Metal Sludge Gossip Board

Unless you work for a Union. Can these fuckers be any more corrupt?
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/01/13/re ... -special-e

I mean, seriously, you want to TAX people, because they have great health care coverage? WTF? And, to say "oh, except those union people, the ones that give us so much cash and support". These fuckers make me sick.

this whole health care mess reeks of corruption, the dems have been having to bribe each other to get the bill passed, Mr Transparency has met behind closed doors with Big Pharma, all the times Obama has lied or gone back on his word, the whole thing reeks of corrupt Chicago politics

oh wait

The guy who promised he would change the way politics is done in Washington is a fucking liar, far worse than G.W. Bush and Bill Clinton combined. If Mr. Obama was sincere about changing politics in Washington he would have never needed to threaten no bribe Ben Nelson. Thank You Mr. Obama for insuring the fact you will be a one term president and the next president we will elect in 2012 will be a Republican or even a third party. Democrats are done the dumb bastards had their chance and they fucked it up!


January 20, 2013 Barack Obama's last day as President!

LOL at anyone believing a bunch of campaign promises. That's the whole point of campaign promises - candidates make a whole bunch of them to get elected, and then they take office and realize that some of them are impossible to keep! Such as changing the way politics is done in Washington - come on, how was he supposed to accomplish that?

January 20, 2013, eh... who's going to succeed him, Sarah Palin?

By the way Vinnie, The American Spectator, really? Do you get any of your news from sources that aren't slanted to the far right?

Ugmo wrote:LOL at anyone believing a bunch of campaign promises. That's the whole point of campaign promises - candidates make a whole bunch of them to get elected, and then they take office and realize that some of them are impossible to keep! Such as changing the way politics is done in Washington - come on, how was he supposed to accomplish that?

January 20, 2013, eh... who's going to succeed him, Sarah Palin?

But come on the lying peace of shit said that it was "CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN". The guy said he was going to change the politics in Washington and its up to us to hold him up to it but if we dont want to do it than its our fault but I'm doing my job in holding him up to it. For a guy who promised change the last thing he needed to do is threaten another senator to vote for his health plan or else. That shit is beyond the typical politics in Washington, he basically put the politics in Washington on steroids.

Seriously dude, I belong with Teamsters Union and majority of the people in Teamsters Union supported Obama. I can safely say alot of those people regret their vote for the guy and for other Democrats as well. So yeah if Obama keeps his shit up alot of those people will vote somebody like Sarah Palin to get rid of Obama. Hopefully there will be better candidates and I'm sure there will be plenty to choose from and people will be paying closer attention to the persons background versus they're words. Obama got elected by his words and now those words dont hold water and that is fucked up. I'll be glad to see the fucking liar get voted out and be gone by January 20, 2013. I honestly believe it's going to happen and will moreso believe it when the results for the Massachusetts senate race is over and Scott Brown wins it. If Martha Coakley wins than I will be saying Obama has a chance but I know the tide is turning and it didnt take long. Cant wait until this tuesday.

So what? We've been taxed on our premiums (self-employed) above a certain threshold for years. And we certainly don't have a fancy GOOD plan.

Join the club.

I am quite displeased with a lot of the Dems in Congress, though. Fuck the healthcare "industry".

Ugmo wrote:By the way Vinnie, The American Spectator, really? Do you get any of your news from sources that aren't slanted to the far right?

Where do you get YOUR news, Ug?

WhiteHouseSubsAC wrote:

Ugmo wrote:By the way Vinnie, The American Spectator, really? Do you get any of your news from sources that aren't slanted to the far right?

Where do you get YOUR news, Ug?

I get my news almost exclusively from Spiegel in Germany and Kurier in Austria. When I read U.S. news sources it's mostly stuff like the LA Times, the Washington Post and the New York Times (and I know the right-wing nutbars here are going to claim those are left-wing rags, but I challenge them to name something more reputable).

I will admit to watching the Daily Show though, which, while not actually "news" per se is clearly slanted to the left. But very rarely do I scan through left-wing zealot news sources to read opinions I agree with anyway. What would be the point of that? More to the point, if I do discover something at a left-wing source that I consider interesting enough to post, I certainly search whether a less biased source has the same information so that people will take the link seriously.

Thebottomline wrote:But come on the lying peace of shit said that it was "CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN". The guy said he was going to change the politics in Washington and its up to us to hold him up to it but if we dont want to do it than its our fault but I'm doing my job in holding him up to it. For a guy who promised change the last thing he needed to do is threaten another senator to vote for his health plan or else. That shit is beyond the typical politics in Washington, he basically put the politics in Washington on steroids.

