Could it have been different if Obama had exercised strong leadership?

[cali]

He hasn't done so when it comes to healthcare reform. In the void we've gotten a strengthened blue dog coalition determined to make healthcare reform a giveaway to the insurance companies.

Going on TV and making speeches about how we need healthcare reform while leaving it up to the Congress to produce shit, just isn't real leadership.

Go ahead and unrec. It won't change the reality of the situation.

[TomCADem]

1. Once Again, How Does A President Constitutionally Bypass Congress?

Apparently, "leadership" means suspending the Constitution.

[cali]

5. presidents coordinate with Congress to get legislation they want

all the time. Obama has not done that with healthcare reform.

[iceman66]

30. You are assuming he hasn't done that.

You have no idea how much coordination has occurred behind the scenes between the White House and Congress, and are wrong to assume there is none.

A pretty big hint to the reality of the situation is the INCREASING number of Senators who have signed on to some form of a public option in the last several weeks.

[Lord Helmet]

41. I agree it's wrong to assume none.

Nobody has a clue what is going on behind the scenes. People are just guessing and making negative predictions. They take it as a free pass to talk shit because it suits their agenda and personality defects.

This is one committee bill. Then comes the reconciliation of both House and Senate bills separately and then together. This is far from over.

[bertman]

60. Actually, Lord Helmet, we DO know what went on behind the scenes and it involved a

Big Giveaway to Big Insurance and Big Pharma.

Now some of our Congresscritters are trying to get that Big Giveaway UN-given.

[Lord Helmet]

72. we're heard a lot of rumors

what we haven't heard is the details of the final bill which doesn't exist yet

[bertman]

76. The giveaway to Big Pharma is a fact, not a rumor. It was engineered by the administration

but Senator Dorgin is trying to get it nullified.

The details of concessions to Big Insurance are less defined but still it's known that deals were struck.

[grantcart]

42. actually the record for legislation that the President initiates and delivers to Congress

has a very low passage.

You presume to know how much communication the President has done with members of Congress, how amusing.

[Abq_Sarah]

7. That's the problem

Congress writes the legislation, the President signs it into law. The president can ask for a bill but the Congress isn't required to write it at all or to his satisfaction.

[GreenArrow]

46. He had/has the Bully Pulpit.

He hasn't used it.

[LaydeeBug]

57. ask George W. Bush. nt

:rofl: :hide:

edit for punctuation

[roguevalley]

84. no. leading doesn't require that. it means kicking asses, schmoozing

and strongarming. FDR did it, LBJ and Truman. You don't sit in your tower and not get down into the fray. Jeez. Has it been so long since we had a president who actually lead that this feels so wrong? Don't for a moment forget that George and Dick had his people by the balls and they succeeded because of it. Maybe I am too old. I remember when Presidents kicked people into line and made things happen. Look at the aspects of your life that are made better by the government. They were bashed into place by Presidents who stood up and led.

[scheming daemons]

2. Could *WHAT* have been different? This is ONE committee's bill (out of 5)...

..it has no relationship whatsoever to what will be in the final bill.


Ridiculous how many people on this site don't understand how the process works.

[wyldwolf]

6. thank you

[Fire1]

14. Lmao!!! I can't help it! Your reply was DEAD ON!!!

:rofl: :rofl:

[Parker CA]

23. [phone]

[jgraz]

79. Which Senate bill has a real, universal Public Option?

Oh, that's right. NONE OF THEM.

[Name removed]

87. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

88. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProSense]

3. "It won't change the reality of the situation." The reality of what: a committee vote?

Good grief. What silliness.

[Beetwasher]

4. Has He Signed Something Yet?

Is there a final bill? :shrug:

Results are what matters. I'll wait until I see the final product before I pass judgement about how effective he was in taking on the most powerful, entrenched special interests that ever existed in the history of the planet.

[Kaleko]

59. Jesuscherist on a parallel cross, how many times

do we have to repeat what you just said?

[RoccoR5955]

8. It didn't work when Clinton did it,

and put his own bill out there. This was the other way to do it.
However, I do think that he could have used the same tactics that Johnson used to get Medicare in on the (Black and) Blue Dogs.

