Meet The Press: David Gregory Irked by Michelle Bachmann Emphasis on Secret $105 Billion ObamaCare Funding
The way David Gregory was carrying on during today's Meet The Press, you would have thought that he was irked by Congresswoman Michele Bachmann's revelation of only 105 thousand dollars in secret ObamaCare funding instead of the actual astounding 105 BILLION dollars. A clearly irritated David Gregory kept insisting that he only wanted to stick with "narrow budget questions" and acted increasingly frustrated as Bachmann kept returning to the 105 BILLION dollars of hidden ObamaCare funding that he did not want to even briefly talk about.
Here is a portion of the interview of a clearly upset David Gregory as you can see in this video who obviously did not want to deal in the slightest with Bachmann's revelation which would have been major news to the viewing public as well as a more detailed transcript below the fold:
REP. MICHELE BACHMANN: ...There was a Congressional Research Service report that just was issued in February, and we discovered that secretly, unbeknownst to members of Congress, over $105 billion was hidden in the Obamacare legislation to fund the implementation of Obamacare. This is something that wasn't known. This money was broken up, hidden in various parts of the bills. And we have worked very hard to discover $61 billion in cuts that we could put forward, get to the president. So, in effect, David, we've taken one step forward and two steps back because we've found now that $105 billion had already been implemented.
MR. GREGORY: All right. But that--but, Congresswoman, you heard the president this week offer...
Notice how often during the interview that Ms Bachmann keeps returning to the topic of the $105 billion of ObamaCare funding during the interview which is countered in each instance by David Gregory desperately trying to change the subject.
MR. GREGORY: We are back, joined now by the head of the tea party caucus in the House of Representatives, Republican Congresswoman from Minnesota Michele Bachmann. Welcome to MEET THE PRESS.
REP. MICHELE BACHMANN (R-MN): Thank you, David.
MR. GREGORY: Nice to have you. You heard the chief of staff, Bill Daley, say that he's optimistic that it's possible to avert a government shutdown. Are you as optimistic as he is?
REP. BACHMANN: Well, I'm hopeful. I don't think anyone wants to see the government shut down, but it is shocking the revelations of all the money that's been spent. There was a Congressional Research Service report that just was issued in February, and we discovered that secretly, unbeknownst to members of Congress, over $105 billion was hidden in the Obamacare legislation to fund the implementation of Obamacare. This is something that wasn't known. This money was broken up, hidden in various parts of the bills. And we have worked very hard to discover $61 billion in cuts that we could put forward, get to the president. So, in effect, David, we've taken one step forward and two steps back because we've found now that $105 billion had already been implemented.
MR. GREGORY: All right. But that--but, Congresswoman, you heard the president this week offer...
REP. BACHMANN: Or appropriated.
MR. GREGORY: ...an accommodation to the states to opt out of the individual mandate, where necessary, to tailor it toward their own states.
REP. BACHMANN: Well, David...
MR. GREGORY: Why isn't that the sort of--the give that Republicans wanted?
REP. BACHMANN: David, that's not a give at all. In effect, all that is, is a pretext for implementing a single-payer plan. If you--if you recall, the president's entire statement, he said the states can opt out as long as they stay within the, the requirements of all of Obamacare unless they want to go with a single payer--again, from the very beginning it has been said that Obamacare is a crime against democracy. It has been a deception from the beginning. Remember, the president told us it was a mandate, not a tax. Now in the federal court he's arguing it's a tax, not a Band-Aid.
MR. GREGORY: Will you--I want to stick with the...
REP. BACHMANN: We were also told that our premiums would go down $2,500 and instead, they're spiking up by 20 and 40 percent.
MR. GREGORY: Let me get in here, Congresswoman.
REP. BACHMANN: This has been a fraud.
MR. GREGORY: Let me get in here. I want to stick with the, the narrow budget questions. Are you willing to vote to shut down the government over some of these add-ons to these spending bills, to defund funding for the healthcare legislation, for Planned Parenthood, for the EPA?
