How the Republican Government shutdown works

[Dad2three]

Yes, you conservatives suck at math and history, I agree with that. When did Republicans "take credit" for the money the incompetent Obama spent shutting down government? I don't remember when you did that. But if you say so, you probably did. At least you are now. Conservatives are idiots, stop listening to Faux News and believing whatever they tell you

Conservatives are idiots and bad with math and history?

Liberals pretty much agree that the economy started going south under Bush his last 2 years in his final term in office. THIS was the economic decline Obama and Liberals claim Obama 'inherited'. Liberals also pretty much agree that whoever controls Congress controls the purse strings, and therefore the economy / budget as well....unless it is THEY who control Congress / the purse strings.

During Bush's 1st 6 years in office 9/11 occurred, the economic aftermath of 9/11 happened, and 2 wars were fought. No 'economic decline' was experienced, but approx. 2 1/2 Trillion was added to the debt...in 6 (SIX YEARS)...during a time when there was a pretty close split in Congress. (2 1/2 trillion in 6 years in approx. 1/3rd of the debt Obama added in his 1st 4 years!)

Democrats secured a Super-Majority Control of Congress, controlling the purse strings / budget the last 2 years of Bush's administration...during which time the Liberals say the economy started going south. During this 1 1/2 - 2 year period another 1 1/2 TRILLION was added to the debt...in only 2 years. WHAT was the difference between Bush's 1st 6 years and his last 2? Oh yeah, Democrats took over Congress! They held this Super Majority control of Congress through the end of Obama's 2nd year in office.

The economic decline Obama claims to have inherited came from 2 years of Liberal control of the budget and 2 more years of horrendous fiscal irresponsibility. For instance, while supposedly in a declining economy Obama and the Liberals passed the tremendously FAILED Stimulus bill, a nearly $1 TRILLION addition to the nation's debt in one shot that contained over 7,000 pieces of DNC-ONLY pork, continued such horrible programs as 'Cash for Clunkers' that ended up hurting the economy/poor & middle class families, and ended up costing OVER $742,000 PER JOB Obama claimed to have created / saved!

In Obama's 1st 4 years he set US records for 'monthly', 'annual', and 'total' deficit spending - adding over $6 trillion to the US debt in ONLY 4 years, more debt added than by EVERY US President from Washington to Bush COMBINED, single-handedly securing the 1st US Credit rating down-grade by refusing to accept more budget cuts to prove he was serious about reducing the deficit as he was warned, and added a record number of job-creation / business-strangling regulations.

These are DOCUMENTED, HISTORICAL FACTS which speak for themselves. Responding with opinion or personal attacks do not effect me at all because you are arguing with these documented history / facts, not me.

The final statistical and historical fact is that Obama is ARGUABLY the worst President in US history. Personally, though, I would award that title to the racist LBJ, the man who started the whole liberal program of 'Economic Slavery' that has been used to oppress blacks, ensure more and more Americans remain UN-successful and dependent on the government, and that they continue to vote for the liberal politicians who will keep the 'free' money and handouts flowing.

Democrats never had a super majority in Congress under Bush ....EVER
Bush blocked any legislative effort from the Democrats. You are welcome to post any legislation pushed through by the Democrats that caused an economic meltdown

Republicans never had a super majority under Bush either, which means they needed to make an agreement. The Democrats were zero compromise, gimme my way

You must have completely missed out on the Bush era

Yes the Democrats compromised. In fact, they gave Bush a 9-11 card where he could get any legislation he wanted passed in the name of fighting terrorism. He even got the wars he asked for
When the economy crashed during the Great Bush Recession of 2008, Democrats gave him stimulus funding, TARP and auto company and bank bailouts....When Obama came in and asked for the same thing....not a single Republican voted for it

Considering that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid drew up the Obama Stimulus behind closed doors with no GOP input and it was filled with Democratic pork is that really a shock? It wasn't REALLY the same as what Bush asked for to address the recession. I believe in fact that 3 Republicans voted for it anyways. Snow, Collins and Arlen Spector (before he changed parties?)

