"The White House is finishing plans for what it is calling a “fiscal responsibility summit,” a three-hour bipartisan wonk-fest. Invitations are going out this week to 90 people: 30 members of the House, 30 senators and 30 scholars and representatives of advocacy groups such as AARP, according to a person familiar with the plans... (Obama) will take a break next Monday (Feb. 23, 2009) to consider just how the government can get a grip on its increasingly ugly balance sheet." White House Plans 'Fiscal Responsibility Summit' - The Caucus Blog - NYTimes.com (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/17/white-house-plans-fiscal-responsibility-summit/) Just more smoke and mirrors?

Just more ways to spend more money trying to figure out how to fix something.

All I have to say is thank God he didn't decide to become an airline pilot instead of an empty suit.

...
All I have to say is thank God he didn't decide to become an airline pilot instead of an empty suit.

But his suit ain't empty; it's full of mischief!

But his suit ain't empty; it's full of mischief!

Ok, I'll concede that it's not empty, but it is full of bulldung. Wonder if he's got a set of Huggies on under his suit?

So, George, what do you think of the possibility of now having an Internet Czar to watch out for the Internet to make sure nobody can think for themselves? Now, that is really scary. Coming soon to a neighborhood near you.

So, George, what do you think of the possiblity of now having an Internet Czar to watch out for the Internet to make sure nobody can think for themselves? Now, that is really scary. Coming soon to a neighborhood near you.If you knew anything about the internet and Obama you'd know that he's for net neutrality. What's your view on that?

If you knew anything about the internet and Obama you'd know that he's for net neutrality. What's your view on that?

You, as usual, are talking out your arse... Definitely not net neutrality but net castration.


"We must make the internet more "Obama" friendly, there are a whole bunch of conservatard sites that criticize our president. I have been assured by Sec of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano that she will take steps to make the internet more friendly but she needs sites that should be banned. Websites that must be banned! "

Grassroots Support of Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty. (http://ronpaulforums.com)
Campaign For Liberty — Home (http://www.campaignforliberty.com/)
Wikipedia (http://wikipedia.org)
The John Birch Society (http://jbs.org)
Ludwig von Mises Institute - Homepage (http://mises.org/)
Libertarian Party | Smaller Government | Lower Taxes | More Freedom (http://www.lp.org/)
LewRockwell.com (http://www.lewrockwell.com/)
Ron Paul Wins! | Campaign for Liberty at the Daily Paul | Blog (http://www.dailypaul.com/)
Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind! (http://www.infowars.com)
Alex Jones' InfoWars.net: Manning the guns in the fight against tyranny (http://infowars.net/)
Alex Jones' Prison Planet.com (http://www.prisonplanet.com/)
Alex Jones' Prison Planet.tv: Fighting The Orwellian Police State (http://www.prisonplanet.tv/)
The Cato Institute (http://www.cato.org/)
Rebuild the Party | A Plan for the Future (http://www.rebuildtheparty.com/)
Jeff Rense Program (http://www.rense.com)
projectcamelot.com (http://www.projectcamelot.com)
informationliberation - The news you're not supposed to know... (http://www.informationliberation.com)

Once we compile our list and submit it to the ADL, how long before we can expect some results? The government should censor the entire Internet. Only information constructive to the cause of the people and progress should be permitted."
__________________

You, as usual, are talking out your arse... Definitely not net neutrality but net castration.You are certainly not a pleasant person nor are you even aware of what the term 'net neutrality' means. You posted a lot of links but I have no idea how they relate to net neutrality.

Here let me educate you:

Citizen's Briefing Book Portal (http://citizensbriefingbook.change.gov/ideas/viewIdea.apexp?id=087800000004mKO)


During the campaign, Barack Obama pledged to “take a backseat to no one in my commitment to Net Neutrality" and to "protect the Internet's traditional openness to innovation and creativity and ensure that it remains a platform for free speech and innovation that will revitalize our democracy." The administration can show it's commitment by working with the new Congress and FCC to pass laws that make Net Neutrality the cornerstone to protecting innovation, free speech and choice on the Internet.

Obama pledges Net neutrality laws if elected president (http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9806707-7.html)
And then
Obama Picks a Net-Neutrality-Lovin' Techie For FCC Chair (http://i.gizmodo.com/5130203/obama-picks-a-net+neutrality+lovin-techie-for-fcc-chair)

Educate yourself of what the issue is: Network neutrality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality)

The websites cited were ones that were to be banned by Ms.Napolatono as they are not O friendly or like to tell the truth about the US government.

That has nothing to do with net neutrality.

Where do you the info that the Obama administration wants websites banned?

Fiscal responsibility is a government oxymoron.
But if this "summit " begins to address long term liabilities associated with entitlements and proposes realistic reforms that encompasse the best ideas of both parties then some good can come from it.

The Concord Coalition released a statement on the summit.
http://www.concordcoalition.org/files/uploaded-pdfs/090219-fiscal_responsibility_summit.pdf

For the summit to be successful :


It must be truly bipartisan and develop solutions that command wide support.
It must have a broad mandate to address all aspects of the fiscal problem while fostering strong economic growth.
There must be no preconditions to the deliberations. All options must be on the table for discussion. Nobody should be required to agree in advance to any option.
Recommendations must go before Congress for an up-or-down vote with few if any amendments.
That last condition is the rub in my opinion. Congress can't help themselves... it's like an addiction . When they get the chance to line legislation with earmarks they begin to salivate.

This will also put the President to the test . Can he heed the opinions of this summit or will he cave to the will of his special interest constituencies ?

You know at least he's trying to be bi-partisan and it seems a departure from the Bush administrations we know best attitude and F the rest of you.

I posted plenty of examples when Bush was bipartisan. You can look them up . It could even be argued that the economy truly tanked when Bush (in his own words ) abandoned free market principles .

But to the point of the posting ;both George and I support this initiative .

You know at least he's trying to be bi-partisan....

I don't believe this meeting has anything to do with bi-partisanship: "With the U.S. government racing toward $10 trillion in spending and loan guarantees to confront the recession, President Barack Obama on Monday will say it’s time to clamp down on federal expenditures." Mixed spending messages from Obama - Josh Gerstein - Politico.com (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0209/19144.html)
I believe we, in the U.S. are coming 'face-to-face' with maintaining our economic security. "In Beijing, she called on authorities in Beijing to continue buying US Treasuries, saying it would help jumpstart the flagging US economy and stimulate imports of Chinese goods. "'By continuing to support American Treasury instruments the Chinese are recognising our interconnection. We are truly going to rise or fall together,' Clinton said at the US embassy here." Clinton wraps Asia trip by asking China to buy US debt (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.42a44b0f5d9cf5c9762e80574e79a3d 5.831&show_article=1)

The truth is out .
In his speech today, Obama said that health care is "the single most pressing long-term fiscal challenge we are facing by far."

His director of Office of Management and Budget, Peter Orszag, said , "Health care reform is entitlement reform. The path to fiscal responsibility runs directly through health care reform."

This is a prelude to Gvt. Run National Health Care under the guise of "fiscal responsibility ".

So in other words ;the way to control entitlements is to expand them.

Meanwhile he shelved plans to introduce SS reform under pressure from the Congressional Dems.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/23/us/politics/23social.html?_r=1

Although Lawrence Summers, head of the National Economic Council, fell asleep on the podium, most attendees, including Republicans, appear to have appreciated the exercise. There was even some light-heartedness.
FT.com / US / Politics & Foreign policy - Obama promises bipartisan action on deficits (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7b52319c-0205-11de-8199-000077b07658.html)