House Repubs splitting at the seams :D

[idb]

It's frightening to think that one side of the debate is being carried out by people who's stated single aim is to ensure that Obama is only a single term president.

 

[Avorysuds]

It's frightening to think that one side of the debate is being carried out by people who's stated single aim is to ensure that Obama is only a single term president.

That is the goal of every politician no matter their party... For instance, the Goal of Obama is to not let a Republican be President, at literally any cost.

 

[idb]

It's frightening to think that one side of the debate is being carried out by people who's stated single aim is to ensure that Obama is only a single term president.

That is the goal of every politician no matter their party... For instance, the Goal of Obama is to not let a Republican be President, at literally any cost.

At the risk of your country's economy?
Where has Obama said that?
To be fair, at least Mitch was open about it...I just don't see how anything he says susbsequently could not be judged by the American public without that in mind.

 

[Avorysuds]

It's frightening to think that one side of the debate is being carried out by people who's stated single aim is to ensure that Obama is only a single term president.

That is the goal of every politician no matter their party... For instance, the Goal of Obama is to not let a Republican be President, at literally any cost.

At the risk of your country's economy?
Where has Obama said that?
To be fair, at least Mitch was open about it...I just don't see how anything he says susbsequently could not be judged by the American public without that in mind.

Yes, at the risk of the country... Do you really believe a politician has to say it in order for that to be true?

Has Obama put up a bill that fixes the budget over 10 years, 20 years or less? No... He is as much of the problem as the Dems in congress and the Republicans in congress. This whole things has been nothing but games and I feel sorry for the people that fall for the "what side will win!" mentality.

Obama could have had a Budget 2 years ago, he seems to care about scoring political points just like the Dems and Republicans over fixing the problem. Obama is repeating tired lines “raise taxes” while he passed Bush ear tax cuts… “Raise taxes” so that it can cut the 1.5 Trillion dollar deficit a year down to 1.4 Trillion……………. It’s a big game of “lets fight so we can pass something that does nothing.” To balance the budget you simply have to cut like *lol omfgz* and neither side (Rand Pual and a few others did but the media does not care) will do this.

In fact Ran Paul and the 2-3 others put up a budget that gets rid of the deficit in 5 years.... yet we don't even debate it on these boards because DON DON DON, that would fix it.


http://www.wtffinance.com/2011/03/rand-pauls-proposal-to-balance-the-federal-budget-within-5-years/

 

[idb]

That is the goal of every politician no matter their party... For instance, the Goal of Obama is to not let a Republican be President, at literally any cost.

At the risk of your country's economy?
Where has Obama said that?
To be fair, at least Mitch was open about it...I just don't see how anything he says susbsequently could not be judged by the American public without that in mind.

Yes, at the risk of the country... Do you really believe a politician has to say it in order for that to be true?

Has Obama put up a bill that fixes the budget over 10 years, 20 years or less? No... He is as much of the problem as the Dems in congress and the Republicans in congress. This whole things has been nothing but games and I feel sorry for the people that fall for the "what side will win!" mentality.

Obama could have had a Budget 2 years ago, he seems to care about scoring political points just like the Dems and Republicans over fixing the problem. Obama is repeating tired lines “raise taxes” while he passed Bush ear tax cuts… “Raise taxes” so that it can cut the 1.5 Trillion dollar deficit a year down to 1.4 Trillion……………. It’s a big game of “lets fight so we can pass something that does nothing.” To balance the budget you simply have to cut like *lol omfgz* and neither side (Rand Pual and a few others did but the media does not care) will do this.

In fact Ran Paul and the 2-3 others put up a budget that gets rid of the deficit in 5 years.... yet we don't even debate it on these boards because DON DON DON, that would fix it.


Rand Paul’s Proposal To Balance The Federal Budget Within 5 Years | WTF Finance

I suppose I just don't have your level of cynicism yet.
I find it difficult to accept that the majority membership of any party would put their party above the welfare of the country.
There will be venal individuals, sure, but I can't see it being a party's manifesto.