BEHIND CLOSED DOORS? lol

Forget the 40% tax cuts too TRY to get SOME GOP support?


Aiming to foster bipartisan support for his record-setting economic stimulus, President-elect Barack Obama plans to propose huge tax cuts for businesses and middle-class workers that will total about 40 percent of the package, or up to $310 billion, congressional officials said.


Obama strategists say he wants to get 80 or more votes in the 100-member Senate, and the emphasis on tax cuts is a way to defuse conservative criticism and enlist Republican support.

[URL='http://www.politico.com/story/2009/01/big-tax-cuts-in-the-works-017039#ixzz3lMavMKAm']
http://www.politico.com/story/2009/01/big-tax-cuts-in-the-works-017039

GOP PARTY BEFORE COUNTRY!!!
[/URL]
http://www.politico.com/story/2009/01/big-tax-cuts-in-the-works-017039#ixzz3lManyLwn

 

[kaz]

Conservatives are idiots and bad with math and history?

Liberals pretty much agree that the economy started going south under Bush his last 2 years in his final term in office. THIS was the economic decline Obama and Liberals claim Obama 'inherited'. Liberals also pretty much agree that whoever controls Congress controls the purse strings, and therefore the economy / budget as well....unless it is THEY who control Congress / the purse strings.

During Bush's 1st 6 years in office 9/11 occurred, the economic aftermath of 9/11 happened, and 2 wars were fought. No 'economic decline' was experienced, but approx. 2 1/2 Trillion was added to the debt...in 6 (SIX YEARS)...during a time when there was a pretty close split in Congress. (2 1/2 trillion in 6 years in approx. 1/3rd of the debt Obama added in his 1st 4 years!)

Democrats secured a Super-Majority Control of Congress, controlling the purse strings / budget the last 2 years of Bush's administration...during which time the Liberals say the economy started going south. During this 1 1/2 - 2 year period another 1 1/2 TRILLION was added to the debt...in only 2 years. WHAT was the difference between Bush's 1st 6 years and his last 2? Oh yeah, Democrats took over Congress! They held this Super Majority control of Congress through the end of Obama's 2nd year in office.

The economic decline Obama claims to have inherited came from 2 years of Liberal control of the budget and 2 more years of horrendous fiscal irresponsibility. For instance, while supposedly in a declining economy Obama and the Liberals passed the tremendously FAILED Stimulus bill, a nearly $1 TRILLION addition to the nation's debt in one shot that contained over 7,000 pieces of DNC-ONLY pork, continued such horrible programs as 'Cash for Clunkers' that ended up hurting the economy/poor & middle class families, and ended up costing OVER $742,000 PER JOB Obama claimed to have created / saved!

In Obama's 1st 4 years he set US records for 'monthly', 'annual', and 'total' deficit spending - adding over $6 trillion to the US debt in ONLY 4 years, more debt added than by EVERY US President from Washington to Bush COMBINED, single-handedly securing the 1st US Credit rating down-grade by refusing to accept more budget cuts to prove he was serious about reducing the deficit as he was warned, and added a record number of job-creation / business-strangling regulations.

These are DOCUMENTED, HISTORICAL FACTS which speak for themselves. Responding with opinion or personal attacks do not effect me at all because you are arguing with these documented history / facts, not me.

The final statistical and historical fact is that Obama is ARGUABLY the worst President in US history. Personally, though, I would award that title to the racist LBJ, the man who started the whole liberal program of 'Economic Slavery' that has been used to oppress blacks, ensure more and more Americans remain UN-successful and dependent on the government, and that they continue to vote for the liberal politicians who will keep the 'free' money and handouts flowing.