REP. BACHMANN: I think this deception that the president and Pelosi and Reid put forward with, with appropriating over $105 billion needs to be given back to the people. There was no debate. There was no discussion. $105 billion is a lot of money. You can't just slip that into a bill and not tell members of the House and not tell members of the Senate, and then when they go to vote for the bill, did it just slip Harry Reid's mind to not tell the senators that this was in the bill?
MR. GREGORY: Congresswoman, my question is a very, is a very direct one: Will you vote to shut down the government over those riders?
REP. BACHMANN: I think that President Obama needs to give back that $105 billion that they already appropriated. They have tied the hands of Congress for the next eight years, David. They already appropriated this money. Members of Congress didn't even know this money was in the bill because we couldn't read the bill before it was passed because it wasn't given to us but hours before we had to vote for it. That's why Speaker Pelosi famously said we have to pass the bill to know what's in it. Members of Congress weren't even given the courtesy of time to read the bill. This $105 billion has to be given back before we can start any other discussions.
MR. GREGORY: Let me ask, let me ask you about some tea party criticism of Speaker Boehner over how far the cuts have gone. The USA Today reported on this on Friday, I'll put it up. "Tea Party leader blasts Boehner over cuts. The founder of one of the largest Tea Party groups said House Speaker Boehner looks like a `fool' ... because he has not cut enough from the budget.
"Judson Phillips ... [the] founder of the Tea Party Nation, Boehner's inability to negotiate," he said, "larger cuts should prompt the Tea Party movement to run a candidate against [him] in 2012 in a GOP primary.
"`The Tea Party movement sprang up in '09 as a reaction to insane government spending,' Phillips wrote on his blog on Wednesday. `In 2010, the American people spoke, demanding change. Everyone realizes that the level of spending cannot be sustained. John Boehner did not get that message.'" Has Boehner failed the tea party?
REP. BACHMANN: The main message that's going across the Internet today among members of the tea party, they are outraged about this $105 billion that was deceptively put in the Obamacare bill.
MR. GREGORY: Congresswoman, you've made, you've made your point.
REP. BACHMANN: That's what they're focused on.
MR. GREGORY: I'm asking you a direct question here about whether you think, as head of the tea party caucus, whether Boehner has failed to live up to the tea party's expectations.
REP. BACHMANN: I think what we're--we--what we're trying to do as Republicans in the House is look for every place we possibly can to cut spending. We've identified $100 billion in cuts off of the president's proposed budget, $60 billion if you compare it to the 2010 budget. So we have done our part to look for cuts. But we can't be--we can't end there. We have to also demand that we claw back the $105 billion that was deceptively already appropriated by President Obama.
MR. GREGORY: The, the speaker has said that it would be irresponsible not to raise the debt limit, as will be called for soon. Will you agree with him on that and do that?
REP. BACHMANN: I am not in favor of raising the debt ceiling. In the last 10 years we have raised the debt ceiling 10 times. We are just giving the Congress a license to keep on spending. And one thing the American people are demanding because they want to see jobs created, they want to see the economy get on a back--good footing. In order to do that, government has to take less so that the American people can keep more.
MR. GREGORY: The issue of the tea party and backlash among voters against the tea party is an interesting area because conservatives and certainly leaders and tea party folks have said, "Look, there was a mandate from the 2010 election, and that was to cut spending." And yet, you have this from--analysis from our Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, written by the Wall Street Journal on Thursday: "Among those most fearing spending cuts," they reported, "were younger voters, independents, seniors, and suburban women--groups that include many swing voters in national elections, who potentially could turn against the GOP.
"`It may be hard to understand why someone would try to jump off a cliff' to solve the debt crisis, [pollster] Mr. [Bill] McInturff said of his fellow Republicans, `unless you understand that they are being chased by a tiger, and that tiger is the tea party.'" Is the tea party chasing the broader GOP off the cliff?
REP. BACHMANN: You know, I think that the political left has been very afraid of the tea party movement because it is not necessarily political. It's not Democrats or Republicans. It's made up of a very broad-based coalition. It's made up of people who want the country to work again. They believe that we're taxed enough already, the government shouldn't spend more money than what its taking in, and that each of the three branches of government should act within the jurisdictional limitations of the Constitution. That's a broad-based group of people. They just want our country to work again. And I think that that coalition is hanging together more strongly now than ever.
