At What Point Did You Decide That You Were Against Obama No Matter What?

[Oldstyle]

If you have political courage then you go on record with a vote for what you stand for. That's something that Harry Reid refuses to do.

 

[Dubya]

Reid didn't vote bills away. That WOULD be democratic. What he did was prevent bills from being voted on by not allowing them to come to the Senate floor. Now why would a majority leader not want bills to come to the floor when his party controls the Senate? What possible reason could there be?

The answer to those questions are quite simple. Harry Reid didn't want the votes of his fellow Democrats to be on record opposing measures that would have put people back to work. That would be poison in an election year. So would voting for a budget that has massive amounts of deficit spending. How does Harry Reid handle that? Simple. He doesn't pass a budget in the Senate. For two years. That isn't what any Senate Majority Leader would do! That's what THIS Senate Majority Leader has done.

And if that wasn't sleazy enough? While he's done it...he's accused Republicans of being obstructionists. It takes a certain kind of chutzpah to pull that off...chutzpah and a compliant main stream media that goes along with the narrative you're "selling".

Name a bill that Republicans wanted that Reid prevented and it would have passed the Senate! The Republicans didn't have legislation held up that the majority of Senators supported. Don't you know that the Senate's time can also be wasted by have endless bills proposed by a minority party that have no chance of passing? You can do it with endless amendments requiring debate and vote too. The Republicans were the only obstruction and you think making up bullshit is going to convince anyone differently?

Just because a bill may not pass in the form it was sent over from the House doesn't mean that it shouldn't be brought to the Senate floor and debated. The Senate's "job" is to take what the House sends them, debate the parts of it that they don't agree with and then work out a compromise or totally reject it. That is the way our system is supposed to work but it hasn't for years now under Harry Reid's "leadership". Mister Reid is more concerned with protecting his fellow Democratic Senator's re-election efforts by shielding them from voting AGAINST legislation that would have put people back to work and from having to vote FOR a budget that huge deficits and no spending cuts.

You actually have the gall to declare that Harry Reid tabled all those House bills and prevented budgets from being voted on because he didn't want to waste the Senate's time? What are they THERE for if not to deal with EXACTLY those things?

The time of the Senate was deliberately being obstructed. Bills that the Republicans unanimously voted for were drug out to last as long as possible. That means there isn't time to do all the business the Senate needs to do and you idiots what to blame the people who were being obstructed, while supporting the people who did the obstruction? It doesn't fly to anyone who spent the time watching it happen. I watched the Senate on C-Span in those early days and you could see what was happening.

You're a partisan hack with no regards for the truth, so kiss my ass and bug off! Figure out why America doesn't buy your bullshit anymore!

 

[Gadawg73]

I admire Obama for his accomplishments. As a boy both of his hedonist parents abandoned him.
Hate is reserved for the left along with jealousy, envy and class war fare.

 

[Dubya]

I admire Obama for his accomplishments. As a boy both of his hedonist parents abandoned him.
Hate is reserved for the left along with jealousy, envy and class war fare.

So what year did you graduate from Ding Dong School?

 

[Oldstyle]

Name a bill that Republicans wanted that Reid prevented and it would have passed the Senate! The Republicans didn't have legislation held up that the majority of Senators supported. Don't you know that the Senate's time can also be wasted by have endless bills proposed by a minority party that have no chance of passing? You can do it with endless amendments requiring debate and vote too. The Republicans were the only obstruction and you think making up bullshit is going to convince anyone differently?

Just because a bill may not pass in the form it was sent over from the House doesn't mean that it shouldn't be brought to the Senate floor and debated. The Senate's "job" is to take what the House sends them, debate the parts of it that they don't agree with and then work out a compromise or totally reject it. That is the way our system is supposed to work but it hasn't for years now under Harry Reid's "leadership". Mister Reid is more concerned with protecting his fellow Democratic Senator's re-election efforts by shielding them from voting AGAINST legislation that would have put people back to work and from having to vote FOR a budget that huge deficits and no spending cuts.

You actually have the gall to declare that Harry Reid tabled all those House bills and prevented budgets from being voted on because he didn't want to waste the Senate's time? What are they THERE for if not to deal with EXACTLY those things?

The time of the Senate was deliberately being obstructed. Bills that the Republicans unanimously voted for were drug out to last as long as possible. That means there isn't time to do all the business the Senate needs to do and you idiots what to blame the people who were being obstructed, while supporting the people who did the obstruction? It doesn't fly to anyone who spent the time watching it happen. I watched the Senate on C-Span in those early days and you could see what was happening.

You're a partisan hack with no regards for the truth, so kiss my ass and bug off! Figure out why America doesn't buy your bullshit anymore!