Democrats never had a super majority in Congress under Bush ....EVER
Bush blocked any legislative effort from the Democrats. You are welcome to post any legislation pushed through by the Democrats that caused an economic meltdown

Republicans never had a super majority under Bush either, which means they needed to make an agreement. The Democrats were zero compromise, gimme my way

You must have completely missed out on the Bush era

Yes the Democrats compromised. In fact, they gave Bush a 9-11 card where he could get any legislation he wanted passed in the name of fighting terrorism. He even got the wars he asked for
When the economy crashed during the Great Bush Recession of 2008, Democrats gave him stimulus funding, TARP and auto company and bank bailouts....When Obama came in and asked for the same thing....not a single Republican voted for it

Considering that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid drew up the Obama Stimulus behind closed doors with no GOP input and it was filled with Democratic pork is that really a shock? It wasn't REALLY the same as what Bush asked for to address the recession. I believe in fact that 3 Republicans voted for it anyways. Snow, Collins and Arlen Spector (before he changed parties?)

Democrats compromised with Bush
Republicans refused to compromise with Obama

I will never understanding what happens to a political party much less worshiping one. But whatever, works for you, Comrade big guy

 

[Dad2three]

Yes, you conservatives suck at math and history, I agree with that. When did Republicans "take credit" for the money the incompetent Obama spent shutting down government? I don't remember when you did that. But if you say so, you probably did. At least you are now. Conservatives are idiots, stop listening to Faux News and believing whatever they tell you

Conservatives are idiots and bad with math and history?

Liberals pretty much agree that the economy started going south under Bush his last 2 years in his final term in office. THIS was the economic decline Obama and Liberals claim Obama 'inherited'. Liberals also pretty much agree that whoever controls Congress controls the purse strings, and therefore the economy / budget as well....unless it is THEY who control Congress / the purse strings.

During Bush's 1st 6 years in office 9/11 occurred, the economic aftermath of 9/11 happened, and 2 wars were fought. No 'economic decline' was experienced, but approx. 2 1/2 Trillion was added to the debt...in 6 (SIX YEARS)...during a time when there was a pretty close split in Congress. (2 1/2 trillion in 6 years in approx. 1/3rd of the debt Obama added in his 1st 4 years!)

Democrats secured a Super-Majority Control of Congress, controlling the purse strings / budget the last 2 years of Bush's administration...during which time the Liberals say the economy started going south. During this 1 1/2 - 2 year period another 1 1/2 TRILLION was added to the debt...in only 2 years. WHAT was the difference between Bush's 1st 6 years and his last 2? Oh yeah, Democrats took over Congress! They held this Super Majority control of Congress through the end of Obama's 2nd year in office.

The economic decline Obama claims to have inherited came from 2 years of Liberal control of the budget and 2 more years of horrendous fiscal irresponsibility. For instance, while supposedly in a declining economy Obama and the Liberals passed the tremendously FAILED Stimulus bill, a nearly $1 TRILLION addition to the nation's debt in one shot that contained over 7,000 pieces of DNC-ONLY pork, continued such horrible programs as 'Cash for Clunkers' that ended up hurting the economy/poor & middle class families, and ended up costing OVER $742,000 PER JOB Obama claimed to have created / saved!

In Obama's 1st 4 years he set US records for 'monthly', 'annual', and 'total' deficit spending - adding over $6 trillion to the US debt in ONLY 4 years, more debt added than by EVERY US President from Washington to Bush COMBINED, single-handedly securing the 1st US Credit rating down-grade by refusing to accept more budget cuts to prove he was serious about reducing the deficit as he was warned, and added a record number of job-creation / business-strangling regulations.

These are DOCUMENTED, HISTORICAL FACTS which speak for themselves. Responding with opinion or personal attacks do not effect me at all because you are arguing with these documented history / facts, not me.

The final statistical and historical fact is that Obama is ARGUABLY the worst President in US history. Personally, though, I would award that title to the racist LBJ, the man who started the whole liberal program of 'Economic Slavery' that has been used to oppress blacks, ensure more and more Americans remain UN-successful and dependent on the government, and that they continue to vote for the liberal politicians who will keep the 'free' money and handouts flowing.