So now that Congress is searching for ways to cut the budget, a very good place to start would be with the 105 BILLION dollars in secret ObamaCare funding, However, David Gregory would rather stubbornly stick to his script about supposed dissension between Tea Party members and the GOP as well other relatively trivial matters.
Perhaps someday David Gregory can bring himself to actually say the words: $105 BILLION.
- P.J. Gladnick's blog
- Login to post comments















Comments
Just Vote No!
Submitted by Ashrak on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 5:32pm.
It is clear, and Gregory admitted it himself, that media in this country is as scared of facts and most congresscritters are. I loved how she held up the number. She did well to hold that prop.
Now, I will say that nothing in any bill can be "hidden" from congresscritters. Things may well be unknown to them because they didn't read an understand the bill, but "hidden" they are not.
The answer to this is really quite simple. And as much as it pains me to say it, Ron Paul has set the example for a very long time.
You VOTE NO! on any bill you do not read and understand or when it is disagreeable to your base principles.
Several have started on that path regarding the 2 week government bailout bill (that is what I call it) and more had better step up just like Bachmann did.
Enough of the bribes, enough of the go along to get along, enough of the denial. Just vote no.
I liken it to the reason I gave up on the NFL years ago. Refs throw a pass interference flag on less of a foul then they didn't throw one the play before. Whereas, if they just threw a flag every time play contact was made after 5 yards, defensive backs would not try to get away with fouls every play and we would all witness not only a cleaner game, but a more exciting one as well.
Congresscritters have to drop the flag, the NO! vote, on play after play after play after play, until the "players" finally understand that no more does the Old way, the Old playbook, win the game.
You VOTE NO! on any bill you
Submitted by GregE on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 7:36pm.
".....You VOTE NO! on any bill you do not read and understand or when it is disagreeable to your base principles......"
Exactly. My brother mentioned something that sounded pretty good to me. An elected officeholder's default vote should be NO. Someone should be able to call their office, and when they ask what the position is, if the staffer says the person hasn't yet read a bill, we should already know the vote that will be cast, if it were to be cast at that moment. I would like for someone to campaign with this as one of their platforms. If every Congressman and Senator picked up this methodology, bills would get shorter and monstrousities wouldn't exist anymore. We'd have bills for single issues instead of massing thousands of things into one gigantic piece of nonsense.
Of course this would require honesty, instead of already wanting to vote NO yet claiming you simply didn't couldn't read or understand a bill and took your expressed default no vote.
Marx
Submitted by Agnostic on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 7:41pm.
Groucho would be proud! And we would all be better off.
A question for David Gregory
Submitted by Gary Hall on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 5:32pm.
Just one of these days, would some Republican simply ask David Gregory to make a commitment that on at least one occassion he will..
..actually ask a single probing question, in support of any conservative position, of a Democrat - and that he will hound them until they actually answer the question?
(;~/ gary
Paraphrazing Gregory's whole spiel...
Submitted by neutron on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 8:25pm.
David Gregory: "Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, you may be a member of Congress, but I'm a Liberal Journolist, and we are the real power in the US! I'm not interested in your substantive answers; I only want sound bites that can be used against you at a later time."
It's "Positively 4th Street" (Bob Dylan) that the Republicans and Conservatives need to sing to the Liberal Journolists. Listen to the song or read the lyrics, and see how true it is.
I guess, judging by the
Submitted by Miss_Me_Yet on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 5:32pm.
I guess, judging by the outcome of that interview, Barackio won't be taking or returning any calls from Dave for at least the next two weeks. This would probably be a good time for Matthews to make his move.
Liberals ... we can't live with them, they couldn't survive without us ...
It's quite comforting to hear
Submitted by dr-go on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 5:34pm.