Are you REALLY making the contention that a budget hasn't been passed in well over 2 years because the Senate hasn't had the time to do so? That's about as amusing a statement as I've seen on here in quite some time and shows just how far you'll go to find excuses for what Harry Reid has done in the Senate since the Democrats got shellacked in the 2010 mid-terms.

And you call ME a partisan hack with no regard for the truth? Too funny...

 

[Oldstyle]

OP, looks like you are looking for an intelligent, thoughtful answer. It's highly unlikely you are going to get one from this crowd. They hate him simply because he is a democrat and hate him even more because he is black. There is nothing that I have read from anyone in this group that belies that fact.

And yet another board liberal plays the "race card"! Yup...sure is a good thing that liberals don't do that anymore!!! Too funny...

I'm not playing any 'race card.' The racism toward Obama by you people is patently obvious. I can't imagine who you think you are fooling by saying it isn't there. It is there is bright neon lights. You can say not so until your dying breath, but the only ones who may believe it are yourselves. The racism toward him by the right wingers here is consistent, vitriolic, insidious and absolutely disgusting. You're all very, very pathetic.

I'm sorry but I'm not a racist. I know that you assume that I am because I'm a conservative and you've been led to believe that conservatives are easily pigeon-holed that way but just so you know...I'm not some ignorant "Cracker" driving a rusted out pickup truck sporting Confederate flags...I'm from Massachusetts...grew up in a liberal college town and attended a rather liberal college. One of my ancestors was an officer in the 54th Massachusetts Regiment, leading a black unit against the very type of person you're now accusing me of being. So with all due respect? Your ignorance is showing!!!

I don't hate Barack Obama. I hate his policies. Why? Because they are ill founded. I don't think raising taxes while millions are out of work is a bad idea because of Barack Obama's pigmentation...I think it's a bad idea because the economics classes that I took in college lead me to that conclusion. But when I make that point I'm instantly accused by idiots like you, of having that view because of a knee jerk racist reaction to a black man being in the Oval Office.

By the way I also have no problem with same sex marriage...so if Barry shocks the world by coming out of the closet and announcing he's gay...I WON'T HATE HIM FOR THAT EITHER!!! DUH?

 

[Stephanie]

Little Esmeralda has been here a week and they have EVERYONE and everything figured out about the people here

How ABOUT THAT ONE..

must be a psychic or just full of shit is more like it

 

[Gadawg73]

I admire Obama for his accomplishments. As a boy both of his hedonist parents abandoned him.
Hate is reserved for the left along with jealousy, envy and class war fare.

So what year did you graduate from Ding Dong School?

1977 UGA BBA
1985 GSU Robinson School of Business MBA
You?

 

[Dubya]

I admire Obama for his accomplishments. As a boy both of his hedonist parents abandoned him.
Hate is reserved for the left along with jealousy, envy and class war fare.

So what year did you graduate from Ding Dong School?

1977 UGA BBA
1985 GSU Robinson School of Business MBA
You?

I see you're too young for Ding Dong School. My background is Chemistry, but I've wondered into business.

Can you explain how you can assess Obama's parents from the limited information about them? I doubt Obama would have all the facts. My question is, why wouldn't a reasonable person just treat such a thing as an unknown? I choose not to treat my beliefs or opinions as knowledge, so why wouldn't it be smarter to deal with it that way? You can mention it's possible that Obama's parents were hedonists and speculate how that could affect Obama, but it isn't reasonable to treat that as a fact, because obviously you can't know it for a fact.

I guess they don't teach you that in business school, but in science, things require proof.

 

[Gadawg73]

So what year did you graduate from Ding Dong School?

1977 UGA BBA
1985 GSU Robinson School of Business MBA
You?

I see you're too young for Ding Dong School. My background is Chemistry, but I've wondered into business.

Can you explain how you can assess Obama's parents from the limited information about them? I doubt Obama would have all the facts. My question is, why wouldn't a reasonable person just treat such a thing as an unknown? I choose not to treat my beliefs or opinions as knowledge, so why wouldn't it be smarter to deal with it that way? You can mention it's possible that Obama's parents were hedonists and speculate how that could affect Obama, but it isn't reasonable to treat that as a fact, because obviously you can't know it for a fact.

I guess they don't teach you that in business school, but in science, things require proof.

You are dumb as a brick if you do not know that Obama's father abandoned a family in Kenya when he married BO's mother in 1961.
But we already know you are ignorant.
1964 they divorce and his mother runs off with Lolo Soetoro and BO's father runs off abandoning Barack Obama Jr. and goes back to Africa with Ruth Nidesand.
Having a hard time 2W understanding undisputed facts here?
1967 BO moves to Indonesia.
1971 Obama's mother abandons him and sends him to live with her parents in Hawaii. She separates from Soetero in Indonesia and plays the field. 2 years later she moves back to Hawaii. She plays the field and waits another 10 years to dovorce Soetero who is still in Indonesia. Her parents raise Obama as she is involved with the scene getting her masters in under water basket weaving that she had been working on for 14 years.
During that entire time Obama's father made ONE VISIT to see him.
Amazing you do not know these facts.
That is why I admire BO. Father abandoned him and his mother was a swinger and he made it.