 

[Avorysuds]

At the risk of your country's economy?
Where has Obama said that?
To be fair, at least Mitch was open about it...I just don't see how anything he says susbsequently could not be judged by the American public without that in mind.

Yes, at the risk of the country... Do you really believe a politician has to say it in order for that to be true?

Has Obama put up a bill that fixes the budget over 10 years, 20 years or less? No... He is as much of the problem as the Dems in congress and the Republicans in congress. This whole things has been nothing but games and I feel sorry for the people that fall for the "what side will win!" mentality.

Obama could have had a Budget 2 years ago, he seems to care about scoring political points just like the Dems and Republicans over fixing the problem. Obama is repeating tired lines “raise taxes” while he passed Bush ear tax cuts… “Raise taxes” so that it can cut the 1.5 Trillion dollar deficit a year down to 1.4 Trillion……………. It’s a big game of “lets fight so we can pass something that does nothing.” To balance the budget you simply have to cut like *lol omfgz* and neither side (Rand Pual and a few others did but the media does not care) will do this.

In fact Ran Paul and the 2-3 others put up a budget that gets rid of the deficit in 5 years.... yet we don't even debate it on these boards because DON DON DON, that would fix it.


Rand Paul’s Proposal To Balance The Federal Budget Within 5 Years*|*WTF Finance

I suppose I just don't have your level of cynicism yet.
I find it difficult to accept that the majority membership of any party would put their party above the welfare of the country.
There will be venal individuals, sure, but I can't see it being a party's manifesto.

I don't know your "side", or if you even have one but do you ever wonder why the Dems and Obama ran on being anti Bush and anti Bush policies yet they have repealed zero Bush polices while expanding on many of them?

Why were Dems so against Reps when they had power and now they love Bush era policies?

Here is a test, name 5 policies you hated under Bush, created by Bush... Now go see if these policies are still around and how many of your 5 have been expanded upon under the Dem congress and Obama.

Point simply put is, if the Dems felt Bush’s policies were so destructive before, why do they keep them or expands upon them? Is it because when they didn’t have power they put party before country or was it just because they didn’t know any better then and have wised up to how good Bush policy really is? Maybe you have a third option no one on the face of the planet has come up with.

 

[whitehall]

It's an old political strategy, make believe the other party is split on an issue. It used to work ....when Cronkite was the only source of information. If the GOP is "splitting at the seams" the disjointed confused jack-asses are imploding.

 

[idb]

Yes, at the risk of the country... Do you really believe a politician has to say it in order for that to be true?

Has Obama put up a bill that fixes the budget over 10 years, 20 years or less? No... He is as much of the problem as the Dems in congress and the Republicans in congress. This whole things has been nothing but games and I feel sorry for the people that fall for the "what side will win!" mentality.

Obama could have had a Budget 2 years ago, he seems to care about scoring political points just like the Dems and Republicans over fixing the problem. Obama is repeating tired lines “raise taxes” while he passed Bush ear tax cuts… “Raise taxes” so that it can cut the 1.5 Trillion dollar deficit a year down to 1.4 Trillion……………. It’s a big game of “lets fight so we can pass something that does nothing.” To balance the budget you simply have to cut like *lol omfgz* and neither side (Rand Pual and a few others did but the media does not care) will do this.

In fact Ran Paul and the 2-3 others put up a budget that gets rid of the deficit in 5 years.... yet we don't even debate it on these boards because DON DON DON, that would fix it.


Rand Paul’s Proposal To Balance The Federal Budget Within 5 Years*|*WTF Finance

I suppose I just don't have your level of cynicism yet.
I find it difficult to accept that the majority membership of any party would put their party above the welfare of the country.
There will be venal individuals, sure, but I can't see it being a party's manifesto.

I don't know your "side", or if you even have one but do you ever wonder why the Dems and Obama ran on being anti Bush and anti Bush policies yet they have repealed zero Bush polices while expanding on many of them?