Ms Bachmann repeat and repeat what it is that the opposition doesn't want to hear, much less discuss. "We have to pass the bill so you can see what's in it." but no, now we can't discuss the contents as it relates to costs? Keep it up Michelle regardless of the criticisms Tingles throws at you.
"Congresswoman, you've made,
Submitted by PJRyan on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 5:35pm.
"Congresswoman, you've made, you've made your point".
If so, then why isn't your network reporting on it? Seems like kind of a big story. Maybe "Drain the swamp, we'll-read-it-after-we-pass-it" Pelosi can explain.
Later in the show when Gregory and Brooks and Robinson were sitting around the table holding hands, Gregory made mention of the contribution the U.S. (or Obama, I forget which he said) made to forcing Mubarak out. I've been trying to find some explanation of the contribution. All I saw was waffling.
Meanwhile, Chris Wallace humiliated Durbin on FNS (actually, Durbin humiliated himself) by insisting that he address the issue of the false claims of $41B in cuts when he clearly wanted nothing to do with that conversation.
I didn't watch Durbin because
Submitted by ricklail on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 7:04pm.
I didn't watch Durbin because I was throwing up after what that fool from Westboro, not Baptist and not a church said. I hope you caught it when she said the American solider was worst than the camel washers. I'd have had to slapped her but that is what they want so they sue and the money keep flowing to their cause. I've got to do a little study and see what Christ said about suing your brother. Never mind though they are only brothers to the members of their LITTLE organization. As I recall Christ told the church and Paul drove it home that the mission of the church was to spread the gospel, not prostest funerals. I was glad Chris pointed out the organization was made of up mostly family members. Only 9 out of the 13 kids of Phelps have anything to do with them.
Interference?
Submitted by fstaff on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 5:38pm.
Liberal hack/Obama stenographer Gregory was back peddling away from that inconvenient truth faster than “Prime Time” in his prime time!
Gregory
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 5:41pm.
Interesting how Gregory keeps trying to get Bachman to comment on Tea Party criticism of Boehner, when she's not the Tea Party. Yes, she represents some if it's ideals, but she doesn't speak for the Tea Party. I see this as Gregory trying to cause friction between her and the Tea Party or Boehner.
Always pushing an agenda.
Well actualy
Submitted by Boudin on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 5:52pm.
She does, she spoke for us in our rebuttal after the SOTU address, and has spoken at many rallies and meetings.
Leader, maybe not, spokeswoman, absolutely, and glad to have her
I'm a Bachman fan, but I
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 6:21pm.
I'm a Bachman fan, but I wasn't aware that she was a spokesperson for the Tea Party, any more than Sarah Palin or Glen Beck are spokespeople for the Tea Party.
My point was that the questions were designed to entrap Bachman into a conflict with Boehner or the Tea Party.
Representative
Submitted by Miss_Me_Yet on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 6:26pm.
Representative Bachmann launched and chaired the " Tea Party Caucus " in Congress back on July,16, 2010. The caucus was approved as an official congressional member organization on July, 19, 2010.She meets on a regular basis with various Tea Party groups and champions their causes in the House.I guess that sort of makes her an honorary spokeswoman anyway.
Liberals ... we can't live with them, they couldn't survive without us ...
honorary spokeswoman
Submitted by Boudin on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 8:23pm.
Works for me
Read this as in the article
Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 3:24am.
Read this as in the article and you may be enlightened; TEA party is a movement .. not a party and therefore has millions of spokespersons.
REP. BACHMANN: You know, I think that the political left has been very afraid of the tea party movement because it is not necessarily political. It's not Democrats or Republicans. It's made up of a very broad-based coalition. It's made up of people who want the country to work again. They believe that we're taxed enough already, the government shouldn't spend more money than what its taking in, and that each of the three branches of government should act within the jurisdictional limitations of the Constitution. That's a broad-based group of people. They just want our country to work again. And I think that that coalition is hanging together more strongly now than ever.
@Rad
Submitted by Samshile on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 7:13am.
The TEA Party Caucus. amigo.
Dull tools are dangerous
Submitted by expatriot on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 5:43pm.