Democrats never had a super majority in Congress under Bush ....EVER
Bush blocked any legislative effort from the Democrats. You are welcome to post any legislation pushed through by the Democrats that caused an economic meltdown

Republicans never had a super majority under Bush either, which means they needed to make an agreement. The Democrats were zero compromise, gimme my way

You must have completely missed out on the Bush era

Yes the Democrats compromised. In fact, they gave Bush a 9-11 card where he could get any legislation he wanted passed in the name of fighting terrorism. He even got the wars he asked for
When the economy crashed during the Great Bush Recession of 2008, Democrats gave him stimulus funding, TARP and auto company and bank bailouts....When Obama came in and asked for the same thing....not a single Republican voted for it

Considering that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid drew up the Obama Stimulus behind closed doors with no GOP input and it was filled with Democratic pork is that really a shock? It wasn't REALLY the same as what Bush asked for to address the recession. I believe in fact that 3 Republicans voted for it anyways. Snow, Collins and Arlen Spector (before he changed parties?)

FLASHBACK: 85 Percent Of House Republicans Who Were Serving In ‘08 Voted For Bush’s Stimulus Act

Of course, since President Obama came into office, the GOP has consistently found reasons to oppose ideas that it once supported.

 

[kaz]

Yes, you conservatives suck at math and history, I agree with that. When did Republicans "take credit" for the money the incompetent Obama spent shutting down government? I don't remember when you did that. But if you say so, you probably did. At least you are now. Conservatives are idiots, stop listening to Faux News and believing whatever they tell you

Conservatives are idiots and bad with math and history?

Liberals pretty much agree that the economy started going south under Bush his last 2 years in his final term in office. THIS was the economic decline Obama and Liberals claim Obama 'inherited'. Liberals also pretty much agree that whoever controls Congress controls the purse strings, and therefore the economy / budget as well....unless it is THEY who control Congress / the purse strings.

During Bush's 1st 6 years in office 9/11 occurred, the economic aftermath of 9/11 happened, and 2 wars were fought. No 'economic decline' was experienced, but approx. 2 1/2 Trillion was added to the debt...in 6 (SIX YEARS)...during a time when there was a pretty close split in Congress. (2 1/2 trillion in 6 years in approx. 1/3rd of the debt Obama added in his 1st 4 years!)

Democrats secured a Super-Majority Control of Congress, controlling the purse strings / budget the last 2 years of Bush's administration...during which time the Liberals say the economy started going south. During this 1 1/2 - 2 year period another 1 1/2 TRILLION was added to the debt...in only 2 years. WHAT was the difference between Bush's 1st 6 years and his last 2? Oh yeah, Democrats took over Congress! They held this Super Majority control of Congress through the end of Obama's 2nd year in office.

The economic decline Obama claims to have inherited came from 2 years of Liberal control of the budget and 2 more years of horrendous fiscal irresponsibility. For instance, while supposedly in a declining economy Obama and the Liberals passed the tremendously FAILED Stimulus bill, a nearly $1 TRILLION addition to the nation's debt in one shot that contained over 7,000 pieces of DNC-ONLY pork, continued such horrible programs as 'Cash for Clunkers' that ended up hurting the economy/poor & middle class families, and ended up costing OVER $742,000 PER JOB Obama claimed to have created / saved!

In Obama's 1st 4 years he set US records for 'monthly', 'annual', and 'total' deficit spending - adding over $6 trillion to the US debt in ONLY 4 years, more debt added than by EVERY US President from Washington to Bush COMBINED, single-handedly securing the 1st US Credit rating down-grade by refusing to accept more budget cuts to prove he was serious about reducing the deficit as he was warned, and added a record number of job-creation / business-strangling regulations.

These are DOCUMENTED, HISTORICAL FACTS which speak for themselves. Responding with opinion or personal attacks do not effect me at all because you are arguing with these documented history / facts, not me.

The final statistical and historical fact is that Obama is ARGUABLY the worst President in US history. Personally, though, I would award that title to the racist LBJ, the man who started the whole liberal program of 'Economic Slavery' that has been used to oppress blacks, ensure more and more Americans remain UN-successful and dependent on the government, and that they continue to vote for the liberal politicians who will keep the 'free' money and handouts flowing.