[depakid]

21. Completely different dynamic today

One thing for sure though- tossing this out to a corrupted congress to piece together- while dropping single payer was bound to fail or result in little more than window dressing.

One more step toward third world status.

[Thrill]

9. This was going to be tough no matter what

If it were easy the shit would have been done years ago. It was going to be tough because the Health industry has half of Congress in their back pocket.

Whether Obama sent a bill to Congress or let them write it makes no damn difference. Thats trivial. The problem is weak leadership in the Senate, thats been the problem for yrs for the Democrats. You have a leader who struggles to line up the votes. Reid has allowed Baucus to hold up Healthcare in that committee since July. Thats the problem.

[iceman66]

55. Exactly.

If Obama only had the House to deal with we would have a bill already, with a strong public option.

[sandnsea]

10. Last week he was making DLC deals and Rahm was selling us out

Make up your mind. Are they into it up to their necks or doing nothing at all.

:eyes:

You never change.

[phantom power]

11. I keep thinking... he coulda been the champ.

I have this recurring dream where Obama uses his charismatic speechifying superpowers to go on prime-time TV, starting around February 2009, and publicly challenges the Democratic Congress to pass HR676 by the year's end. He makes frequent TV and public appearances to repeatedly sell Americans on why it's the best way. Privately, he leans on Congress to pass the bill. Hard.

I feel absolutely positive he could have pulled it off. We would have joined the ranks of civilized nations with universal health care, and Obama would have secured his place in the history books. The GOP would be out of power for years.

Oh well.

[tabatha]

17. Nope, then the right would have made all sorts of charges.

Yuu know - we are not Royalty, Nazis, etc.

[phantom power]

20. they would, but... they're doing that anyway.

The GOP would, and will, throw a gigantic hissy fit no matter what happens. Obama has already been called everything from a Communist to a Nazi. And they won't stop until a GOP candidate sits in the WH. In fact, they won't stop then either, as the previous 8 years of BushCo proved.

So let's have them call us Communists and Nazis for passing single payer, and really solve the problem once and for all.

:shrug:

[tabatha]

51. Yes, but they are baseless charges.

Congress is supposed to make the laws.

Obama belongs to the executive branch.

[phantom power]

56. Presidents historically set the tone, and advocate agendas....

There is absolutely nothing unconstitutional, or even unusual, about the idea of a President getting out and championing a cause, like "Pass single payer health care."

There is also nothing that unusual about a President playing some hardball, either with his own party or with the opposing party. LBJ was infamous for it. It's obviously risky, and not to be used lightly, but if there ever were a case where the upside was huge, this must be it. You've got a public who is ready and willing to be convinced, and 50 million uninsured citizens. Congress is mired in fear. They are afraid of sticking their necks out, but the President could give them the rallying point, and/or the excuse they need, to make it happen.

I'm pretty sure this process has become bogged down because they are all ruled by lobbyists. Because it's otherwise so obviously the right thing for the Dems to do, both politically and ethically and in terms of good policy.

[FormerDittoHead]

98. Thank God they didn't do that, and NOW we have their full support!

oh, wait. I think it got it now...

[iceman66]

25. No, he could not have pulled it off.

The votes in the Senate just aren't there to pass anything resembling HR 676, not even using reconciliation.

If he had done as you suggest, he would have just been setting himself up for a big fall.

[phantom power]

28. I disagree. He could have gotten the votes.

Like I said, he takes the case directly to America. Explains why it's the best way. Then publicly challenges Congress to pass it.

Make their future elections depend on it. They'd pass it.

[iceman66]

32. What Senators do you think would have changed their positions?

Be specific.

[RJDem]

45. Everyone one of them facing re-election in 2010

He has the power to drastically reduce their campaign funding through the DNC, DSCC, and all the other senators and representatives political PACs. Barring that he could have demanded reconcilation from Reid so that only 51 votes were needed. Remember? The way laws used to be passed in congress.

But he didn't want a public option. He cut a back room deal with the insurance companies and big pharma months ago. Everything else since then about a public option as been political theater for your consumption.

[iceman66]

52. In other words, you can't name one.

First of all, Obama doesn't have the level of power you suggest. Even if he did, some of the Senators now opposing the public option are doing so precisely because they are up for re-election (e.g., Blanche Lincoln) and are more beholden to special interests like the insurance lobby than the national party.

