Sen. Inhofe (R) - Me no read bill - Me against bill, page 3

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 6 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 16 times

reply posted on 27-8-2009 @ 10:57 PM by schrodingers dog

Originally posted by soldiermom

It's his JOB to be the voice of his constituents. He knows what's in the bill. When he stated he didn't need to read it, I'm sure he meant it in a way as to relay the fact that it's recycled bullcrap that he's seen before.

Oh so now YOU know what he meant.

This is what the man said:

"I don't have to read it, or know what's in it. I'm going to oppose it anyways," he said.

You can spin it any way you wanna to to make yourself digest it, but he actually didn't even say he didn't WANT to know it, he said he didn't HAVE to know it. Yikes!

But keep plugging, I'm sure you'll find a way way around it ... maybe.

[edit on 27 Aug 2009 by schrodingers dog]

reply posted on 27-8-2009 @ 11:13 PM by JaxonRoberts

reply to post by soldiermom

His job is to do what's BEST for his constituents, even if they don't like it! His job is to be MORE informed about pending legislation than his constituents, because they are usually ignorant of what's in pending legislation! He represents ALL of the people in his State, not just those of his party! Not just those who vote. EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD WITHIN THE BORDERS OF HIS STATE!

Now, he may very well be correct in opposing this particular peice of legislation, but if he is himself ignorant of what is in it, HOW THE FRAK WOULD HE KNOW???? You are on a site who's motto is DENY IGNORANCE, and all I am hearing is SUPPORT of ignorance!

EVERY MEMBER OF BOTH THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE SHOULD READ AND UNDERSTAND EVERY PEICE OF LEGISLATION BEFORE EVEN CONTEMPLATING A VOTE, YEA OR NAY!!!

reply posted on 27-8-2009 @ 11:14 PM by soldiermom

Originally posted by schrodingers dog

Originally posted by soldiermom

It's his JOB to be the voice of his constituents. He knows what's in the bill. When he stated he didn't need to read it, I'm sure he meant it in a way as to relay the fact that it's recycled bullcrap that he's seen before.

Oh so now YOU know what he meant.

This is what the man said:

"I don't have to read it, or know what's in it. I'm going to oppose it anyways," he said.

You can spin it any way you wanna to to make yourself digest it, but he actually didn't even say he didn't WANT to know it, he said he didn't HAVE to know it. Yikes!

But keep plugging, I'm sure you'll find a way way around it ... maybe.

[edit on 27 Aug 2009 by schrodingers dog]

I'm pretty certain he has a fairly educated guess as to what's in it. All he really needs to know is that it's going to cost we the tax payers in the end. That's good enough for me and it's probably good enough for him.

No comment on Conyers? I suppose it's okay if they don't read it as long as they vote for it. Where's the balance here?

reply posted on 27-8-2009 @ 11:16 PM by Mak Manto

Urgh...

Inhofe...

If there ever is a senator that should not be a politician, he's it. I'm not surprised that he hasn't read it and will not support it.

He was voted as one of the most conservative members of Congress. That means both the Senate (100 senators) and the House (435 members).

I don't think he could muster up the effort to read it, and besides, I feel he's one of those "I have to be a conservative no matter what" so he would vote against it.

I've been a HUGE opponent of senator Inhofe for a long time.

Not surprised he is against this.

reply posted on 27-8-2009 @ 11:19 PM by soldiermom

reply to post by JaxonRoberts

EVERY MEMBER OF BOTH THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE SHOULD READ AND UNDERSTAND EVERY PEICE OF LEGISLATION BEFORE EVEN CONTEMPLATING A VOTE, YEA OR NAY!!!

Sure. But we're just going to pick on the Republican Senator from Oklahoma for not reading it. Leave the rest of them alone. Especially if they're voting for it.

In addition to DENY IGNORANCE, we should have DENY HYPOCRISY thrown in for good measure.

reply posted on 27-8-2009 @ 11:22 PM by Mak Manto

reply to post by soldiermom

Senator Inhofe deserves his ignorance. I've been a staunch opponent of his for years.

This is nothing new.

Seeing his work to stop LGBT rights was disgusting enough.

He'll be against anything that seems "liberal."

reply posted on 27-8-2009 @ 11:24 PM by jd140

www.news9.com...

Doesn't take much to find out why he won't vote for it.

reply posted on 27-8-2009 @ 11:25 PM by schrodingers dog

Originally posted by soldiermom

No comment on Conyers? I suppose it's okay if they don't read it as long as they vote for it. Where's the balance here?

How about this ...

Everyone who has to vote on it should read it.

I will even at this point settle for them skimming it.

What is unacceptable for a representative of the people is not "having to" ...

Like I said, if the job of a Senator is what you seem to think it is, why have him?
Why not let the people vote directly for every bill, because that's what you're saying.

I've said this before and I'll say it again, show me a Democrat, Libertarian, anyone who says what he said and I'll condemn it with the same venom.

You seem to think that this is about parties and the health care bill ...

It is not.

He could be voting on a bill to plant tulips, he still should HAVE to look into it.

Now ... you can do it .. repeat after me ...

"my senator should, if not read the bills he has to vote on, but at least he should maybe take a passing interest"

reply posted on 27-8-2009 @ 11:28 PM by JaxonRoberts

reply to post by soldiermom

When I said every member, I meant every member! Republican, Democrat and Independent. Whether voting for or against. No double standard. Yes, Conyers too! It's their damn job! It's what we all pay them for! They are not paid by the State they are from, they are paid by all of us! If they can't do their jobs, they need to be FIRED! We hold the power to do that! I don't care if they do vote the way you want them to, if they blatantly refuse to read and understand legislation, they should be voted OUT! PERIOD!

reply posted on 27-8-2009 @ 11:36 PM by schrodingers dog

reply to post by soldiermom

Oh and one final thing cause I'm really done with this nonsense ...