So NO you can't present ANY bills the Dems passed 2007-2009 to change Dubya/GOP policy that created Dubya's recession. Thanks

Hint Ronnie Raygun TRIPLED every other US Prez debt AND Dubya doubled every other US POrez debt (while he lost 1+ million PRIVATE sector jobs).. lol

I said W was the same as Obama, moron. As for Reagan, tax receipts doubled under him and the majority of spending increases were actually Tip and the Democrats. Double wasn't enough for them

You mean when Ronnie GUTTED taxes for the rich but KINDA made up for some of it with his 11 tax increases on the poor/middle class?



Tax receipts doubled? Weird taking US from 20% of GDP to 17% is doubling, you know how ECONOMISTS measure it, not the static dollar figure right wingers WANT to use that doesn't adjust for inflation/pop growth!


Reagan Chief Economist Feldstein: "It's Not That You Get More Revenue By Lowering Tax Rates, It Is That You Don't Lose As Much."

Feldstein In 1986: "Hyperbole" That Reagan Tax Cut "Would Actually Increase Tax Revenue."

Conservative Economist Holtz-Eakin: "No Serious Research Evidence" Suggests Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."

Tax Foundation's Prante: "A Stretch" To Claim "Cutting Capital Gains Taxes Raises Tax Revenues."

Bush CEA Chair Mankiw: Claim That Broad-Based Income Tax Cuts Increase Revenue Is Not "Credible," Capital Income Tax Cuts Also Don't Pay For Themselves

Bush-Appointed Federal Reserve Chair Bernanke: "I Don't Think That As A General Rule Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Bush Treasury Secretary Paulson: "As A General Rule, I Don't Believe That Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Bush CEA Chairman Lazear: "As A General Rule, We Do Not Think Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Bush Economic Adviser Viard: "Federal Revenue Is Lower Today Than It Would Have Been Without The Tax Cuts."


Bush Treasury Official Carroll: "We Do Not Think Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."

TIP? Oh you mean the GOP Senate...

Can you put down the kool-aid while you talk, all I hear is gurgling

 

[kaz]

Right, because people who will destroy stone and metal monuments wouldn't hop a plastic barricade to do it. You actually are a rocket scientist, aren't you?

Remember how the doofus in the Oval Office spent $64 billion more shutting government down than it would have cost to operate it?

MUST be some CONservative "math and history" crap

GOP PROUDLY TOOK CREDIT HOWEVER, REMEMBER??? lol

Yes, you conservatives suck at math and history, I agree with that. When did Republicans "take credit" for the money the incompetent Obama spent shutting down government? I don't remember when you did that. But if you say so, you probably did. At least you are now. Conservatives are idiots, stop listening to Faux News and believing whatever they tell you

So NO , you can't and will not present a credible link to your imaginary "math". Got it

Cruz: GOP leads in 2014 because of shutdown

Where did I do "math," Holmes?

You quoted $64 billion Bubba, isn't that some type of math? PROVE IT DUMBASS!

$64 billion is a number, Poindexter. Math is a field with operations and calculations

 

[Dad2three]

What is this "our veterans" crap! We aren't your pawns to be used again and again when you want to pull us out of the drawer to display your "concern" and faux "patriotism". During President Obama's time in office, more has been done in correcting the enormous problems with and within the VA, both VHA (health side) and VBA (benefits side), left over from the Bush & Co administration. Bush flat fucking IGNORED veterans, fool~! Now stuff your neoconservative talking points and learn something, smack!!!!

More has been TALKED ABOUT, given LIP SEFVICE TO under Obama. Under Obama vets have been, and continue to be, left to DIE waiting on appointments/treatment while Obama administration toadies paid themselves well and gave themselves big fat bonuses while hiding the truth!

So you like FACTS?! Here are some for you....

“Nearly One-Third Of 847,000 Vets With Pending Applications For VA Health Care Already Died.”

Obama’s abuse of our military veterans continues, unabated and unchecked by the useless Congress.

As of Jul 21, 2015:
It has been over a year since we learned that the Veterans Administration (VA) doctored records to cover up long wait times while veterans died waiting for care. Yet, under Obama’s watch, problems are still rampant at the agency. Consider the following:
- About 238,000 veterans, nearly one out of three veterans, with pending applications for VA healthcare has already died.