Second, and most importantly, the public option is NOT DEAD.

At least wait and see what the final result is before making insinuations about 'back room deals'!

[phantom power]

54. But, isn't that part of what politics is supposed to be about?

Getting people to rally behind a great idea, even if they don't initially agree?

:shrug:


I'll tell you what I think. Maybe I'm still hopelessly naive even after all these years but here goes: first of all, polling suggests that the general public is not opposed to universal health care.. So, they are open being convinced that something like HR676 is a good idea. I also believe that even Congresscritters can understand the basic simplicity, economy and humanity of a single payer health care system. In fact, I think most of them understand this already, but between being bought off by lobbyists and being in thrall to 20 years of non-stop right wing group think, they have convinced themselves "the votes aren't there." Even though they are the votes.

It's circular reasoning. It's tautological. "We can't vote for that! The votes aren't there!"

Huh????

[iceman66]

58. There is nowhere near the necessary level of public support

to compel a Max Baucus or Blanche Lincoln to turn on their corporate masters.

True, most people favor universal health care, but most are also happy with their private insurance.

Obama is trying to get the best bill that he can, given the realities that he has to deal with.

Please have at least some faith in our President, and his political instincts.

[polichick]

12. Yes, it could have been different. (We didn't need that crappy pharma deal either). nt

[katandmoon]

13. I sure don't see how it could have HURT. But Obama and leader are mutually exclusive terms.

It's becoming more and more apparent every day that he's a follower, not a leader.

[TomCADem]

15. Leadership = Suspending Constituion and Bypassing Congress?

[phleshdef]

24. Exactly, its another damn "leadership" complainer who has no clue what they even mean by it.

They just like to say it.

[Jennicut]

66. Yeah, we really hated it when Bush did it but with Obama it should be okay.

Baucus is tied to no party anyway...or the party of the Insurance Companies.

[SpartanDem]

16. 4 of 5 committees have given him what he wants

but this one goes off the reservation and now he hasn't shown leadership?

[freddie mertz]

This is the committee whose efforts he has been praising..

Yeah. I know he kinda HAD to, in public.

What we would all like to know is what has been going on behind the curtain.

[jeanpalmer]

18. He did exercise strong leadership

The final bill is going to reflect what he has wanted all along. His primary goal is: "we do intend to get something done this year." He has to have a bill. He indicated early on that he was "open to new ideas" and would not be "rigid and ideological," meaning he was willing to compromise. He worked behind the scenes with Pharma and Baucus to shape the bill. If the final bill is unacceptable, he can veto it if he feels strongly about it. But he won't, because it will reflect his views and efforts.

[RJDem]

31. LOL -- "something done"

Yeah, and that something is going to be YOU have to buy insurance from private insurance companies that can charge any damn thing they want to charge, with no competitive mechanism to reduce the cost of premiums.

That's "something" all right. It's the largest government mandated gift from your pocket to a for profit industry in the history of this country.

[jeanpalmer]

36. Not only will it not reduce the cost of premiums

it won't reduce the overall high cost of healthcare, which is the fundamental problem. SEmms like it might even increas premiums, with all the pre-existing conditions coming on board -- the insurance companies are going to charge for that.

[depakid]

19. We'll never know

Could be we'd be here criticizing the administration for trying that approach (though I doubt it). Seems to me that the current crop over-learned the lessons of the Clinton efforts.

As to future domestic efforts- what's clear is that Obama's very conflict averse- unwilling or unable to call opponents out or hold up boogeymen (like insurers or bankers) and marshal public resentment- which drives policy in the United States.

So- I expect to see masterful foreign policy- but repeated half measures- or outright failures to get it done on the domestic level.

Hope I'm proven wrong....

[LittleBlue]

22. Yes, but he won't. It seems pleasing Chuck Grassley is more important

than pleasing the base.

What a load this has turned out to be.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CakeGrrl]

27. Oh goody - a siren call to all long-standing Obama detractors.

And ignorant of the big picture to boot.

I'll gladly unrec, thank you.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Lord Helmet]

44. LOL!! It's fly paper for the perpetually disgruntled.

[BlooInBloo]

48. Yep. Their happy day is here.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Honeycombe8]

29. I guess writing it in the W.H., like Clinton did, would've been a better way to go?

Oh, wait a minute. No, that didn't work out so well for Clinton, either, did it?