Seriously dude, I belong with Teamsters Union and majority of the people in Teamsters Union supported Obama. I can safely say alot of those people regret their vote for the guy and for other Democrats as well. So yeah if Obama keeps his shit up alot of those people will vote somebody like Sarah Palin to get rid of Obama. Hopefully there will be better candidates and I'm sure there will be plenty to choose from and people will be paying closer attention to the persons background versus they're words. Obama got elected by his words and now those words dont hold water and that is fucked up. I'll be glad to see the fucking liar get voted out and be gone by January 20, 2013. I honestly believe it's going to happen and will moreso believe it when the results for the Massachusetts senate race is over and Scott Brown wins it. If Martha Coakley wins than I will be saying Obama has a chance but I know the tide is turning and it didnt take long. Cant wait until this tuesday.

See, by and large Obama has followed through on what he said he would. He has tackled the major issues he said he would and has been relatively successful with them. On the campaign trail these guys spend like 15 hours a day making promises. Of course afterwards you can say "He promised A, B, C, D and E and he didn't follow through on C - he's a LYING PIECE OF SHIT!!!!" Well is he really, or did he just find out that the realities of Washington made it unable for him to follow through on C?

As far as him promising to change politics in Washington, how likely was that to happen? He wasn't elected supreme emperor for life. Seems to me anyone who truly expected Obama to get into office and within one year competely change the way Washington has worked for the past 30, 40 years was being naive. The guy doesn't govern in a vaccuum.

And look, once the campaign ramps up again in 2012, no one at all is going to care about this or that "lie" he made in 2008. People are going to make their decision based on whether they feel the country is on the right track. And really - all these people who are so pissed off about Obama's "lies" - did they vote for him in the first place, or is this just sour grapes?

The tax on health care plans is smoke-and-mirrors bullshit in and of itself. It wouldn't apply to most Americans as it is anyway - only those with very expensive healthcare plans would pay it. The union exemption is not expected to be permanent, either - it would expire in 2018.

Not that it matters, the entire tax is a moot point for most Americans, union or otherwise. As a concession to unions, this is relatively meaningless.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/polit ... 90182.html

This article is NOT Democrat-friendly, but it does lay out in a little more detail than Vinnie's link exactly who would have to pay the tax. Only plans valued at $24,000 and up for a family or $8,900 and up for individuals would be taxed. Most families pay around thirteen grand a year for their coverage.

Hahaha @ "great" health care coverage. Sure, if by "great" you mean "really, really, really expensive and more than most of could ever afford to begin with".

Ugmo wrote:

Thebottomline wrote:But come on the lying peace of shit said that it was "CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN". The guy said he was going to change the politics in Washington and its up to us to hold him up to it but if we dont want to do it than its our fault but I'm doing my job in holding him up to it. For a guy who promised change the last thing he needed to do is threaten another senator to vote for his health plan or else. That shit is beyond the typical politics in Washington, he basically put the politics in Washington on steroids.

Seriously dude, I belong with Teamsters Union and majority of the people in Teamsters Union supported Obama. I can safely say alot of those people regret their vote for the guy and for other Democrats as well. So yeah if Obama keeps his shit up alot of those people will vote somebody like Sarah Palin to get rid of Obama. Hopefully there will be better candidates and I'm sure there will be plenty to choose from and people will be paying closer attention to the persons background versus they're words. Obama got elected by his words and now those words dont hold water and that is fucked up. I'll be glad to see the fucking liar get voted out and be gone by January 20, 2013. I honestly believe it's going to happen and will moreso believe it when the results for the Massachusetts senate race is over and Scott Brown wins it. If Martha Coakley wins than I will be saying Obama has a chance but I know the tide is turning and it didnt take long. Cant wait until this tuesday.

See, by and large Obama has followed through on what he said he would. He has tackled the major issues he said he would and has been relatively successful with them. On the campaign trail these guys spend like 15 hours a day making promises. Of course afterwards you can say "He promised A, B, C, D and E and he didn't follow through on C - he's a LYING PIECE OF SHIT!!!!" Well is he really, or did he just find out that the realities of Washington made it unable for him to follow through on C?

As far as him promising to change politics in Washington, how likely was that to happen? He wasn't elected supreme emperor for life. Seems to me anyone who truly expected Obama to get into office and within one year competely change the way Washington has worked for the past 30, 40 years was being naive. The guy doesn't govern in a vaccuum.

