Town hall meeting with Senator Evan Bayh

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Julie Grice on August 10, 2009 at 12:41pm

Yes, and yes. I'm not holding my breath that he will agree to it. Ellsworth just backed out of his a few days ago.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Pamela L. Reilly on August 10, 2009 at 11:19pm

Yes and yes, definitely! Thanks for doing this!!!

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Ron Brumbarger on August 14, 2009 at 7:08am

Apparently Senator Bayh nor his crew are signed into SI - not a single peep from them to meet with his constituents. Sad... truly, truly sad that we have no representation of our opinions (how could he know) from Senator Bayh. Seems to me that if Senator Bayh hasn't the time to meet with those for whom he works... perhaps he SHOULDN'T BE WORKING FOR US ANY LONGER...

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Ben McCann on August 14, 2009 at 9:42am

It is time someone step up and LEAD the charge to take his place as REPRESENTATIVE.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by David Monroe on August 15, 2009 at 3:09pm

After all of this and seeing what has been happening this Summer. All the outright lies and by people, most calling themselves good Christian folks. It's heartbreaking.

The increasing heat of the chatter over this summer should be a cold wakeup call. We must try to be more civil, more understanding, less partisan. If I say I don't like the screaming, I am not saying I don't want free speech and people with any semblance of intelligence know that's what I mean, stop perverting words, stop the lies, stop the anger, please. We are courting a season of violence in America. We are eroding our common sense and common decency. By pumping up hyperpartisanship, jingoism, xenophobia and yes, by some, racism as a means of gaining market share or as a recruitment tool; we are playing with forces that can easily and quickly get out of control.

We as a country need more "dreamers" and less "screamers."

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Julie Grice on August 15, 2009 at 3:41pm

I remain less concerned about the volume of the debate and much more significantly concerned about its object.

My goodness, when did we as a country become so delicate? I have a new appreciation for our Founding Fathers who formed our greatness amidst the rigor and contention of the Continental Congress. Had we been there, we would have caught the vapors and collapsed in a faint.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by David Monroe on August 15, 2009 at 9:00pm

If you mean the wise and hardfought delicate manor of compromise and consensus building, that were the two principles the Founding Fathers drew upon to craft the U.S. Constitution, then yes, I agree.

This is a debate about healthcare reform, not cession from the Union or Slavery or the Louisiana Purchase or the Monroe Doctrine or a War. Helping people get healthcare, paying less of the hidden costs and maybe more in taxes for some, but ultimately the boon to the economy by having a populace of healthy workers paying taxes and spending money instead of being too sick to work, using the ER as a Dr's office. This is what the reform is about.

Achieving a goal does not come only from shouting people down and insulting their values. Both sides are guilty of this. It's become this odd dysfunctional relationship where instead of actually sitting down and listening to each other, both sides are pushing that button that will set the other side off in anger or stubborn resolve.

I value your opinion as much as my very own, I value your being as much as my own or as much as a homeless man downtown or a single mother with several jobs and kids and no healthcare who can't be sick, ever. Thanks to those wise founding fathers; We all should be and can be heard as equals in this.

Be passionate, be forceful in your words, but be respectful and allow for compromise. I have found it takes much more bravery and inner strength to hold one's temper and to find common ground and understanding with your opponent than to hate or dismiss them. Anger and shouting is easy and is natural and can sometimes be necessary for effect, but sustained, it just gives everyone a headache and is bad for one's blood pressure. Peace.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Julie Grice on August 15, 2009 at 3:43pm

I remain less concerned about the volume of the debate and much more significantly concerned about its object.

My goodness, when did we as a country become so delicate? I have a new appreciation for our Founding Fathers who formed our greatness amidst the rigor and contention of the Continental Congress. Had we been there, we would have caught the vapors and collapsed in a faint.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Rex Stocklin on August 16, 2009 at 1:03am

Julie, I DO agree with you that everybody is being a bit too cowhearted and/or fragile. In a bold world we've become pastel. And yet, most of us aren't the seasoned debaters that those fellas were. Plus, the lion's share of today's populace, be they the black pieces or the white, are not as informed as are forefathers were. Hoi polloi get their info from TV & blogs, not exactly rigorous standard-bearers of impartial fact. It is WAY easier to have a steely constitution (pun intended) when one is firm on the truth, the REAL truth gleaned from experience & honorable, authoritative reportage. Today we have bias & dubious agenda everywhere one looks. One only has their experience by which to navigate, it seems. And if one is unskilled at debate it is easy to feel dragooned in all the cacophony. Hence, I think civil give & take is a better way to go. But I feel ya. I think I need to pop in "John Adams" and bask in the revolution a skosh.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Susan Yager Baldwin on August 17, 2009 at 7:03pm

Yes, I would attend if I don't have a conflict. I work a lot of evenings and weekends, but I have some questions. Thanks and good luck arranging it.

▶ Reply to This

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last