Hmmmmm. Maybe it's the issue and Congress, and NOT who writes the bill, that is the problem? Just maybe.

[FrenchieCat]

33. Since most don't know what strong leadership even means these days.....

I think the question is a ridiculous one.

[freddie mertz]

62. We would know it we saw it...

And I have seen SOME mostly from members of the House (Pelosi, Weiner etc), and lately from Sen Rockefeller.

I am afraid that the president is just "not all that into" the public option.He seems almost weirdly passive on the issue.

We may get a bill yet that includes it, but I would not be surprised if it's people in congress who get us there

[mvd]

34. If we get no public option, then it will be a total party failure IMO

The President could be blamed for not drawing a line in the sand and not recognizing how important it is, and Congress can be blamed for not crafting a bill with it in (because I do think the President would sign a bill with a strong public option).

[ljm2002]

35. It's a reasonable question...

...although it's always hard to say what "would have happened", in any context.

You say we've gotten a strengthened, more determined Blue Dog coalition, and that may be true. However, we've also gotten a strengthened, more determined Progressive Caucus, who are willing to put up a real fight for a change.

If Obama had provided more leadership, it could be as you say and we might have something better than what appears to be coming down the pike. Or not: it is also possible that with him pushing for a bill, that progressives would not be as fired up. There is something to be said for Congress owning this, they have more "skin in the game", as they say.

Also if Obama had provided more leadership, it may well be that the mighty Wurlitzer would be operating nonstop and undermining things even more than they have been. The utter hatred and contempt for him would make the opposition to HCR even more vehement IMO.

But who knows, I certainly don't.

[mvd]

40. Yes, it's hard to tell for sure

I don't know if the Senate Finance Committee is capable of acting less bipartisan, yet you could say the bipartisan atmosphere empowered them. At any rate, I'm certainly not going to blame only Obama.

[DailyGrind51]

37. Did Pres. Obama really believe Reid was going to push it through the Senate?

[ShortnFiery]

38. Yes, it could have been much different. This "pragmatism" is seriously LAME and GUTLESS. eom

[rvablue]

43. dele.

[jberryhill]

47. Pistols at Dawn? What? Really.

He should have told Baucus that if there was no PO in this committee's bill then he'd give Baucus the worst wedgie ever.

Get real.

[Aramchek]

50. your tendency is toward cynicism. many times you are disproven.

[cali]

83. yeah, you know me so well. you've been here for all of 3 months.

[dave29]

53. strong leadership?

The man goes before Congress, gets yelled at, goes to town halls where people outside have guns, and has made the case, repeatedly for what he wants in the bill. More and more the bill is moving in his direction.

We can't cast aspersions on something that hasn't happened yet.

Buck up, we'll get there, and hopefully you'll feel different when the pen hits the paper.

[Autumn]

61. Yes it would have been very different. We

voted him in with a strong mandate and he is a very popular President. He should have said this is what I campaigned on and this is what I want and shoved it down their fucking throats. No reason to let these asshole dick around.

[Jennicut]

65. You don't shove anything through Congress...unless you are Bush

and have Cheney threatening and/or bribing people and sitting in on Congressional meetings. It's not Obama's fault that Baucus is an asshole or that there are a bunch of conservadems in Congress. That problem existed way before Obama ever became President. Besides, it is one committee that has a lot of conservative Dems on it.

[Autumn]

67. Like you said , it is one committee.

He should have shoved it down their throats. Republicans do it, he should too. A little arm twisting would do the conservadems a world of good.

[Jennicut]

69. Arm twist them with what?

Baucus answers to money only. His own constituents want a public option.
Kick him off the committee but that is too late now.
Rethugs were voted out for displaying a disregard for the rules. Arm twisting is okay but the only reason Bush got what he wanted was because the Hammer, Cheney, and Hastert decided it so. And that really worked out well.
One committee does not decide the entire bill.