Why were Dems so against Reps when they had power and now they love Bush era policies?

Here is a test, name 5 policies you hated under Bush, created by Bush... Now go see if these policies are still around and how many of your 5 have been expanded upon under the Dem congress and Obama.

Point simply put is, if the Dems felt Bush’s policies were so destructive before, why do they keep them or expands upon them? Is it because when they didn’t have power they put party before country or was it just because they didn’t know any better then and have wised up to how good Bush policy really is? Maybe you have a third option no one on the face of the planet has come up with.

I do have a third option actually.
It's an option that the single-issue Tea Party candidates are finding.

It's easy to come up with bright ideas when you're outside the tent but when you're finally inside and have to implement them you realise that the world isn't quite that simple.
It might be that the policies you have been railing against are too entrenched to toss out, it might be that, with the inside knowledge that having the keys to power brings, they are in fact good or simply necessarily pragmatic policies.

'Naivety' maybe?

 

[Avorysuds]

Yes, I guess to me this all seems like very dated tactics... The answer is there but it's like watching 2 children argure over why their very wrong answer is better than the others.

In all cases, the Dems, Obama and Reps offer cuts or taxes that take a deficit of about 16-20 Trillion in 10 years and knocks off about 2-4 Trillion... 2-4 Trillion over 10 years is in fact a very wrong answer no matter who wants the credit.

Again, Rand Paul fixed it in 5 years and we still won't debate that because it's the right answer and that puts country before party.

 

[idb]

Yes, I guess to me this all seems like very dated tactics... The answer is there but it's like watching 2 children argure over why their very wrong answer is better than the others.

In all cases, the Dems, Obama and Reps offer cuts or taxes that take a deficit of about 16-20 Trillion in 10 years and knocks off about 2-4 Trillion... 2-4 Trillion over 10 years is in fact a very wrong answer no matter who wants the credit.

Again, Rand Paul fixed it in 5 years and we still won't debate that because it's the right answer and that puts country before party.

I haven't watched the Paul video but I take it from the summary on the WTF link that his plan is basically to devolve most federal responsibilities (and therefore spending) to state level?

 

[Avorysuds]

I suppose I just don't have your level of cynicism yet.
I find it difficult to accept that the majority membership of any party would put their party above the welfare of the country.
There will be venal individuals, sure, but I can't see it being a party's manifesto.

I don't know your "side", or if you even have one but do you ever wonder why the Dems and Obama ran on being anti Bush and anti Bush policies yet they have repealed zero Bush polices while expanding on many of them?

Why were Dems so against Reps when they had power and now they love Bush era policies?

Here is a test, name 5 policies you hated under Bush, created by Bush... Now go see if these policies are still around and how many of your 5 have been expanded upon under the Dem congress and Obama.

Point simply put is, if the Dems felt Bush’s policies were so destructive before, why do they keep them or expands upon them? Is it because when they didn’t have power they put party before country or was it just because they didn’t know any better then and have wised up to how good Bush policy really is? Maybe you have a third option no one on the face of the planet has come up with.

I do have a third option actually.
It's an option that the single-issue Tea Party candidates are finding.

It's easy to come up with bright ideas when you're outside the tent but when you're finally inside and have to implement them you realise that the world isn't quite that simple.
It might be that the policies you have been railing against are too entrenched to toss out, it might be that, with the inside knowledge that having the keys to power brings, they are in fact good or simply necessarily pragmatic policies.

'Naivety' maybe?

Rand Paul is the biggest Tea Party person in congress outside of his father Ron Paul and Rand offered a fix in 5 years to balance the budget... Do you understand this or not, can I get a nod of the head or something?

More or less I don't care to hear your incorrect opinion of who or what the Tea party stands for or is about because you seems bias and because of that you have assumed the worst for the TMP and Republicans while somehow seeming to believe Dems and Obama still have our best interest at heart. I'm still waiting for your top 5 most disliked polices unde4r Bush so I can better understand how you believe Obama and Dems are any different...

