C-SPAN Challenges Congress to Open Health Care Talks to TV Coverage

[Xenophon]

This should be fun, watching as the 'most open, honest and ethical congress ever' renegs and keeps the entire thing behind closed doors.

C-SPAN Challenges Congress to Open Health Care Talks to TV Coverage

 

[Polk]

The talks shouldn't be open.

 

[hjmick]

The talks shouldn't be open.

Why not?

 

[Xenophon]

The talks shouldn't be open.

Why not?

It would be bad for the Democrats.

 

[hjmick]

The talks shouldn't be open.

Why not?

It would be bad for the Democrats.

Oh I know why they want to do it in secret, I want to know why Polk thinks it's a bad idea to open the meetings...

 

[Baruch Menachem]

If this were talks about super secret funding for stat of the art weapons systems, I could see a good reason for keeping it secret. Or CIA payroll issues, that should be kept secret.

But this is not national security, this is highway robbery. The only reason I can see to keep anything secret is to hide the criminality of the process.

 

[slackjawed]

I 5think it should be 'open' and televised. I would like to see it myself and would like everyone interested to see it too.
The only reason to keep hiding, as they have been, is to provide cover for the members of congress that will be in attendance.
I offer the observation that the 'cover' they are looking for will backfire on them come election time if they continue the secret closed door deal making sessions and continue to pass bills in the middle of the night and on weekends.
If these meetings were about national security, then there would be a justification to keep them secret. Since they are not, shine a light on what each of them do and say during the meetings. The American people deserve the openness and transparency that we have been promised.

 

[Xenophon]

I'm happy to see people recognize that there is no valid reason have closed door meetings on 'healthcare reform' unless you intend to do and say things you KNOW the public won't like.

 

[Polk]

The talks shouldn't be open.

Why not?

What purpose does it serve?

 

[potter 58]

gee where were you wingnuts when Cheney had his secret energy meetings, not a peep as usual

 

[Polk]

gee where were you wingnuts when Cheney had his secret energy meetings, not a peep as usual

Because, setting energy policy behind entirely closed doors is the same thing as merging the text of two bills which are publicly available and are the product of months of televised debate.

 

[Xenophon]

gee where were you wingnuts when Cheney had his secret energy meetings, not a peep as usual

I love these posts, they just scream 'I am a partisan douchebag who thinks you are too because I'm a half wit.'

I was protesting Cheney and Chimpola's wars sonny, the ones your Democrat friends supported when they thought it would get them votes.

Back to the topic, explain why you fear the light of day on this process, if you can, which i doubt.

 

[SFC Ollie]

The talks shouldn't be open.

Why not?

What purpose does it serve?

Gee what purpose? maybe to show the people who is cutting their throats and who is actually for the people? or maybe just because the President promised it. But I don't expect it. If the televise it there will be 50 nails in the democrat coffin instead of 10.

 

[LuckyDan]

BO himself said they shoud be televised. It's public policy. Why not air it? Even if it would be a yawn.

 

[Annie]

Reason for the Democrats to put debate on C-Span:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Api4fUziAnI[/ame]

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The talks shouldn't be open.

But Obama promised they would be. I guess he lied. Now there is a real shocker.

 

[slackjawed]

gee where were you wingnuts when Cheney had his secret energy meetings, not a peep as usual

I cannot speak for others, but I opposed these closed meetings as well. In retrospect, there was an argument that those meetings did have something to do with both national security and possible criminal prosecution. I don't see any issues of national security or any possible criminal prosecution in these ones. I simply see politicians that want to hide what they do and say from the people that they are supposed to serve.

I think the purpose to open these meetings to tv coverage would be to deny these so-called leaders the cover to do one thing, or say one thing behind closed doors and claim something quite different in the light of day.

 

[hjmick]

The talks shouldn't be open.

Why not?

What purpose does it serve?

Well, for one it would go a long way to fulfilling Pelosi's yet to be fulfilled promise to "lead the most honest, most open and most ethical Congress in history." That was back in 2006, isn't three years long enough to get that up and running? Secondly, there is no good reason not to hold the meetings in the open, especially when this plan will have an effect on almost every American. Third, there are many Americans who would be interested determining for themselves what's what, rather than relying on the spin from the participants. Lastly, perhaps by having the hearing open and televised, it would cut out the kickbacks, shady deals and special-interest provisions that we have come to expect and see regularly.

Now, tell us all, why are you afraid to have the hearings open and televised?

 

[Oddball]

The talks shouldn't be open.

But Obama promised they would be. I guess he lied. Now there is a real shocker.

Beat me to it...Good catch.

 

[hjmick]

gee where were you wingnuts when Cheney had his secret energy meetings, not a peep as usual

Well...

I am no "wingnut" and I can't speak for others, but I'll tell you where I was...

Nowhwere near you so you can't even begin to speculate my take on the energy meetings with Cheney. For the record, I was opposed to the closed doors then as I am now.


Now piss off.