpret the big picture for folks. His recent shows have done a fairly honest job of explaining this huge mess of healthcare. I appreciate that he is trying to take a different tact. Too bad his vile rhetoric done to pander to the militant right, has not gotten him an unannounced immediate vacation...


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> Too bad his vile rhetoric done to pander to the militant right, has not gotten him an unannounced immediate vacation...


Since when is telling the truth vile? Have we lost all sense of right and wrong? If Obama is a racist and someone says they think he is a racist is it wrong? Look at your accusations towards Palin. Which by the way were proven wrong. As a matter of fact you took it in the shorts hard a couple of times. People got on your case too, but I happen to agree with Beck. If you don't like it prove it's bs like we did with your Palin statements.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Chuck Smith said:


> But back on the original topic....
> 
> Do you think the actions of Barney Frank were correct for being an elected official? Did he act with the class that elected officials should?
> 
> Like I posted before what if this was a republican spouting off calling someone unintelligent and that they could not hold a conversation with them. Is that professional. Like I said I am sure he was getting screamed at, ridiculed, etc. But he is an elected official he needs to take the good with the bad. He needs to act professional. In this clip he is not.


I know a TON of Democrats that have applauded Barney for finally having the balls to stand up to the crazy hate rhetoric being pushed by a vocal minority.

If the R's had folks standing up to them at meetings and spewing a bunch of racist hate speech, and making crazy comparisons in an attempt to get on TV and disrupt an informational meeting... then YES I would be completely supportive of a Republican who told him to shut the frack up and sit down and at least participate in a civil manner.

So to answer your question Chuck. Yes in my opinion, given what was happening over and over and over across the country in an obviously organized attempt at disruption, a US Senator had the correct response to publically reply to a crazy constituent in a manner that befitted the context of the question with a reply that matched the logic, intelligence and tenor of said presenter.

I have no problem with a random person becoming passionate and frustrated with a public official at a meeting. Good for them to exercise their public right to Free Speech. And if done articulately, respectfully, randomly, and with genuine spontaneity, they should be heard. But this was not that, and any objective person would be able to see the difference.

And if someone did express themselves articulately, respectfully, randomly, and with genuine spontaneity, and let's say that even if they threw in a few F bombs and used a loud voice, an elected official should indeed use a calm, professional manner in replying.... and yes that should be the expected methodology. But these types of planned outbursts are not that, and should be dealt with differently.

My .02


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> But these types of planned outbursts are not that, and should be dealt with differently.


Look at the people at those meetings. The ones who have planned it have nice professional printed signs. The grass roots who come on their own have magic marker signs. Listen to them and decide which side has planned demonstration.



> making crazy comparisons in an attempt to get on TV and disrupt an informational meeting


I thought town hall meetings were where the politicians went to meet with their constituents and find out what they wanted. Obama doesn't understand that. At his last town hall they counted words. Obama was spoke 88% of the words while the people who came to express their opinions and ask questions only spoke 12% of the words. This is not the intent of town hall meetings.



> and let's say that even if they threw in a few F bombs


That would make them liberals like you Ryan.

Ryan, I think the reason some of these people get loud is because to many of our politicians are thick headed. If they were calm the politician would think he was free to run rough shod over them. I think that's why people are hollering at them. Anything less would not soak through their thick arrogant skulls.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Come on Plainsman, you know full well that ACRON and other groups like this are all grass roots people who are passionate about what they do. It is why they have to advertise on Craigslist in PA,CA,OR and FL that I can find for paid attendees to go to these meetings in support of the NObamaCare!!!!!

Ryan is a typical liberal, in denial of what is happening! Only will watch CNN or MSNBC, will hoot and holler when Stewart grills a Rep, but claim indignation when it happens to a Dem claiming that it was out of context!!!!!!!!

I was not at the Colfax event with Dorgan! However the video of part of the event shows a clearly distressed Dorgan who had no answers and was forced to disavow public option HC knowing full well not doing so means he will need unemployment come Jan 2011!!!!! The people grilling him are his own voters from the past!!!!!!!!

Ryan expected a long run of the Dems, but is seeing that their ride may be very short lived!!!!


----------



## omegax (Oct 25, 2006)

Plainsman said:


> Look at the people at those meetings. The ones who have planned it have nice professional printed signs. The grass roots who come on their own have magic marker signs.