Gregory is proving to be one of the dullest tools in the drawer and he should be careful 'cause he might hurt himself.
With that said, Michele should not tout the extremely small cuts that the retardedcans are proposing. $61 billion, are you kidding me! Get with it Michele, you are usually better than this. Times are a changin' and you and the rest of the retardedcands need to get with it. Don't get me wrong, I like her but she has been in DC a long time. She needs to get out and talk to the "regular" folk. Just sayin'.
Legacy media becomes increasingly feral!
Submitted by TexasMom0517 on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 5:54pm.
The Left is becoming increasingly FERAL and nowhere is it better seen than in the media.
David Gregory carried out game plan against Bachmann
Submitted by metaphorsbwithu on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 5:56pm.
And Bachmann was up to the challenge.
Just spent some time earlier trying to enlighten one of my liberal Canadian twitter friends on what Gregory was trying to do.
The Bachmann-haters will claim, as did he, that she was "unable to answer" Gregory's questions.
The reality is Bachmann was too smart to give Gregory "narrow" talking point clips to play later to imply she was for cutting entitlements to the needy and shutting down the government.
Ironically, Dick Durbin, when asked by Chris Wallace how a mere $10.5 billion in Democrat "cuts" was meeting the Republican's modest $61 billion in cuts "half way", was REALLY "unable to respond".
In truth, Gregory was all over the field, firing out questions on shutting down the government, Obama's bogus "opt-out" of ObamaCare, the EPA and Planned Parenthood, TEAParty criticism of Boehner, the Debt Limit, entitlement backlash by seniors and others, Libya and overthrowing Gaddafi, Running for President and (at the end), playing "gotcha" on some of her previous quotes and asking how she responded to "those who say" she's an extremist and incited anger.
WHEW!
All which she handled admirably despite the verbal assaults and constant interruptions.
And yes, I took notes.
Petulant Gregory
Submitted by TexasMom0517 on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 5:51pm.
David Gregory sounded so petulant and whiny with Bachmann!
The GOP needs to learn to reframe the meme the Democrats and the legacy media are pushing. Michele Bachmann almost fell for it today, when Gregory kept asking if she supported "shutting down the government." Every time the MSM asks this question, the Republicans need to say, "The only way the government will be shut down is if PRESIDENT OBAMA vetoes a budget bill."
They let Clinton get away with framing the debate and blaming the Republicans, but NOT THIS TIME. The GOP must do a better job of getting the message out and responding to the bias in the traditional media outlets. Stop expecting ABC,CBS, NBC, MSNBC, or CNN to ask fair questions. They are constantly asking the "when did you stop beating your wife" questions and don't want Republicans to answer. They simply want to put their liberal viewpoints into the air.
searching for a sound bite
Submitted by Agnostic on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 8:32pm.
David Gregory is searching for the sound bite to use against the Tea Partiers, Speaker Boehner, Republicans and Rep. Bachmann. Just look at the questions he uses to after Bachmann speaks (I would say they were follow-up questions but they had little to do with what the Representative was talking about):
“Are you willing to vote to shut down the government ...”
“Will you vote to shut down the government over those riders?”
“Has Boehner failed the tea party?”
“I'm asking you a direct question here about whether you think, as head of the tea party caucus, whether Boehner has failed to live up to the tea party's expectations.”
“Will you agree with him on that (raise debt ceiling) and do that?”
"Is the tea party chasing the broader GOP off the cliff?”
This was little more than a witch hunt in the way of trying to get a weapon to use in the media against anyone who may stand in the way of the liberal agenda.
I was getting irked too
Submitted by zenman1661 on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 5:57pm.
I was getting irked too By her. We all know that politicians on eiher side love to not answer questions and bring up their talking points instead. And the 105 billion for health care funding is something that needs to be made known. and stopped. But bringing that up was her only response for 3 or 4 different questions from Gregory. It was getting very annoying and monotonous. God help me for saying this, but was Chris Matthews right for saying she was in a trance. If she wants to be taken seriously, she needs to to do a better job changing up her answers to questions, especially when facing liberal "journalists"
Actually...