And look, once the campaign ramps up again in 2012, no one at all is going to care about this or that "lie" he made in 2008. People are going to make their decision based on whether they feel the country is on the right track. And really - all these people who are so pissed off about Obama's "lies" - did they vote for him in the first place, or is this just sour grapes?

Not even close to being naive. Okay so he cant change the politics in Washington but he does not have to go along with it and play their game and thats my point. He spoke out heavily on it while on the campaign trail. So you say he's making good on all his other promises, thanks for the laugh. I remember all too well when said if elected president he was going to pull all the troops out of Iraq within 30 days and close down Gitmo within 30 days as well. I remember that well because he said that when he was here in Portland, Oregon.

I guarantee it if McCain had run a campaign on "Hope and Change" and promised the same damn thing Obama promised and was elected there would be more liberals screaming murder right now.

Thebottomline wrote:Not even close to being naive. Okay so he cant change the politics in Washington but he does not have to go along with it and play their game and thats my point. He spoke out heavily on it while on the campaign trail. So you say he's making good on all his other promises, thanks for the laugh. I remember all too well when said if elected president he was going to pull all the troops out of Iraq within 30 days and close down Gitmo within 30 days as well. I remember that well because he said that when he was here in Portland, Oregon.

I guarantee it if McCain had run a campaign on "Hope and Change" and promised the same damn thing Obama promised and was elected there would be more liberals screaming murder right now.

Honestly, I don't really look at things in those kind of specifics. You're talking about very specific campaign pledges that are easy to call him on, whereas I'm talking about the overall direction of his administration, which is pretty much a 180 to Bush's on most issues.

What do you specifically mean when you're saying change the politics in Washington? Are you talking about gridlock with the Republicans? Are you talking about lobbyists? Campaign finance reform? My guess is that it became pretty evident to Obama once he took office that he could be an idealist president who doesn't get anything at all done, or he could be a pragmatist who gets as much as possible done within the confines of a system that is virtually impossible to change (and certainly can't be changed within a year).

I mean, if he ever pledged to pull all the troops out of Iraq within 30 days, then that was a stupid, stupid promise, and he realized once he became president what a bad idea that was.

I don't know about Gitmo... seems like a no-brainer to close it immediately, but maybe he has run into legal obstacles there that we don't know about. I really doubt he decided out of the blue that Gitmo was a tremendous institution that should be maintained. If he hasn't closed it immediately there might be a good reason for that.

I don't really understand the McCain comparison. If McCain had run a hope and change campaign and pledged to do everything differently from Bush, he would have been the Democrat. My feeling is that one year is waaaaay too early to assess whether his presidency has or will continue to be a success, considering the massive challenges he's facing. I personally am pretty happy with most of his decisions so far and very relieved that he is now the guy running the show.

Let me ask you another question (that you obviously don't have to answer): did you vote for Obama? If not, how can you be upset about him not delivering on promises he made during the campaign?

I guess Jake Yonkel has a legitimate reason to be upset if he feels Obama didn't keep his campaign promises, but people who voted for the other guy now bitching about broken campaign promises... I don't know what the word is for that, but crocodile tears kinda comes close.

Ugmo wrote:By the way Vinnie, The American Spectator, really? Do you get any of your news from sources that aren't slanted to the far right?

Ah yes, dismiss the facts, because you disagree with the source.
Hows Rueters?
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60E0KJ20100115
How about the Wall Street Journal?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB2000142 ... 79432.html
Washington Post?
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/201 ... -deal.html
Surely the Boston Globe isn't a right wing newspaper, right?
http://www.boston.com/business/healthca ... back_care/


And, you want to know what Obama promised that he backed out on that pisses off people? How about the "Post Partisan Washington". Exactly how many GOP leaders are consulted about ANYTHING that is going on in Washington? ZERO.