- Wait lists for veterans are 50% higher than a year ago.

- At least $6 Billion a year have been wasted on illegal contracts for medical care & supplies. (senior VA official, Jan R. Frye writes: “Doors are swung wide open for fraud, waste and abuse… I can state without reservation that VA has and continues to waste millions of dollars by paying excessive prices for goods and services due to breaches of Federal laws [also known as CRIMES].” )

- Only two employees have been fired for the fraud and neglect uncovered last year.

Fuck you worm. I've been living through this shit since 2008, when I initiated my first claim as a Nam vet! All of those issues BEGAN to evolve as early as 2002 with the VA reporting that over 300,000 vets had been put on waiting lists or been forced to wait up to six months for an appointment with the new crop of vets just starting to trickle in from Afghanistan. Bush & Co started a war and either didn't think about the casualties that would be created or simply didn't care and turned their backs on those vets. Look at the funding the VA got before the Walter Reed scandal in 2006 and then afterwards! OOPS!

You can spread those headlines above from pillar to post, but they have no bearing on the root cause of the problem, which was indifference towards vets by previous administrations but primarily by the administrations that took so many beautiful young people to war in far away lands like Bush in Kuwait and Bush & Co in Iraq!

As far as the two that were fired, Obama should have fired Sec. McDonald last Spring! I'm all for holding Obama's feet to the fire for his mistakes and transgressions! That is the general consensus in the vet world. Obama has his own dirty linen in this matter, but the ROOT FUCKING CAUSE for the ongoing VA cluster fuck that has been going on since 2001 got steadily worse until it finally peaked around 2011. That goes for both sides of the VA house! Hell, I'm in the Phoenix area now, with a Sep 28 appointment I requested 7 weeks ago. Don't believe everything you read in the papers, lad! There's facts, lies and VA facts. The biggest lies are VA facts!

Take your fucking partisan headlines and shove them sideways up your gaping sphincter, because you don't know Jack Shit about the issue, and all you care about is your stinking partisanship!

I have no doubt that the VA is a cluster fuck because it's run by the government! That's why I'm so happy that my healthcare isn't! Oh wait...I forgot that's no longer the case! I'm now on ObamaCare. Gosh...how lucky for me!

You're are on Obamacares? really? Don't understand what it is huh Bubs? lol

 

[Dad2three]

Democrats compromised with Bush
Republicans refused to compromise with Obama

Now I SERIOUSLY have to have some of what you are smoking!

Harry Reid refused to allow any GOP bill passed by the House even come up for discussion let alone a vote. That is documented FACT. Reid ensured approximately 100 House Bills remained on his desk.

This is arguably one of the more admirable characteristics about Liberals - come hail or high water they will NOT compromise their ideology and agenda. They see doing so to be a betrayal of those...while the GOP continuously rolls over with their proverbial legs spread wide open, giving in to whatever Liberals want for fear of offending someone and possible losing votes / their jobs.

Boehner’s ‘Bipartisan’ Bunk

Despite Republican complaints that Reid is the cause of gridlock, the Washington Post in August did an analysis of the past 20 congressional terms and found that the number of House-approved bills awaiting action in the Senate this session isn’t that unusual.

“In 11 of the past 19 Congresses — more than half — more than 300 bills were waiting for Senate action by the time the Congress completed its work,” Philip Bump wrote.


Boehner’s ‘Bipartisan’ Bunk

Yes, let's allow the GOP House special rules to get their ideas heard in the Senate the Dems didn't get *shaking head*

 

[Dad2three]

MUST be some CONservative "math and history" crap

GOP PROUDLY TOOK CREDIT HOWEVER, REMEMBER??? lol

Yes, you conservatives suck at math and history, I agree with that. When did Republicans "take credit" for the money the incompetent Obama spent shutting down government? I don't remember when you did that. But if you say so, you probably did. At least you are now. Conservatives are idiots, stop listening to Faux News and believing whatever they tell you

So NO , you can't and will not present a credible link to your imaginary "math". Got it

Cruz: GOP leads in 2014 because of shutdown

Where did I do "math," Holmes?