 

[OODA_Loop]

At What Point Did You Decide That You Were Against Obama No Matter What?

After I saw him throw a baseball.

 

[Charles_Main]

At what point did MILLIONS of Liberals decide they would support Obama NO MATTER WHAT.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Clearly, this is directed to The Republicans and self-proclaimed Conservatives of USMB.

When, exactly, did you realize that you really didn't like Obama and were going to be against him no matter what?

I'll answer the question in the reverse as an example. Some years ago, when Bush was first elected, I disliked him. I didn't like what he stood for, didn't like what he said, I didn't even like the way he sounded, he sounds dumb and he's proven himself to be such. Anyway, I wasn't totally or automatically against him. What turned me against him permanently, was what he did with the good will of The American People after the country was attacked.

He lied about the WMDs, he kept the country in state of constant fear, and he waged two unnecessary wars. To top it off, he didn't pay for it at the time and sent the bill to our kids and grandkids.

To be precise, from the instant he began that fear campaign war campaign, he lost me forever. I will NEVER forgive him for that.

So, when did you Republicans, Conservatives and other assorted RWers of USMB decide to be against Obama no matter what?

C'mon, be honest.

OP, looks like you are looking for an intelligent, thoughtful answer. It's highly unlikely you are going to get one from this crowd. They hate him simply because he is a democrat and hate him even more because he is black. There is nothing that I have read from anyone in this group that belies that fact.

Wow. That is incredible. Now I am racist because I didn't vote for this communist. Funny, I never realized that me (a black man) could be accused of being a "racist" against a bi-racial man. I guess it is true. The times, they are a changing.....

However, just to set the record straight....I dislike ALL liberals, be they white, brown, black, yellow or the new "in" color....Bi-Racial. 99.999% of your don't have the sense to pour piss out of your boots.

 

[Blooper]

At what point did MILLIONS of Liberals decide they would support Obama NO MATTER WHAT.

They didn't. And we don't.

 

[Blooper]

 

[thereisnospoon]

Have you noticed you have avoided the evidence of the Republican obstruction of government? Any honest Republican knows it has happened. You were asked why the new rules for filibuster went into effect in January and they required the Republicans support to pass. The Senate can't be obstructed the way it was for 3 Congresses, so figure out the obvious. Lying about things on the internet doesn't win a discussion the way you think it does. Denying facts only proves you have lost credibility.

that is what happens in a republic.

Don't like it? go to China you blithering idiotic commie.

it's time to change your tampon BTW

That's what happens when an unscrupulous political party abuses the rules of the Senate and then decides to change the rules when they believe they have a chance to get control of the Senate and don't want the same practices done to them.

You support the party behaving like communists and they were the party that opened up China, so why don't you go there? You behave just like the commies and have no respect for the majority of Americans.

Hey genius. Just because you insist something to be true does not make it true.
You're beating a dead horse.
BTW, was is not the DEMOCRATS who in violation of Senate rules used the filibuster to prevent confirmation votes on three Bush 43 SCOTUS nominees? What's that ya say?
Crickets, right.
Liberal hypocrisy knows no bounds.
The filibuster was created to keep the majority party in check.

 

[viking331]

I did not like President Obama from the get go . Guilt by association with Bill Ayers and the rest of the terrorist crowd. then there is his socialist if not communist leanings. then there is his lying whenever his lips move. add to all of this his AFCA which is unaffordable.then there is his hate of Israel and hate of England . then there is his hate of America . who else would want to completely transform the USA.
Love it or Leave it. Need I go on? he is a BUM pure and simple .Attack my ideas but dont attack me.
Thank you Viking

 

[beagle9]

At what point did MILLIONS of Liberals decide they would support Obama NO MATTER WHAT.

They didn't. And we don't.

Lie's all lie's from you libs....

 

[Dubya]

1977 UGA BBA
1985 GSU Robinson School of Business MBA
You?

I see you're too young for Ding Dong School. My background is Chemistry, but I've wondered into business.

Can you explain how you can assess Obama's parents from the limited information about them? I doubt Obama would have all the facts. My question is, why wouldn't a reasonable person just treat such a thing as an unknown? I choose not to treat my beliefs or opinions as knowledge, so why wouldn't it be smarter to deal with it that way? You can mention it's possible that Obama's parents were hedonists and speculate how that could affect Obama, but it isn't reasonable to treat that as a fact, because obviously you can't know it for a fact.

I guess they don't teach you that in business school, but in science, things require proof.