How about all of the following:
End income tax for seniors making less than $50,000. (panders to the elderly, then fucks them)
End no-bid contracts above $25,000 (Panders to the Anti-Halliburton mob, then fucks them)
Direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services to conduct a comprehensive study of federal cancer initiatives
(No new studies ordered.)
Allow five days of public comment before signing bills.
(We all know this shit doesn't happen)
Tougher rules against revolving door for lobbyists and former officials.
(turned around and allowed people to serve in positions that could influence the businesses they left behind)
Double funding for afterschool programs.
(Pander to the single parents/working parents, then refusing to follow through)
Urge states to treat same-sex couples with full equality in their family and adoption laws.
(Pandering to the homosexual lobby, then refusing to help them)
Allow bankruptcy judges to modify terms of a home mortgage.
(pandering to the poor/financially challenged, then turning his back on them)
Pay for the national service plan without increasing the deficit.
(HAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA! Yes, make public service mandatory (just like the Nazis did) and have it NOT increase the deficit)
Reduce earmarks to 1994 levels.
(I know we can all agree this was total bullshit)
Create a $3,000 tax credit for companies that add jobs.
(well, spending half a million to CREATE a job didn't help them any)
Allow penalty-free hardship withdrawals from retirement accounts in 2008 and 2009.
(pandering to the elderly AND the poor, and fucking them)
Recognize the Armenian genocide.
(I guess if America had did it, he would have been apologizing for it)

and
Negotiate health care reform in public sessions televised on C-SPAN.
(We all know this shit didn't happen)

So, even if you DIDN'T vote for this piece of shit, you are still effected by how he lied his fucking ass off.

And it's funny that the excuse is "well, he couldn't change things". HORSE SHIT.
There are a ton of ways to make sure things got done, how he promised. Make a vow to NOT sign a bill with earmarks, and guess what, you'll get bills with no earmarks. Plain and simple.

Want to have a white house filled with no former lobbiests? Then don't hire any.

The solutions are simple, but he wont do them of course.

Why didn't you post the more reputable links then? That's what I'm talking about. You don't see me posting Daily Kos or Huffington Post links when I can find the same info at more reputable sites.

VinnieKulick wrote:And, you want to know what Obama promised that he backed out on that pisses off people? How about the "Post Partisan Washington". Exactly how many GOP leaders are consulted about ANYTHING that is going on in Washington? ZERO.

This again. Vinnie, if the GOP leaders aren't being consulted it's because they rebuffed any attempt by Obama to foster bipartisanship. Seriously, quit propogating this old canard. Obama gave the GOP plenty of opportunities to show they take bipartisanship seriously, and they have obstructed EVERYTHING so far. At some point Obama is going to say "Okay, screw you guys, if all you care about is politics." And that's what happened.

I'll go through your list when I get the time, but my sense is he can't do all of those things at once. What with trying to pass health care reform with absolutely no support from the GOP and dealing with a huge economic crisis, he's kind of had his hands full.

VinnieKulick wrote:Allow bankruptcy judges to modify terms of a home mortgage. (pandering to the poor/financially challenged, then turning his back on them)

This is the first thing I picked out of your list, and this is the first thing I found within a few seconds:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 00286.html

For the second time in two years, a provision to allow bankruptcy judges to modify mortgages died in the Senate today, handing the Obama administration a significant defeat in its plans for arresting the foreclosure crisis.

So what you're accusing him of backing out on, he actually addressed and lost a Senate vote on. Is the rest of your list like this?

Ugmo wrote:Why didn't you post the more reputable links then? That's what I'm talking about. You don't see me posting Daily Kos or Huffington Post links when I can find the same info at more reputable sites.

Again, complaining about the source, and not the information. I gave you a few links, obviously the INFORMATION is correct, get over the fact that you heard it from "Right Wing" media.

This again. Vinnie, if the GOP leaders aren't being consulted it's because they rebuffed any attempt by Obama to foster bipartisanship.

and again, I'll ask you, WHEN THE FUCK DID HE TRY TO FOSTER BIPARTISANSHIP?

Seriously, quit propogating this old canard. Obama gave the GOP plenty of opportunities to show they take bipartisanship seriously, and they have obstructed EVERYTHING so far. At some point Obama is going to say "Okay, screw you guys, if all you care about is politics." And that's what happened.

Not wanting to expand government and not wanting to further increase the deficit isn't obstructing, and no matter how many times you make the claim, it won't change that fact.
I guess Obama saying "We're keeping score brother" (to a Democrat no less) is all about healthy dialog, right?
They've got their Nixon Enemies list. Is that really trying to foster bipartisanship?

What with trying to pass health care reform with absolutely no support from the GOP and dealing with a huge economic crisis, he's kind of had his hands full.

I am still waiting for somebody to explain to me how Obama takes this health care reform so serious, and thinks it's so important, that he never tried to introduce legislation while he was a Senator. ANd, seeing as how we're still loosing jobs, and unemployment is still at or over 10% (after he said the stimulus would keep it under 8%) I don't see how he's really got his hands full, since nothing he is doing on that front seems to be making a shit of a difference.