Submitted by retrocon on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 6:19pm.
If you read the questions, they are setups for soundbites against either the republicans or the tea party. Also, any answer would be wrong.
Shut down the government? No answer, because it isn't any one branch or house that shuts it down. Literally, the senate and house have to agree to shut it down by not compromising. If a bill makes it through both, then the POTUS might not sign. So, there's no answer. If you say yes, they create a scapegoat for the left. If you say no, you go to the slaughter with your tea party base.
Is the Tea Party mad at Boehner? Who is the Tea Party? I'm part of it, but "it's" not a single minded thing. I might like him, someone else may not. No one person speaks for the Tea Party, everyone participating does.
Finally, the Bozo Gregory now has not a single soundbite that doesn't include the 105 billion hidden in the package. Bingo, good job Michelle.
Do you really think this is about anything except soundbites to make the republicans or the tea party or Bachmann look bad? She didn't provide the opportunity.
And, she made a slice of the American public, usually kept ignorant of the facts of the debate, a little smarter.
So, while it is political, maybe it's about time.
Go back to the post just above yours.
Submitted by The Vet on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 7:06pm.
The point in avoiding answering gotcha questions is to not answer gotcha questions so you cannot be caught in a gotcha moment. Agnostic nailed it. Scoot up a little for your answer.
You should not avoid liberal journalists playing liberal jounalist games. But to agree to an interview is not that same as letting the liberal journalist play his game on you.
Quickest way to make a
Submitted by sergeant stogie on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 6:04pm.
Quickest way to make a liberal blow a gasket? Use their own tactics against them. Awesome.
How exactly was the money in
Submitted by mamabear on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 6:19pm.
How exactly was the money in the bill secret? It was written in the bill, right?
mamabear, read carefully
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 6:20pm.
As was noted, the GOP and public was not allowed to read the bill before it passed!!
They were allowed to read
Submitted by mamabear on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 1:33am.
They were allowed to read it. I presume they are saying they didn't have time. Not to carry a different argument over here, but I have never in my life as a lazy teacher complained that information was kept secret from me because the book it was contained in was too long and I didn't have time to read it! Also, the report she's citing came out five months ago, and it is about 6 pages long. Was that being kept secret too?
idiot lefty
Submitted by Radical1979 on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 4:43pm.
Are you really going to go with but I have never in my life as a lazy teacher complained that information was kept secret from me because the book it was contained in was too long and I didn't have time to read it!
The fact is, the bill wasn't available to be read before the vote. Deliberately.
It's 1990 pages long. Why does it matter if it took 5 months to determine her figures? With a bill that long it would take a great deal of time to read and figure out the costs etc. I'm just glad it was found and is now being publicized!
had to vote on it first
Submitted by Agnostic on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 6:37pm.
They had to vote for it before they found out what was in it. Sorry, couldn't resist.
Though it doesn't necessarily apply here since the bill wasn't actually available:
These members of Congress can't even answer simple economic and civic questions and do not truly understand the bills they are voting on. They understand the slogan, the cause or where the money is coming from but they rarely understand the full scope of the bill. This is very wrong and leads more than anything else to the pack mentality in Congress.
I don't expect the members to be experts on every field but they should do due diligence but more importantly the bills need to be simplified. 1000+ pages of legal speak is too much for anyone and the bills are design that way to hide their true objective. Bills need to be simplified and they are incorporate so much that they take 1000s of pages to write then it needs to be split up and implemented in steps so that previous steps can be altered or done away with as necessary before pushing forward with more legislation without even know if the previous has worked to expectation. As you know events are not static and even if Congress comes up with a good idea today if it takes 10 years to implement then 5 years from now the status quo will have changed.
This is a statement against the mountain of paperwork that insulates the politicians from the repercussions of their votes not a statement against a particular party. However, the recent administration has taken this action to all new levels.
Not only that
Submitted by Blonde on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 6:39pm.
It gives the Secretary of HHS (currently Kathleen Sebilius) unlimited power and budget to implement whatever regulations she deems fit to enforce Obamacare. Unlimited. Scary, huh? I've read somewhere that the "regulatory" language is expected to run somewhere in the vicinity of twenty six thousand pages!