I actually saw behind-the-scenes footage of one of these groups making their signs and getting ready for a town hall. The thing that sticks out in my head is one of the officials telling people not to make their signs too nice, because they want to make sure they look homemade.

Holding a town hall is walking into a trap. The fringe groups keep goading congress people into holding these things, just so they can appear to be more mainstream by packing the town hall meeting. It's actually brilliant. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that it's only "fringe" people who object. However, it's pretty tough to argue with the fact that packing a town hall with your people is a great way to seem like more people agree with you than actually do.

Personally, if I were a a rep or senator, I would hold on-line chats or do things like a Slashdot discussion, where people vote on questions in advance and the top rated questions are answered in-depth. You certainly want to make sure you're answering people's questions, but town halls are a trap.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> I actually saw behind-the-scenes footage of one of these groups making their signs and getting ready for a town hall. The thing that sticks out in my head is one of the officials telling people not to make their signs too nice, because they want to make sure they look homemade.


I will be there in less than an hour. Then I will tell you if the footage you watched was made up or real. I think it was bs, but we will see.


----------



## omegax (Oct 25, 2006)

I'm sure it's not reflective of all of the meetings. I was just saying that sign quality isn't necessarily an indicator.


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

R y a n said:


> Fox loses as the Conservative channel gets 35% and the liberal channels get the remaining 65%.


So you admit that the remaining channels are "liberal" in bias?

Than enough of calling Fox a "24 hour right wing lie machine"......the conservatives have their channel, the liberals have theirs, which are JUST as big a "lie machine" as fox. Somewhere IN BETWEEN the two, is the real truth.

As far as Frank, hes an idiot and a perfect example of why term limits are needed at the congressional level as well. I expect an elected official to take the high road. Which he most definitely did not. Turn the tables, had a republican representative stooped that low and personally attacked a constituent like Frank did, the 24 hour left wing lie machines D) would have been up at arms. Pelosi would have been telling liberals to "yell and scream" at the top of their lungs to stop such demeaning behavior in an elected official. (As you'll all remember, she was all for speaking out against an administration and raising a ruckus during the Bush years, but now, if you speak out against her plan, your rude, crude, and a Nazi!........funny how that works.)

The democrats in support of this are like rats on a sinking ship right now, desperation is a stinky cologne.


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

omegax said:


> Holding a town hall is walking into a trap. The fringe groups keep goading congress people into holding these things, just so they can appear to be more mainstream by packing the town hall meeting. It's actually brilliant. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that it's only "fringe" people who object. * However, it's pretty tough to argue with the fact that packing a town hall with your people is a great way to seem like more people agree with you than actually do.*


Really? You really believe that? You really really REALLY think the people showing up to protest at these meetings do not agree with the protest?

If someone asked me to come to a town hall meeting to protest something, or informed me of a town hall meeting which would give me the opportunity to protest, and I didn't agree with them protesting, I certainly would not attend.

I think its pretty safe to say ALOT of people DO NOT agree with what this administration is trying to do. I think this issue has hit a "cord" with alot of people, their mad, nervous, or downright scared of the direction this could go 5-10 years down the road, and their FINALLY speaking out.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Well, I have to hit the sack, but thought I would tell you I am back from the town hall meeting with Dorgan. 
One sign, very professional, but I think she did it as an individual. However, I do have an interesting story. I thought it would be standing room only so I went an hour early. There was no one there at 6:30 so I sat in the parking lot. In pulls a van full of people. The driver was wearing a red sweat shirt with white letters that said "Working America". Some of the others removed theirs. The funny thing is they didn't go in together. Then when they got inside they didn't sit together. Everyone of them spoke, and came off as one of the crowd. Some identified themselves. They all looked college age. The ones who identified themselves were all from Fargo. I think this is the group I heard was getting paid.
I think this group was more even with about 60% against public health care and 30% for. I guess the other 10% was there for something else. Cap and Trade and other things came up. 
Dorgan made fun of the people who didn't believe in global warming. Not cool. Something about a guy living in his garage in Texas didn't believe it either ---- I don't remember.