You know what's interesting? I've found where you got that list of Obama's broken promises:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter ... es/browse/

Look at that thing! He's actually got a pretty damned good record so far!

I believed you asked what promises he broke.

And guess what, as a FISCAL CONSERVATIVE, I am not about to turn flips about him following through on shit I don't agree with.

VinnieKulick wrote:I believed you asked what promises he broke.

And guess what, as a FISCAL CONSERVATIVE, I am not about to turn flips about him following through on shit I don't agree with.

You voted for him did you, or are these crocodile tears on your part?

I voted for Barr, since he most closely matched what I would want as a President.

I don't think punishing people who are productive is an effective way for a government to act.

I don't think punishing companies because they have a successful business is the way a government should run.

I don't think the government should be investing tax payer money in private sector business.

But, that's just my opinion.

VinnieKulick wrote:I don't think punishing people who are productive is an effective way for a government to act.

I don't think punishing companies because they have a successful business is the way a government should run.

This is one of those things I don't get. You automatically assume that because someone is wealthy they must be more "productive" than the rest of us?

Um, they PRODUCED a higher amount of money.

the only thing i have to say,

ugmo, quit posting wiki links.

if the GOP leaders aren't being consulted it's because they rebuffed any attempt by Obama to foster bipartisanship. Seriously, quit propogating this old canard. Obama gave the GOP plenty of opportunities to show they take bipartisanship seriously, and they have obstructed EVERYTHING so far. At some point Obama is going to say "Okay, screw you guys, if all you care about is politics." And that's what happened.

obamacare has not one iota of bipartisan.
bipartisan was talked a whole lot about from the president, but, yet he and the senate took not one of their suggestions into consideration. and it's the republicans holding them back?
sounds like they were hellfire on their mission and they didn't want any upsets in their plan. bribe a senator here and there, throw some money,too, cowtow to pharma and insurance industries all in the name of passing this bill.
i'm sure i missed a few things..

VinnieKulick wrote:Um, they PRODUCED a higher amount of money.

Since when do the wealthy "produce" money? They EARN more. That has nothing to do with "productivity".

absolutely fabulous wrote:

if the GOP leaders aren't being consulted it's because they rebuffed any attempt by Obama to foster bipartisanship. Seriously, quit propogating this old canard. Obama gave the GOP plenty of opportunities to show they take bipartisanship seriously, and they have obstructed EVERYTHING so far. At some point Obama is going to say "Okay, screw you guys, if all you care about is politics." And that's what happened.

obamacare has not one iota of bipartisan.
bipartisan was talked a whole lot about from the president, but, yet he and the senate took not one of their suggestions into consideration. and it's the republicans holding them back?
sounds like they were hellfire on their mission and they didn't want any upsets in their plan. bribe a senator here and there, throw some money,too, cowtow to pharma and insurance industries all in the name of passing this bill.
i'm sure i missed a few things..

The GOP has steadfastly opposed any healthcare reform, because THEIR constituents are by and large covered, and they see no need to help the peasants when Big Pharma is lining their pockets so well.

The Democrats, however, are largely the party of the poor and disadvantaged, and THEIR constituents have been crying for help on this matter for decades. I'd say it is THE single most important campaign promise Obama made, and he's addressing it on that priority basis. Good for him.

The bill emerging is kinda fucked, buit I believe that at this point, due to fucked-up Washiongton politics (yes even among Dems) he has decided to pass whatever he can, and then improve it piecemeal once it's established.

Realistically, that's what you do anyway, once yoiur law hots the reality of tyhe world and you have to adjust. That's why I like my Interstate highway analogy, though it's not perfect. You've got to put some shovels into the ground first; if you then find the ground's too hard for shovels, get some jackhammers. You don't know until you START DOING IT.

I did NOT vote for him, but I'm damn glad he's there now, imperfections and all. If we'd elected McCain, we'd probably mostly be standing in soup lines instead of posting on Sludge.

chickenona wrote:

VinnieKulick wrote:Um, they PRODUCED a higher amount of money.

Since when do the wealthy "produce" money? They EARN more. That has nothing to do with "productivity".

HEY! The late Casey Johnson certainly helped stimulate the drug industry in this country! Those old-money heirs and heiresses are VERY productive in their squanderings!

lerxstcat wrote: If we'd elected McCain, we'd probably mostly be standing in soup lines instead of posting on Sludge.

I hope that was just hyperbole because I hate to think that you've gone that far off the deep end Lerx.