[Autumn]

71. Instead of honoring Baucus's

requests to proclaim September 26th National Hunting and Fishing Day, Obama could have reminded Baucus of what he campaigned on and told him to work on that or he wasn't going to give him what he wanted. Sooner or later Baucus will be up for re election , he could remind him that would certainly want an extremely popular President to campaign for him. Obama is the leader of the pack, time for him to bring them to heel.

[ShortnFiery]

75. Continue to "believe" but this is an example of piss poor leadership on Obama's part.

He could have led the effort. Hell, he has the approval ratings for it. Instead Obama is essentially giving a big wet kiss to the large Insurance Companies. And you are helping him ... complementing him even. How foolish is that!?!

We will have, at most, a WEAK Public Option and MANDATES for ALL. Yeah, he's a genius but not presently working for OUR SIDE.

I know, when he wants to, OBAMA can LEAD. This time, not so much. :thumbsdown:

[MadMaddie]

63. Folks like you are never happy

If he stood over the Dems during this process you would claim that he should step away and let congress do their work.

If he give Congress room to work and hash it out then he is not directly involved enough.

You will never be happy with anything he does.

By the way you might want to look at the conservaDems for why this process is so fucking pathetic. President Obama didn't cast a nay vote the conservadems did...maybe you should blame the right people.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

70. what a not nice thing to say. "folks like you" "never happy" what

unproductive, offensive things to say to someone just trying to make sense of it all and discuss all sides of issues !

[MadMaddie]

74. Your subject line asked the question

"Could it have been different if Obama had exercised strong leadership"?

You are implying that Obama has not shown strong leadership, he laid out his plan, he pulled his Democratic party members into meetings to tell them what he wanted and they are not pulling their own weight.

The Democratic Party has the Senate and the House and yet the Democratic Congress members are still cowtowing to the damn Repugs. How is that President Obama's fault? How is it his fault that the Blue Dogs are the ones that are hampering this whole effort.

The main failure if you want to call it a failure is keeping the olive branch continually extended to the Repugs. It was a good effort and it is clear they are the "Party of No"!

Every Democratic Congress member is a leader, some of them have been fighting the good fight. Others not so much......

[cali]

82. wrong. and simplistic as well.

[MadMaddie]

90. Cali sometimes simplistic is the answer

sometimes the answer is not complicated.

What would you do to convince Harry Reid to have backbone and the Blue Dogs to act like Democratic members?

[Armstead]

64. Yes

[Laura PourMeADrink]

68. I agree. If we can learn from history - Hillary's try at it. IMHO, O

should have created an incremental plan. Met with dems and planned for snicking each provision (of the unannounced overall plan) a little bit a time. Low key. Throw them a bone once in a while. Instead, the incredibly un-savvy plan - worst thing you can do - announce to the opposition that you are CHANGING EVERYTHING. It gave those crazies the chance to plan and mobilize their crazy birther tea baggers.

[nemo137]

85. They'd have done that regardless.

The crazies are a feature, not a bug. Their leaders want to stop this administration - I think that there;d have been this bullshittery no matter how lame of a bill was proposed, how incremental.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

89. you are right - but there's no way I believe it would have been as

strong if it came in piecemeal. It's harder for people to wrap their heads around a bunch of bills spread out than one big push - announced. Think about how different things would have been if Commander Cuckoo Bananas announced "I am going to overhaul everything to benefit the rich." Instead, we can learn something from the devious bastards....like they sneak in tax cuts, eliminate oversight, remove regulation. Small steps of legislation that lead to the huge end impact.

[rmp yellow]

73. Blanche Lincoln is up for re-election. Will Obama support her?

Stay tuned.

[PHIMG]

77. Yup, he gets to look "presidential" blow air kisses to Progressives

While the blue dogs go in for the kill.

[nashville_brook]

78. totally agree.

[dmr]

80. Seems to me the Dem Congress has moved along this issue

very fast considering how very slow they usually work.

I have to wait until the final bill comes out before I think there may be something to complain about. Meantime, I'll let my opinions be known to them on a regular basis - that's my job.

As far as the president going on TV and making speeches - well, he's selling it to the People. It has worked, the polls are up for reform and the PO.

I don't follow any president blindly. I've already written the president when I wasn't happy. At this point I think the president, who has a lot of Bush* garbage on his plate, is doing the best he can.