We are seconds from going in circles, one where you pretend anything Republican is bad and ignore how you support the wrong answer that just so happens to be on par with the *bad* republicans. Plz prove me wrong, it would be nice to see people at least try.

 

[Avorysuds]

Yes, I guess to me this all seems like very dated tactics... The answer is there but it's like watching 2 children argure over why their very wrong answer is better than the others.

In all cases, the Dems, Obama and Reps offer cuts or taxes that take a deficit of about 16-20 Trillion in 10 years and knocks off about 2-4 Trillion... 2-4 Trillion over 10 years is in fact a very wrong answer no matter who wants the credit.

Again, Rand Paul fixed it in 5 years and we still won't debate that because it's the right answer and that puts country before party.

I haven't watched the Paul video but I take it from the summary on the WTF link that his plan is basically to devolve most federal responsibilities (and therefore spending) to state level?

From what I understand he does not touch SS, Medicare or Medicaid... I could be wrong it's been awhile but regardless if his plan does it's still a correct answer that balances the budget vs a wrong answer provided by the GOP, DNC and Obama that fail horribly... in fact Obama and congress have not even managed to cover 20% of the deficit in 10 years.

But it sounds like you are making an effort so I'd sugjest taking a look at the video, the bill is attatched or at least easily findable.

 

[idb]

I don't know your "side", or if you even have one but do you ever wonder why the Dems and Obama ran on being anti Bush and anti Bush policies yet they have repealed zero Bush polices while expanding on many of them?

Why were Dems so against Reps when they had power and now they love Bush era policies?

Here is a test, name 5 policies you hated under Bush, created by Bush... Now go see if these policies are still around and how many of your 5 have been expanded upon under the Dem congress and Obama.

Point simply put is, if the Dems felt Bush’s policies were so destructive before, why do they keep them or expands upon them? Is it because when they didn’t have power they put party before country or was it just because they didn’t know any better then and have wised up to how good Bush policy really is? Maybe you have a third option no one on the face of the planet has come up with.

I do have a third option actually.
It's an option that the single-issue Tea Party candidates are finding.

It's easy to come up with bright ideas when you're outside the tent but when you're finally inside and have to implement them you realise that the world isn't quite that simple.
It might be that the policies you have been railing against are too entrenched to toss out, it might be that, with the inside knowledge that having the keys to power brings, they are in fact good or simply necessarily pragmatic policies.

'Naivety' maybe?

Rand Paul is the biggest Tea Party person in congress outside of his father Ron Paul and Rand offered a fix in 5 years to balance the budget... Do you understand this or not, can I get a nod of the head or something?

More or less I don't care to hear your incorrect opinion of who or what the Tea party stands for or is about because you seems bias and because of that you have assumed the worst for the TMP and Republicans while somehow seeming to believe Dems and Obama still have our best interest at heart. I'm still waiting for your top 5 most disliked polices unde4r Bush so I can better understand how you believe Obama and Dems are any different...

We are seconds from going in circles, one where you pretend anything Republican is bad and ignore how you support the wrong answer that just so happens to be on par with the *bad* republicans.

Uh oh!
I'm not too difficult to figure out.
My time on this board has been educational, and part of my way of being educated is by taking a devil's advocate postion or testing my own preconceptions against other posters that have strong opinions or are knowlegeable.

Just to get it straight, I said "single-issue Tea Party candidates".
I'm sure there are others that have more than one issue in their minds.

Any policies of Bush's that I don't like are going to reflect my position as an observer living on the other side of the world rather than US domestic issues.
Certainly two would be;
1. The invasion of Iraq
2. Inconsistency on free trade policies

His general international belligerence and arrogance didn't endear him to other countries either.