You may rationalize this all you want at your leisure now because you and him are on the same side of the issue.

That is serendipity ... one of these days another crucial piece of legislation will be before him, and he will also feel he doesn't have to look into it, one that you will not agree with, and in the process will fail you as your elected representative.

This is what you are missing when you put this in a "party" context.

You are encouraging incompetence because it is politically convenient at this moment.

That incompetence will come back and bite you. (and u won't be insured)

reply posted on 27-8-2009 @ 11:44 PM by soldiermom

reply to post by schrodingers dog

I'll wager my last dollar that he does know what's in the bill. If I thought he were really that inept and cavalier, I would never have cast a vote for him.

Poor choice of words on his part, but you don't usually get where he is by not doing your job. In some cases , maybe you do. Maybe he had his scrubs do the dirty work. I don't know. But I'll still lay a bet that he knows exactly what's in the bill. At the end of the day, he's still doing what his constituents want.

I don't vote for a person because I think they know what's best for me. I know what's best for me. I vote for them because I expect them to listen to their voter's will. And that's what he's doing.

reply posted on 27-8-2009 @ 11:50 PM by schrodingers dog

Originally posted by soldiermom
reply to post by schrodingers dog

Poor choice of words on his part ...

You know what, let's leave at that ...

I know when to quit.

Thank you for meeting me one tenth of the way, and all I had to do is lose my last couple of hair and aggravate my ulcer.

reply posted on 27-8-2009 @ 11:52 PM by jam321

I believe in equality.

Here's the Conyers thread so you can express the same view you have of Sen. Inhofe for not reading the bill.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

As for the Senator, I see no reason for him to read or know what is inside the house version, but it is his obligation to read and be familiar with the Senate version.

reply posted on 27-8-2009 @ 11:55 PM by jdub297

Originally posted by schrodingers dog

Seems like Oklahoma Senator Jim Inhofe, and all around genius, gets all he needs to know about one of the most significant pieces of legislation in US history from public opinion and the "media" ...

At a town hall meeting Wednesday Sen. Jim Inhofe told Chickasha residents he does not need to read the 1,000 page health care reform bill, he will simply vote against it.

Isn't this following the Democrats' established procedure for meaningful debate?

During his speech at a National Press Club luncheon, House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.), questioned the point of lawmakers reading the health care bill.

“I love these members, they get up and say, ‘Read the bill,’” said Conyers.

“What good is reading the bill if it’s a thousand pages and you don’t have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill?”

www.cnsnews.com...

deny ignorance

jw

[edit on 27-8-2009 by jdub297]

reply posted on 27-8-2009 @ 11:55 PM by soldiermom

reply to post by schrodingers dog

Oh and one final thing cause I'm really done with this nonsense ...

So am I. Like I said before, it's recycled bullcrap that he's seen before. This has been in the works for a very long time. He's been around for a very long time.

And if it's not about "parties" like you claim, why didn't you do a thread on the Conyers statement too?

There's those darn double standards again.

reply posted on 28-8-2009 @ 12:00 AM by soldiermom

reply to post by schrodingers dog

Ditto. It's late and I'm going to bed. We'll just leave it at that.

reply posted on 28-8-2009 @ 12:03 AM by schrodingers dog

reply to post by soldiermom

Because as Rockpuck said, I've unfortunately gotten used to all the idiots on the hill not doing their job. And a rep/sen not reading a bill is not unfortunately not news. We heard it from both parties during the bailout/tarp debacles. It's sad and it's cynical but there you have it.

But ...

I had never heard ANYONE say "I don't HAVE to read it" ... I never heard anyone show and proudly declare what I perceive as such contempt and arrogance towards those he is supposed to represent.

Like I said, if this guy Conyers or anyone else said such a thing he is equally incompetent and I'll say it. It really isn't a party thing with me.

So yes, I agree with you, such scrutiny should apply beyond party lines lest one IS a hypocrite.

Night soldier.

[edit on 28 Aug 2009 by schrodingers dog]

reply posted on 28-8-2009 @ 12:09 AM by schrodingers dog

reply to post by jdub297

Conyers is also incompetent ...

There ... happy?

I hope not because that doesn't make us even, it makes us both lose.

You should expect better of your reps than doing as poorly as the idiot to his left.

[edit on 28 Aug 2009 by schrodingers dog]

reply posted on 28-8-2009 @ 12:18 AM by jdub297

Originally posted by jam321
As for the Senator, I see no reason for him to read or know what is inside the house version, but it is his obligation to read and be familiar with the Senate version.

Um, no. Not really.

There was a guy in the Senate a while back who decided that MOST bills were none of his business!

Instead of taking a stand for or against almost every bill he voted on, he just announced "present" at the roll call.

He was from Illinois. He's not a senator anymore. He had to quit when he was elected President.

jw

reply posted on 28-8-2009 @ 01:35 AM by TSer78

Originally posted by IKnowNothing
Just proves he's a standard American politician, that doesn't read what's being put to vote. This entire legislature is making a mockery of the system.

Agreed.

It's not about what's in a bill that matters much, it's how our buddies vote.

When the Patriot Act was voted in, the right did the same.