You are dumb as a brick if you do not know that Obama's father abandoned a family in Kenya when he married BO's mother in 1961.
But we already know you are ignorant.
1964 they divorce and his mother runs off with Lolo Soetoro and BO's father runs off abandoning Barack Obama Jr. and goes back to Africa with Ruth Nidesand.
Having a hard time 2W understanding undisputed facts here?
1967 BO moves to Indonesia.
1971 Obama's mother abandons him and sends him to live with her parents in Hawaii. She separates from Soetero in Indonesia and plays the field. 2 years later she moves back to Hawaii. She plays the field and waits another 10 years to dovorce Soetero who is still in Indonesia. Her parents raise Obama as she is involved with the scene getting her masters in under water basket weaving that she had been working on for 14 years.
During that entire time Obama's father made ONE VISIT to see him.
Amazing you do not know these facts.
That is why I admire BO. Father abandoned him and his mother was a swinger and he made it.

You are the one who is dumb as a brick if you think you can take certain facts about someone's life and get the full picture. If you can't treat people you don't know as an unknown, then you are a fool. Even relatives may not know the full story about why a person does this or that. It's wise not to speculate and judge other people, fool! There is a way of using judgment and not being judgmental, so why don't you try to figure it out!

There isn't enough details in the lives of Obama's parents to know that much about them. You don't know Obama's mother was a swinger and are just saying it. You may believe it, but common sense says there is no way you could know that. Common sense should tell a person to not treat an unknown as if it is a known fact. I don't know what life demanded from Obama's father, but I can conceive it's possible to have a child in Hawaii and not be able to see them, particularly if the person has to be involved elsewhere. I can also conceive that the relationship between adults is complex, so things can happen to prevent a father from seeing their child. It becomes a big "what if" story and since the details aren't going to be known, what the hell is the sense in speculating about it?

 

[Dubya]

that is what happens in a republic.

Don't like it? go to China you blithering idiotic commie.

it's time to change your tampon BTW

That's what happens when an unscrupulous political party abuses the rules of the Senate and then decides to change the rules when they believe they have a chance to get control of the Senate and don't want the same practices done to them.

You support the party behaving like communists and they were the party that opened up China, so why don't you go there? You behave just like the commies and have no respect for the majority of Americans.

Hey genius. Just because you insist something to be true does not make it true.
You're beating a dead horse.
BTW, was is not the DEMOCRATS who in violation of Senate rules used the filibuster to prevent confirmation votes on three Bush 43 SCOTUS nominees? What's that ya say?
Crickets, right.
Liberal hypocrisy knows no bounds.
The filibuster was created to keep the majority party in check.

The facts insist the Republicans have obstructed government. Common sense says a filibuster can be used and not obstruct government, but at some point government can be obstructed when enough tactics to obstruct government are used, meaning enough filibusters or rules tactics, like proposing too much legislation or amendments to legislation that require debate and votes. You obviously lack the common sense or honesty to deal with this subject and treat apples and oranges as the same. The Senate has a finite amount of time to do it's job and if a minority wastes enough time, the Senate can't do it's job and is being obstructed. Why is that picture too complex for your simple mind? An individual Senator can create his own filibuster. Again, that is not obstructing government, it's delaying the business of the Senate. It's only when there is enough of the Senate's time wasted that it becomes obstruction of government.

Here is a perfect example of obstruction of government and it has been done by the Republicans during recent sessions of the Senate, although I'm presenting it as a hypothetical example. Let's say some legislation is in the works and it has bipartisan support. It could even be legislation that all the Republican Senators will vote for and has unanimous support, but a Republican Senator signals he wants it debated and amended. The Senate leaders of both parties consult with each other and agree to schedule it before the Senate. The Majority Leader anticipates this will be legislation that will be quickly passed, because it has the unanimous support of Republican Senators. When it gets to the floor of the Senate though, the minority party keeps adding all kinds of amendments to the legislation. The amendments can be trivial changes, like I think this sentence should include a comma after a particular word and broken down into two sentences, or I think you should add this sentence. It doesn't make a difference if it is a trivial change, the Senate rules require debate and a vote on the amendment. Even if the majority doesn't use it's debate time, the minority can still use all their time. Finally, the amendment gets a vote and no one wants to change the wording or very few do. That can go on for 46 amendments until even the Republicans get tired of wasting time on it. It's possible nothing was changed or maybe there was some minor change. Weeks later the legislation is passed unanimously by a vote.

The Senate is not the only way to confirm an appointment by the President, so if for some reason appointments aren't confirmed, the jobs can be filled by a President using recess appointments. The job is then filled until the next Senate session is over. If the Senate still hasn't confirmed the appointment, another recess appointment can be made by the President. Explain how that obstructs government! Do you like crickets?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-qakWaqnwg]Small Plastic Boxes With Golden Chirping Crickets - YouTube[/ame]