I quoted both instances the first time I pointed it out was 3 replies up from your comment 4 replies up. You can read your comment and see exactly where I you said it twice.
By whom? Have I even once claimed that Obama isn’t culpable, or have I agreed that he is multiple times? Yep the latter. You aren’t being put to any task or called out. No one is daft enough to not understand how this unfolded. Just because we aren’t all myopically and mistakenly focusing on Obama ONLY, you feel the need to keep trying to drop this all on only him for whatever reason and are the one putting others to task. Ironic that you claim the reverse.
I have only pointed out the bigger picture and the crucial action that made all the possible. The very reason why this wasn’t prevented. Every time I do it is you who jumps all over me trying to railroad the Democrats with some political agenda…as other commentors have pointed out above as well. give me a break…BOTH parties unanimously confirmed the appointee. The appointee is not the real instigator, he is merely the means that the real instigator, the political lobbies, were able to get him to start the ball rolling which then landed in the courts which they also influenced. You have such a hardon against Obama that you are completely missing the bigger picture, and missing the fact that I’ve not once disagreed that Obama appointed him and that he is culpable for his role. I’ve never, not even once, disagreed with that fact, I’ve just ALSO pointed out the much bigger picture and the larger, more crucial pieces that made this all possible, nay inevitable. How this all would have been prevented if one party hadn’t specifically blocked the bill that would have prevented this, the bill that came so close to making all of this impossible.
Please reread the comment thread with comprehension. I’ve never once denied the Democrats culpability or Obama’s role, I’ve only continued to provide the big picture which you’ve railed against, in which the Republicans have played a very large part. This has gotten quite a lot of contention from you despite all being factual, level headed, and not motivated by my political leanings because I’m not in favor of either party which gives me the ability to see the bigger picture. We get it, you hate Obama, geez…
Quoting myself here; “So what you’re saying is because Republicans made it possible that it’s
understandable Obama’s administration would try and change Net
Neutrality rules to favor corporations?”
That statement is straw-manning you and associating you with a political party?
Nope, not the ones. Doesn’t really matter at this point, neither of us has anything left to say to each other.
I understand that you:
dislike Obama
hold him and the democrats responsible
You hopefully understand that I think that:
both parties played a role in this appointment and share responsibility.
the blocked bill that would have prevented any of this was an even more crucial piece of this all unfolding then the appointment. it all could have easily been avoided/prevented had that passed.
the real driver behind all of this is the financial pressure from specific lobbies, and their reach extends much further then either party.
Not really much more to this then that. So unless you want to add any specific crucial point you feel like I didn’t understand or missed, we can conclude this exchange as it isn’t going anywhere productive. Thanks.
Except one thing, and it’s my whole point. Republicans are acting as themselves and for their agenda, ones they campaign on, no lies on their behalf. What makes the difference Obama specifically is he is corrupt. Watch the video the thread started on.
It would have. But the considering the the sitting President’s appointed chairman, and the President does meet with his Chairs and works with them, I point to figure one; Corrupt.
[quote=“redesigned, post:43, topic:29879”]
3. the real driver behind all of this is the financial pressure from
specific lobbies, and their reach extends much further then either
party.[/quote]
And that’s the other promise broken I believe I mentioned once or twice. And I think this one should be driven hard. No lobbyists were to be appointed to head any of his committees! He even went so for to write an executive order to put a face on it, and left a waiver in it allowing the appointments.
Remember that whole “Hope/Change” thing? This ain’t it. Good night and Good Luck!