You quoted $64 billion Bubba, isn't that some type of math? PROVE IT DUMBASS!

$64 billion is a number, Poindexter. Math is a field with operations and calculations

So NO Bubba, you can't give the math OR a link to show where you got this CONservative "$64" billion "math" cost! Thanks anyways Bubba

 

[jknowgood]

There is no need for security at the ww2 monument. Obama hates our veterans and this proved how much.

What is this "our veterans" crap! We aren't your pawns to be used again and again when you want to pull us out of the drawer to display your "concern" and faux "patriotism". During President Obama's time in office, more has been done in correcting the enormous problems with and within the VA, both VHA (health side) and VBA (benefits side), left over from the Bush & Co administration. Bush flat fucking IGNORED veterans, fool~! Now stuff your neoconservative talking points and learn something, smack!!!!

Link?

ONE, 5 Second Google search


When Fox News Shrugged Over A Military Care Scandal (Hint: Bush Was President)


When Fox News Shrugged Over A Military Care Scandal (Hint: Bush Was President)

And Obama promised he would fix it. Another lie.

 

[Dad2three]

There is no need for security at the ww2 monument. Obama hates our veterans and this proved how much.

What is this "our veterans" crap! We aren't your pawns to be used again and again when you want to pull us out of the drawer to display your "concern" and faux "patriotism". During President Obama's time in office, more has been done in correcting the enormous problems with and within the VA, both VHA (health side) and VBA (benefits side), left over from the Bush & Co administration. Bush flat fucking IGNORED veterans, fool~! Now stuff your neoconservative talking points and learn something, smack!!!!

Link?

ONE, 5 Second Google search


When Fox News Shrugged Over A Military Care Scandal (Hint: Bush Was President)


When Fox News Shrugged Over A Military Care Scandal (Hint: Bush Was President)

And Obama promised he would fix it. Another lie.

Weird, did the GOP Congress work with him? MUST be on Obama's shoulders right Bubba?

I'll note you NEVER responded to Clinton shutting down (my link) the PARK SERVICE BOTH TIMES GOV'T SHUT DOWN LIKE OBAMA, Weird Bubba, BUT Bet that will not stop you from AGAIN claiming ONLY Obama did it, lol


NEXT

 

[jknowgood]

There is no need for security at the ww2 monument. Obama hates our veterans and this proved how much.

What is this "our veterans" crap! We aren't your pawns to be used again and again when you want to pull us out of the drawer to display your "concern" and faux "patriotism". During President Obama's time in office, more has been done in correcting the enormous problems with and within the VA, both VHA (health side) and VBA (benefits side), left over from the Bush & Co administration. Bush flat fucking IGNORED veterans, fool~! Now stuff your neoconservative talking points and learn something, smack!!!!

Link?

ONE, 5 Second Google search


When Fox News Shrugged Over A Military Care Scandal (Hint: Bush Was President)


When Fox News Shrugged Over A Military Care Scandal (Hint: Bush Was President)

And Obama promised he would fix it. Another lie.

Weird, did the GOP Congress work with him? MUST be on Obama's shoulders right Bubba?

I'll note you NEVER responded to Clinton shutting down (my link) the PARK SERVICE BOTH TIMES GOV'T SHUT DOWN LIKE OBAMA, Weird Bubba, BUT Bet that will not stop you from AGAIN claiming ONLY Obama did it, lol


NEXT

You forget that Obama had two years of total control, and did nothing. Also the memorials remained opened during Clinton's shut down. What's your point?

 

[Dad2three]

What is this "our veterans" crap! We aren't your pawns to be used again and again when you want to pull us out of the drawer to display your "concern" and faux "patriotism". During President Obama's time in office, more has been done in correcting the enormous problems with and within the VA, both VHA (health side) and VBA (benefits side), left over from the Bush & Co administration. Bush flat fucking IGNORED veterans, fool~! Now stuff your neoconservative talking points and learn something, smack!!!!

Link?

