The real party of NO, the GOP, steps it up

[Riot]

Yeah sure: GOP, meet the political wilderness you will spend the next election cycles within, surrounded by the unruly mobs of rural conservative red state members who have just lost their unemployment benefits and haven't a job on the horizon.

[Danzig]

oh, quit with the one sided, biased attacks, riot.


WASHINGTON — The chairmen of President Obama’s debt-reduction commission have been unable to win support from any of the panel’s elected officials for their proposed spending cuts and tax increases, underscoring the reluctance of both parties to risk short-term political backlash in pursuit of the nation’s long-term fiscal health.


the morass we are in is from decades of stuff like what i highlighted above. neither party is willing to do what is necessary, fearing losing re-election or power far more than wanting to do what we elected them to do to begin with.


this bi partisan commission was supposed to come up with ways to fix the mess-but what elected officials are going to jump on board???

[dellinger63]

Hey the Party is over. Time to turn on the lights and start cleaning up. And NO there will be no more cake or drink given out.

As I was told 2 years ago, DEAL WITH IT!

[Cannon Shell]

I guess Riot never heard of lame duck sessions. Yeah the American people want the guys just voted out to make some more decisions before they are escorted from the building

I just find it amusing that she makes it out like politics is only a factor on one side of the aisle. I find it a little disturbing that she thinks politically she is in the center.

Hey she's charitable. Don't believe me? Just ask the smug b.itch.

[Nascar1966]

Its not like the Democrats haven't played dirty pool for the past two years when they had the numbers. Payback is a bitch and every dog has its day. Enjoy the next two years of payback Democratic puppets.

[Riot]

I'll happily keep pointing out the unprecedented ridiculousness of the current GOP incarnation as long as their minority side is acting outrageously irresponsible compared to the other.

Have the Dems forced a record nearly 200 filibusters in 2 years? Cloture votes on everything? Blocked routine funding bills for weeks just because they didn't like the President? Naw.

Has the GOP? Absolutely.

Nascar, you say the Dems have done the same during the past two years. No, they haven't. And they didn't in the past with Bush, nor with Clinton. Either did the GOP.

No other minority Senate has been as obstructive. Voting records of the Senate are public and on the internet. Feel free to post it if you have it.

The minority GOP has obstructed and forced the Dems to get 60 in a cloture vote on every vote that the Constitution says needs 51.

And now the GOP is so brazen they are putting it in writing, that they are publicly throwing a temper tantrum, blocking everything - DADT, START, funding, etc - until they get tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of Americans. They are willing to throw 98% of Americans under the bus. They are blowing it, just like Gingrich did.

Dell, you say payback is a bitch? Yes, it will be. The GOP only won seats in the House. They are still the minority party in the Senate after Jan. 1. Reid is still in charge.

The minority GOP is going to lose their filibuster capability the first moments the new Senate opens, when the Dems change the Senate rules on them.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I guess Riot never heard of lame duck sessions. Yeah the American people want the guys just voted out to make some more decisions before they are escorted from the building

And you don't realize that the people didn't vote out the Democrats? That after January 1, the Senate is still a Democratically-controlled majority, with Reid in charge? And Dem President who holds veto power?

The only thing the GOP won was a majority in the House.

I find it disturbing you think you are a rather typical Republican. And are unawares of the election results.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Riot

The only thing the GOP won was a majority in the House.

After the 2008 election, the power of the Democrats was overstated. After the 2010 election, the loss of power is overstated. With the filibuster crap, it makes it easy to narrow one of the 3 sections of pipe. Nothing can become law without all 3 sections of the pipe flowing.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

After the 2008 election, the power of the Democrats was overstated. After the 2010 election, the loss of power is overstated. With the filibuster crap, it makes it easy to narrow one of the 3 sections of pipe. Nothing can become law without all 3 sections of the pipe flowing.

Exactly. Oooooh, I like your Min Pin avatar!

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

And you don't realize that the people didn't vote out the Democrats? That after January 1, the Senate is still a Democratically-controlled majority, with Reid in charge? And Dem President who holds veto power?

The only thing the GOP won was a majority in the House.

I find it disturbing you think you are a rather typical Republican. And are unawares of the election results.

I never said I was a typical Republician. As a matter of fact I never said that I was a Republican either. I have some social views that would be decidedly not typically Republican.

As for your assertion that the GOP "only" won the Senate, there seems to be an awful lot of handwringing from the left over that "small" victory. Didn't the GOP pick up some seats in the Senate as well? Yeah the President has a 44% approval rate, the Democrats just lost the House and lost seats in the Senate. That sounds like they did great!