[inna]

81. some startling points in this article by Glenn Greenwald:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/08/19/obama/index.html

[TheKentuckian]

86. I'm unclear on what he should be doing differently overall

I think he targeted on the edge of the envelope of what is plausible considering the make up of the Senate and he has pushed reform relentlessly. I think it is also a misunderstanding that the blue dogs have been strengthened by his action (or supposed lack there of) because they structurally already were overpowered from the plum committee assignments to the harsh reality of having 40 nays in the pocket to obstruct. Eleven dug in conservative Democrats can make or break any efforts and thankfully more liberal Democrats have discovered after a generation or so that they also have some weight to throw around too.

No unrec from me but I do believe you are arguing based off a false starting point, I think we're doing better than usual just not as well as we need to be. That's what happens when the entire national conversation goes far right for 30 years. Too many people just thought/think that this is supposed to be way easier than it actually is and that we have a far stronger hand than what is actually in hand. I have predicted a twenty year climb out of the hole well before the election and that is only with a very determined and sustained effort but I get the idea that lots believed the corner was already turned.

I also believe almost everyone's idea of the political system has been badly affected by the Bush debacle. There is a fervor across the political spectrum for a unitary executive with AT MOST a rubberstamp Congress that few admit to but almost all allude to constantly. Congress must be restored to co-equal or better status or we will eventually become a dictatorship and I doubt it will be a benign one. To get there they have to do their job and have enough combined clout to take on the Executive and the Judiciary.

[jeanpalmer]

91. Healthcare is an issue

that requires strong presidential leadership. You can't just throw it out there and leave it up to Congress, like he has done. If he really wants to reform healthcare, he can't leave it up to the Baucuses and the other rent-a-congressman. If his idea was to just throw it up for grabs, without any direction from him, he should have just left it alone. We'd be better off.

His initial responsiblity was to provide an in-depth coherent analysis for the American people of why healthcare reform is needed. What are the problems? Providers manipulating the system to run up charges, insurance companies providing an unnecessary service at an exorbitant price, pharma charging outrageous prices for medications with government cover, greedy corporatism that's worried only about profits and bonuses. Those are just starters. Then, he should have provided a solution to those problems in the form of comprehensive reform plan.

His most important responsibilty was educating the people. You can't propose a big overhaul of healthcare without laying the groundwork with the American people. They need to understand the need for change and what that change should be. If you don't lay the groundwork, people develop their own crazy ideas what's going to be done, most of it not grounded in reality, and you end up with teabaggers everywhere. Townhall meetings, when you're not proposing anything specific, turn in to circuses. And what you end up with is resistance to the unknown, and a giant clusterfk, which is where we are now.

If he didn't want to take on the responsibility of educating the people and offering a proposal, then he shouldn't have started the process. He could have explained why he didn't want to start the process -- the budget deficit, loss of jobs in a weak economy, whatever they were. People would have respected that. But to just throw the thing wide open without any proposal or educational process was mindless.

[Midwestern Democrat]

97. Agreed. People forget that the Democratic Party was virtually on life

support as recently as 2005 - the party had been in decline since about 1966, weathered an enormous assault during the Reagan years, and was virtually gutted in the 1994 midterms. For about ten years after that disaster, the party was a totally impotent force that was simply treading water to keep from drowning. The 2006 and 2008 elections gave us an opportunity but they certainly didn't erase all of the underlying issues that made predictions of a "permanent Republican majority" not so laughable just a little more than four years ago. The fact that the McCain/Palin ticket had a polling lead on Labor Day 2008 - in spite of everything that went down in the Bush administration - should give everybody some pause about what we're dealing with.

[boppers]

92. Oh, more name calling.

How original.

[Name removed]

93. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[firedupdem]

94. So lame!

:rofl: kicking up threads with this message. LOL!! You must be miserable. :rofl:

[boppers]

95. CHICKEN CHICKEN CHICKEN!

FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT!

Yeah, what Obama needs is 3rd-grade diplomacy, where "being tough" matters.

Because, you know, healthcare reform is just as important as whoever is cheating at kickball.

[asdjrocky]

96. Short, sweet and fucking true.

We've been totally ripped off.

[joeycola]

99. I think it could have been a whole lot different=It could have been

much more positive had Pres. Obama exercised strong leadership from the start.