----------



## API (Jul 14, 2009)

barebackjack said:


> ...I think its pretty safe to say ALOT of people DO NOT agree with what this administration is trying to do. I think this issue has hit a "cord" with alot of people, their mad, nervous, or downright scared of the direction this could go 5-10 years down the road, and their FINALLY speaking out.


As a point of reference, within the past 8 months, I have written to state and federal politicians, attended tea parties, and town halls; expressing my thoughts many many times more than in the preceding 40+ years.

My opinion is that Obamacare (not to mention a host of other liberal insanity) is a product that I do not want and do not wish forced upon me. Look at the results of Obama to date: 

The "cap n trade" fiasco 
Poorly managed "stimulus" program 
Unpaid car dealers screwed by "cash for clunkers" program
Unelected "czars" running amok deciding stuff

It's like the Obama folks think that all they need to snow the people is a nice "buzz term" and then the sheep fall in line.

What we have now is a political group who would implement what they perceive to be best without consideration of cost or for what people really want. Now these clowns want to manage our health care.

These politicians are supported by an MSM that drinks deeply from the kool aid jug of Obama logic mixed well with conjured up immaterial "facts", and panting for the short term gratification.

Like rational thinking people who care about the long term best interests of our country, I pass on the kool aid!

One can rest assured that my protests are my own and not group think.

...and most assuredly, when I survey my surroundings while expressing my thoughs, I clearly am not standing alone.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

API said:


> barebackjack said:
> 
> 
> > ...I think its pretty safe to say ALOT of people DO NOT agree with what this administration is trying to do. I think this issue has hit a "cord" with alot of people, their mad, nervous, or downright scared of the direction this could go 5-10 years down the road, and their FINALLY speaking out.
> ...


 :thumb:


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Funny how all the town hall meetings going on in MN it is like what plainsman stated.... about 60-70% not in favor of the Public Option and then 20-30% for and about 0-10% not really vocal about it at all.

Not much screaming but when someone had an outburst each politician was polite.

I understand Frank had people scream, shouting, and what not. But still a politician needs to still be held to a higher level. He should not speak down to or degrade a person. That is just unacceptable. And to be honest I think less of anyone for commending this man and his behavior. He acted unprofessionally period.

Now on the public option.

You say the private insurance company makes $$$$ of dollars and record profits. Well look at one thing....they price the coverage per risk. Now a public option will not make $$$$ like a privat company they are not charging for PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS. So how will it not go bankrupt if they are not doing pre-screening or charging accordingly.

Here is another look at how a public option will force people into it.....Lets say you own your own business and you provide health benefits. One of the ways that is purposed to pay for the Public option is to tax employers who don't pay for coverage. Now if this tax is less than what you as an employer would pay in benefits would you think about dropping your benefits program to save money in this tough economic times? I know I would as a person who owns my own business. If i could save thousands of $$ I would. ALso look at how many people get dental coverage or eye care coverage....that would be gone under the public option. If employer went with just getting taxed instead. But again the people for the public option will say you will not lose any coverage.

You want to talk about Reps using a "Scare tactics".....so are the dems. They say an insurance company can drop you when you get sick....they can't. Even if you did not have the coverage for lets say cancers treatments. If you get cancer they can't just drop you unless it is written in the policy. But again about 90% of people who have insurance or any insurance (auto, home, etc.) don't read or understand their policy.

Also another thing the dems are not talking about.....they say they need more competition......There are over 60 health insurance company's in the united states. Did you know that...do they talk about that. I don't think so.

So again I will ask for those in favor of a public option because of the "more competition" angle that the dems keep spewing.....Wouldn't lifting state mandates and reconfiguring them be cheaper and create more competition than just adding a "Public Option"?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> ALso look at how many people get dental coverage or eye care coverage....that would be gone under the public option.


I told Dorgan that at the town hall meeting. He said he supports a public option. As a retired federal employee I still purchase federal Blue Cross, Blue Shield. We pay for it when we are working also. However, the federal government gets it's fingers into price negotiations. I have no eye care and no dental. Two years ago another program started and I purchase separate insurance for eye care which is ok, but the dental is still poor. If you think your private insurance has rationing you should see the federal insurance. Every time I go to the clinic the receptionist will say "ooohhh, you have the federal don't you". They know it's crap insurance. I can only imagine what the public option would be like. You guys don't even want to drop to what mine is, but I'll bet the public option will be worse.


----------