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
"The Secretary Shall" Obamacare Chart
Submitted by mom_rox on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 10:21pm.
According to former Sec. Leavitt (of HHS), there are almost 2000 mentions of "The Secretary shall" in the Obamacare law. That's one overloaded day planner.
For any reader who has not yet seen the "The Secretary Shall" Obamacare chart, here's the link.
delete
Submitted by mom_rox on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 10:23pm.
delete double post
I agree that bills need to be
Submitted by mamabear on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 1:39am.
I agree that bills need to be simplified, but I also find it terrifying that members of congress vote on bills they haven't read, or at least had staffers read for them. I felt the same way about the Patriot Act when it passed. Lots of democrats said afterwards that they didn't realize what was in it when they voted for it, and yet they voted FOR it. Yikes.
At least most of the republicans complaining about health care voted against it without reading it instead of for it without reading it!
You can always spot the
Submitted by LAM SON 719 on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 6:31pm.
You can always spot the trolls on this board by their standard preface before they commence their snark little attacks. The mean conservative woman kicked the the little metrosexual's ass. Obama and this thugs got caught lying. Get used to it more exposure of his criminal activity is on the way.
Gregory- "I'd like to stick
Submitted by ant on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 8:34pm.
Gregory- "I'd like to stick to the narrow questions..". Ya know, the ones that I had planned, the agenda points we have been using in an effort to make you look bad and try to scare people by not expanding on any info and leaving ignorant, partisan, non-solutions hanging in the air always. We are not interested in the truth, let the American people be blind-sided by these major problems after it's too late.
The MSM, willing co-conspirators against the American people and if the shit hits the fan, it will be remembered.
What a left wing tool this
Submitted by Miss_Me_Yet on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 8:43pm.
What a left wing tool this guy is.
Liberals ... we can't live with them, they couldn't survive without us ...
MR. GREGORY: Let me get in
Submitted by ThisnThat on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 9:54pm.
MR. GREGORY: Let me get in here. I want to stick with the, the narrow budget questions.
Did Gregory mean: The $60 billion a year medicare fraud that obama said he wanted to tackle immediately? Or the $200B in duplicative programs waste reported just last week? Or the $61B in cuts passed by the House and rejected by obama and the Senate dims? Or the $113B annual costs of illegals in this country? Were these the narrow budget questions on Gregory's docket?
Obviously not. All Gregory wanted to do was to try to gin up a Tea Party-Republican squabble so he could announce to the country: "See how weak the repulicans are?" Way to go Bachman, for standing your ground.
__________
“Didn't win the Medal of Honor? Didn't even serve? Then lie about it. We'll support you." — 9th Circuit Court
Good for Michele Bachmann for
Submitted by Jack Bauer on Sun, 03/06/2011 - 9:58pm.
Good for Michele Bachmann for learning how to play these Democrat shills masquerading as "unbiased journalists"...
I guess she came ARMED AND DANGEROUS to a brain fight.
Listen and LEARN wet Republicans
All of the above Mr Obama? --- How about ALL OF THE BELOW, instead.
Irked
Submitted by WonderingAloud on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 2:56am.
I believe what mainly irked David Gregory was the fact that no matter the question asked of her, Congresswoman Bachmann rattled on about the $105 million in hidden costs. Even long after she had made her point. He could have asked her what day of the week it is and she would have rambled on about $105 million.
It was a very fair question to ask her about some in the Tea Party being warry of Speaker Boehner and his milk-toast attitude about cutting spending. Instead of giving a thoughtful, well delivered response, she went off again about the $105 million. She is turning into another Republican who is excited with the sound of her own voice.
Let's hope she runs for president, loses and gives the opportunity to an effective conservative and true cost cutter to take her place in congress.
Duh, Liberals will never
Submitted by Miss_Me_Yet on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 3:35am.
Duh, Liberals will never really get it. Representative Bachmann had 10 minutes on the premiere libfest television program of all time to drive home the point that president Obama is nothing more than a lying, cheating, America hating, ghetto creating, community organizing, POS.