I'm not trying to dodge your efforts to pin me down;
I admit that I still carry some of the hope that was attached to Obama when he came to power,
I also admit that most of the loons in the US at the moment seem to claim identification with the conservatives.

Maybe that makes me a Liberal in your eyes?
It all seems to be either black or white in US politics.

 

[Avorysuds]

I do have a third option actually.
It's an option that the single-issue Tea Party candidates are finding.

It's easy to come up with bright ideas when you're outside the tent but when you're finally inside and have to implement them you realise that the world isn't quite that simple.
It might be that the policies you have been railing against are too entrenched to toss out, it might be that, with the inside knowledge that having the keys to power brings, they are in fact good or simply necessarily pragmatic policies.

'Naivety' maybe?

Rand Paul is the biggest Tea Party person in congress outside of his father Ron Paul and Rand offered a fix in 5 years to balance the budget... Do you understand this or not, can I get a nod of the head or something?

More or less I don't care to hear your incorrect opinion of who or what the Tea party stands for or is about because you seems bias and because of that you have assumed the worst for the TMP and Republicans while somehow seeming to believe Dems and Obama still have our best interest at heart. I'm still waiting for your top 5 most disliked polices unde4r Bush so I can better understand how you believe Obama and Dems are any different...

We are seconds from going in circles, one where you pretend anything Republican is bad and ignore how you support the wrong answer that just so happens to be on par with the *bad* republicans.

Uh oh!
I'm not too difficult to figure out.
My time on this board has been educational, and part of my way of being educated is by taking a devil's advocate postion or testing my own preconceptions against other posters that have strong opinions or are knowlegeable.

Just to get it straight, I said "single-issue Tea Party candidates".
I'm sure there are others that have more than one issue in their minds.

Any policies of Bush's that I don't like are going to reflect my position as an observer living on the other side of the world rather than US domestic issues.
Certainly two would be;
1. The invasion of Iraq
2. Inconsistency on free trade policies

His general international belligerence and arrogance didn't endear him to other countries either.

I'm not trying to dodge your efforts to pin me down;
I admit that I still carry some of the hope that was attached to Obama when he came to power,
I also admit that most of the loons in the US at the moment seem to claim identification with the conservatives.

Maybe that makes me a Liberal in your eyes?
It all seems to be either black or white in US politics.

Thx for the honest reply.

 

[Dot Com]

Wonder how this is going to turn out for Boehner given he has to fix his bill now that the CBO hammered it?

 

[Full-Auto]

Wonder how this is going to turn out for Boehner given he has to fix his bill now that the CBO hammered it?

They just scored the 2.0 Keep up

 

[Dot Com]

Wonder how this is going to turn out for Boehner given he has to fix his bill now that the CBO hammered it?

They just scored the 2.0 Keep up

I don't normally follow sites that post good news for republicorp. What DID Drudge say about it?

 

[Full-Auto]

Wonder how this is going to turn out for Boehner given he has to fix his bill now that the CBO hammered it?

They just scored the 2.0 Keep up

I don't normally follow sites that post good news for republicorp. What DID Drudge say about it?

I wouldnt know

BREAKING: An Improved CBO Score for Boehner Plan 2.0 - Guy Benson

Could you roll the eyes again?

 

[bodecea]

Exactly.

Confirmation from a Senate republican and a conservative newspaper that the right is indeed delusional, out of touch with what average Americans want, and endangering the Nation.

From the WSJ linked in the OP link:



The ‘idea’ is clearly reckless idiocy.

Tea Party Hobbits.....

yup. thats why the lefty msm has the on again off again love affair with him and he was broke dick stalking horse in 08, they love him when he beats up on the right then whips him when he attacks the left, maverick my patootey

Why do you refer to the WSJ as "him"?

 

[saveliberty]

Wonder how this is going to turn out for Boehner given he has to fix his bill now that the CBO hammered it?

They just scored the 2.0 Keep up

I don't normally follow sites that post good news for republicorp. What DID Drudge say about it?

How is that allergy to facts coming along?