It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gregg withdraws as commerce secretary nominee

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 07:42 PM
link   
People keep referring to Obama's promise of unprecedented transparency in all his dealings. Isn't it about time to stop pretending that this is one of the promises he intends to keep? This gigantic bill was concocted behind closed doors by a handful of democrats. Even members of Congress don't know exactly what's in it because it keeps being revised and it's such a rush rush job. There was certaily no debate on what kind of spending might be helpful and what might be wasteful. The promise to allow the public to review the bill is over because it won't be posted until tonight and they are called to vote tomorrow, certainly not the promised 48 hours. Geither tells us he can't give us details on TARP II because they have to figure it out as they go along and as they see what works. What's transparent about that? I haven't heard any comments by the White House on Rahm Emanuel's five years of free housing in Washington DC in the home of a pollster with whom he does business (how is this different from Daschle's free car service?). These stump speeches Obama is giving around the country are nothing but preaching to the choir about how great his ideas are that is then broadcast on the news, but there is nothing there but dire predictions if his plan isn't immediately implemented. Maybe this TOTAL lack of transparency is part of what Gregg couldn't go along with.




posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 11:34 PM
link   
you watch now that gregg is out they will move the census back to the commerce.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 11:48 PM
link   
This country can't continue with these two political parties. The bickering and finger pointing makes me sick. Nothing is being done to help the tax payers who keep voting for these power hungry, money grabbing, self righteous career politicians. We're a society of haves and have nots. People need to wake up and stop buying into all the lies and fear mongering. We have politicians who declare they are pro-life, but don't think twice about sending over 4 thousand young men and women to their deaths. It's all for the sake of "national security." and it's a sad state of affairs. It's the 21st century and we're still solving world problems in primitive and barbaric ways. We're brain washed to thinking the United States can do no wrong, but yet we continue to reprimand countries who do the same dispicable things that we do. We invade countries and than try to force democracy down other countries throats. I wonder at times, isn't that the same thing that we were told about the Soviet Union and communisim? It's amazing the same people who complain about corporate greed vote for politicians who support them and their bail outs. Our taxpayers money is being used to support the same people who control our daily lives.



posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 12:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


I forgot about this. I did see a story about this not too long after the election and wondered why I didn't hear about it before we all voted. I believe the Republicans were fine with Obama winning because they didn't want to be stuck with and blamed forever for this economic mess. There is no other explanation for why they did not bring out the Chicago connections in any great detail. There was plenty there including this very article to reveal Obama's political style. Chicago machine politics has indeed come to Washington DC!



posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 04:32 AM
link   
I truly believe he quit for these reasons.
Look at what N.H is proposing to do in this man’s State at the moment.
It’s like an oil and water mix to what’s going on in the Whitehouse.
Good for him!

peace



posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 09:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Anonymous ATS
 


I couldn't agree more. The 2 party system is the major problem that I see today.



posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by earlywatcher
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


I forgot about this. I did see a story about this not too long after the election and wondered why I didn't hear about it before we all voted. I believe the Republicans were fine with Obama winning because they didn't want to be stuck with and blamed forever for this economic mess. There is no other explanation for why they did not bring out the Chicago connections in any great detail. There was plenty there including this very article to reveal Obama's political style. Chicago machine politics has indeed come to Washington DC!


I don't understand either, it is like the republicans threw the election.



posted on Feb, 13 2009 @ 01:04 PM
link   
I think they did throw the election. So many things were not brought up by McCain in venues that would have forced examination, such as during the televised debates. The Chicago political machine is an obvious one. Another is the simple matter of eligibility. I know there have been threads that discussed this but question continues. Recently Occidental College was asked to release their records on Obama, specifically whether he attended as a foreign student and whether he received scholarship money intended for foreign students. The college was going to comply but Obama's team of Los Angeles lawyers said no. You can see latest details
Sanctions sought in eligibility case
and this latest complaint itself
Writ of Mandate in Obama eligibility case
Why weren't these things brought up by republicans if they were serious about winning the election?

I think Gregg probably became more and more uncomfortable with the situation and didn't want to be in a position of have to explain and support this total lack of transparency in the new administration.



posted on Feb, 14 2009 @ 05:58 PM
link   
I wondered how a guy who believes the Commerce Department should be abolished could possibly be the Secretary of Commerce. I think Obama chose him because he is a fiscal conservative, and he wants to include some of those in his administration. I also think Obama is sincere in wanting to work with Republicans.

Unfortunately, Gregg appears to be too ideologically motivated to be able to work in a bipartisan way.
There are very few moderates left in the leadership of the Republican party, and those appear to be the only ones who can reach across the aisle.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join