This is a man whose entire presidency is not only a total sham, but an all out assault on this countries sovereignty, as well as the lives and well being of each and every man, woman and child for many generations to come.
She was spot on and did her job of alerting the people to the danger and enemy in our midst, in this case the traitor in our White House, president Obama.
I guess you can call Michelle Bachmann a modern day Paul Revere.
There was no other way this vital information would ever be heard on the president's very own state controlled television network, unless this brave American patriot spoke out like she did.
NBC sure as hell wasn't going to do it on their own.
Liberals ... we can't live with them, they couldn't survive without us ...
You're point was pretty much
Submitted by ant on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 11:17am.
You're point was pretty much answered by 'retrocon' and other posters above.
Now, Gregory and his station have no damaging video 'clips' of Bachmann that don't contain the Obamacare accounting fraud revelation. This is most likely why she did what she did. It's not difficult to know the MSM's Standard-operating-procedure, they are not that clever, they're just persistent. Bachmann probably knew this and was ready to play.
Would you rather see Obama in the Oval Office---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 3:03am.
than a conservative female? Oh, that's right; you don't feel Michele Bachmann is an effective conservative. Whom do you have in mind that is an actual, real, and most importantly, effective conservative?Defund ObamaCare
Submitted by Peter on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 3:31am.
Go Michelle Go. Stay on point and get the secret opening salvo of ObamaCare defunded.
Michelle Bachmann handled David Gregory superbly!
Submitted by Rush Fan on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 8:35am.
As P.J. indicated, Michelle stayed on the message she wanted to convey the viewers, regardless of the banal questions Gregory asked. Gregory is usually able to maintain the upper hand. He was overmatched with Bachmann.
I don't understand the fear
Submitted by billb on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 8:49am.
I don't understand the fear that some conservative candidates have about running against Obama. He was elected with a blank resume and lofty speeches. He now has a record. There in lies the problem for him! Romney is still taking heat for health care in Mass. Obama has turned healthcare into a gross nightmare. If this Nobel prizewinning bufoon gets elected, then for sure ALL is lost.
BTY, Sara Palin needs to go to the Michelle Bachmann school of stage prescence!
Bachmann
Submitted by 612chris on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 9:15am.
It would be wonderful if the media would ignore this politician. I live in MN, and she has done nothing for her district, which is why we send politicians to D.C. She wants to be on the nation stage, but is ignorant and has nothing new to bring to any political discussion. Gregory was correct in attempting to get her to answer a simple question, but she comes with her “talking” points, and refuses to engage in a dialog that may offer clarification on her ideas. She does not deserve the time the media wastes on her
Does nothing eh
Submitted by Boudin on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 9:25am.
I take it then, you dont mind hundreds of billions being snatched from the taxpayers without consent?
You are mistaken, 612chris
Submitted by Thalpy on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 12:43pm.
Bachmann is exactly who we need to represent the United States on any of the MSM programs of propaganda and indoctrination: that would be all of the programs put forth by the MSM. Our civil war IS on the National stage, not in MN.
All conservative women are "ignorant." We get it, 612Tingles.
Submitted by SickofLibs on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 12:49pm.
Threatened much?
double
Submitted by Boudin on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 9:26am.
?
Real simple Chrissy
Submitted by Tomorama on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 10:21am.
Real "simple" even for you Chrissytine612teen........................
Boudin asked you a direct question, are you OK with her point about Oblunder and the hidden 105 BILLION dollars as being wasteful and lied about?
Sebbalius actually admitted the other day that the books were indeed cooked to make the numbers work, I MISSED THE HUGE STORY ON THE NIGHTLIES??????
My bad, it is ODS or Booooooooshes fault.
Questioning Obama
Submitted by Lee Boggs on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 6:34pm.
In the March 6 Meet the Press, David Gregory asked Michele Bachmann the following: MR. GREGORY: Is it appropriate...to question whether this president loves America? The fact that David Gregory finds a very relevent question inappropriate reflects pooly on his journalistic standards.