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

As for your assertion that the GOP "only" won the Senate there seems to be an awful lot of handwringing from the left over that "small" victory. Didn't the GOP pick up some seats in the Senate as well? Yeah the President has a 44% approval rate, the Democrats just lost the House and lost seats in the Senate. That sounds like they did great!

You typo'd, I said House, not Senate.

Of course the Dems want to keep seats, just like the GOP wants to win them. The norm after a big presidential is to switch over the legislative branch.

So it's rather notable, that in spite of the past two years of fear mongering: death panel, horrible Communist, Muslim, Socialist, Hitler, ruining our country, take our country back, creation of the Tea Party by the Koch brothers, health care will destroy us meme, resulting in the most endangered Senate Majority leader in ages (Reid) - and the GOP couldn't beat Reid. Or win Delaware. Lost the Alaska seat to a write in.

First time in modern history the "switch" party took only the House back, but couldn't take the Senate.

The lowest amount of House seats won out of the past three "switch" elections.

The President's approval rating may be 44%, but that's higher than Clinton, Bush Two and Reagan at this point in their presidencies. And higher than the Dem party in general, and much higher than the GOP general approval rating.

Yeah, considering what could have been, the Dems lucked out.

[Nascar1966]

Originally Posted by Riot

And you don't realize that the people didn't vote out the Democrats? That after January 1, the Senate is still a Democratically-controlled majority, with Reid in charge? And Dem President who holds veto power?

The only thing the GOP won was a majority in the House.

I find it disturbing you think you are a rather typical Republican. And are unawares of the election results.

Im sure Obama will veto a Republican Bill that would good for this country. Yes I know the tool Reid kept his seat unfortunately. It doesnt hurt me you call me a typical Republican either.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Nascar1966

Im sure Obama will veto a Republican Bill that would good for this country. Yes I know the tool Reid kept his seat unfortunately. It doesnt hurt me you call me a typical Republican either.

I wouldn't call you that. I think you are in the far right wing of the GOP, a little right of Sarah Palin and way to the right of Pat Buchannan. But what I say doesn't matter You characterize yourself.

[Riot]

oh, quit with the one sided, biased attacks, riot.

This forum has been heavy on the anti-Obama Muslim-Communist-Socialist-Birther hate for nearly three years. Once he was elected it was constant. Turn about's fair play.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

This forum has been heavy on the anti-Obama Muslim-Communist-Socialist-Birther hate for nearly three years. Once he was elected it was constant. Turn about's fair play.

Are Communists or Socialists in need of defense?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Riot

This forum has been heavy on the anti-Obama Muslim-Communist-Socialist-Birther hate for nearly three years. Once he was elected it was constant. Turn about's fair play.

oh, the two wrongs make a right line of thinking. gotcha. funny thing is, you probably think you're progressive in your thinking that reps are evil, dems are good. it's no different than someone who thinks the opposite. it's the same (faulty) logic.

the system is broken. it's not 'we the people' anymore. the parties rule, with the members of congress either toeing the party line, or getting replaced-note lieberman a few years back when the dems produced another candidate, and he had to run as an indy. as long as the two parties rule, with their vying to hold power, nothing will change in d.c. it doesn't matter who is the majority, or who is the minority. no one has the spine to do what's needed, as the party needs to keep them in their seats to retain the parties power. if you don't back your party's play, they'll find someone who will. the thought that all that's wrong right now is due only to republicans refusing to be bipartisan is laughable. the opposite occurs when the dems are in the minority because that's how the game is played. your contention that all the gridlock and problems are due only to stonewalling by one side is ridiculous. it's your agenda, it's what you think-but the dems aren't all truth and light and reps the evil monster, or vice versa. a bi partisan commission has produced some ideas. how much do you suppose happens or changes? i'd wager not much at all.

[joeydb]

When the question is "should we spend more money, when we already owe $14,000,000,000,000?", "NO!" is the only correct (and sane) answer.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

When the question is "should we spend more money, when we already owe $14,000,000,000,000?", "NO!" is the only correct (and sane) answer.

No. Not when our citizens are starving in the midst of recession. This is America. We feed them and house them and help them. We don't buy new weapons systems, but we feed our own and care for our own.

If the morals of the situation fail to impress, consider that especially when in the midst of a slow jobless recession recovery, that money goes directly to keeping the economy going. In their pockets and directly out into the economy. Each dollar of unemployment results in $1-$2 of economic stimulus.

If we take that infusion of money out of the economy now, we will fall back in a big way, and then our costs (Medicare, health, food stamps, etc) will skyrocket.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Riot

Each dollar of unemployment results in $1-$2 of economic stimulus.

LOL....you believe that????

Ahem -- if it was REALLY stimulus, the unemployment rate would DROP.