ONE, 5 Second Google search


When Fox News Shrugged Over A Military Care Scandal (Hint: Bush Was President)


When Fox News Shrugged Over A Military Care Scandal (Hint: Bush Was President)

And Obama promised he would fix it. Another lie.

Weird, did the GOP Congress work with him? MUST be on Obama's shoulders right Bubba?

I'll note you NEVER responded to Clinton shutting down (my link) the PARK SERVICE BOTH TIMES GOV'T SHUT DOWN LIKE OBAMA, Weird Bubba, BUT Bet that will not stop you from AGAIN claiming ONLY Obama did it, lol


NEXT

You forget that Obama had two years of total control, and did nothing. Also the memorials remained opened during Clinton's shut down. What's your point?

Got it, you''ll double down on the lie. Shocking


A fleeting, illusory supermajority

t’s in Republicans’ interest right now to characterize the Democrats’ congressional majority in 2009 and 2010 as enormous. As the argument goes, President Obama could get literally anything he wanted from Congress in his first two years, so Democrats don’t have any excuses.

The stimulus wasn’t big enough? Blame Dems; they had supermajorities in both chambers for two years. There’s no comprehensive immigration reform? Blame Dems; they had supermajorities in both chambers for two years. There was only one big jobs bill? Blame Dems; they had supermajorities in both chambers for two years. And so on.




I realize memories can be short in the political world, and 2010 seems like a long time ago, but it’s unnerving when professionals who presumably keep up with current events are this wrong. Even if various pundits lost track of the specific details, I’d at least expect Fox News hosts to remember Sen. Scott Brown’s (R) special-election win in Massachusetts.

Since memories are short, let’s take a brief stroll down memory lane, giving Wallace a hand with the recent history he’s forgotten.

In January 2009, there were 56 Senate Democrats and two independents who caucused with Democrats. This combined total of 58 included Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), whose health was failing and was unable to serve. As a practical matter, in the early months of Obama’s presidency, the Senate Democratic caucus had 57 members on the floor for day-to-day legislating.

In April 2009, Pennsylvania’s Arlen Specter switched parties. This meant there were 57 Democrats, and two independents who caucused with Democrats, for a caucus of 59. But with Kennedy ailing, there were still “only” 58 Democratic caucus members in the chamber.

In May 2009, Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) was hospitalized, bringing the number of Senate Dems in the chamber down to 57.

In July 2009, Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) was finally seated after a lengthy recount/legal fight. At that point, the Democratic caucus reached 60, but two of its members, Kennedy and Byrd, were unavailable for votes.

In August 2009, Kennedy died, and Democratic caucus again stood at 59.

In September 2009, Sen. Paul Kirk (D-Mass.) filled Kennedy’s vacancy, bringing the caucus back to 60, though Byrd’s health continued to deteriorate.

In January 2010, Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) replaced Kirk, bringing the Democratic caucus back to 59 again.

In June 2010, Byrd died, and the Democratic caucus fell to 58, where it stood until the midterms. [Update: Jonathan Bernstein reminds me that Byrd’s replacement was a Dem. He’s right, though this doesn’t change the larger point.]

Wallace believes the Dems’ “filibuster proof majority in the Senate” lasted 24 months. In reality, he’s off by 20 months, undermining the entire thesis pushed so aggressively by Republicans. (as the us economy had dumped 9%+ the last quarter of 2008 and was losing 700,000+ jobs a month!)

A fleeting, illusory supermajority

 

[kaz]

Yes, you conservatives suck at math and history, I agree with that. When did Republicans "take credit" for the money the incompetent Obama spent shutting down government? I don't remember when you did that. But if you say so, you probably did. At least you are now. Conservatives are idiots, stop listening to Faux News and believing whatever they tell you

So NO , you can't and will not present a credible link to your imaginary "math". Got it

Cruz: GOP leads in 2014 because of shutdown

Where did I do "math," Holmes?

You quoted $64 billion Bubba, isn't that some type of math? PROVE IT DUMBASS!

$64 billion is a number, Poindexter. Math is a field with operations and calculations

So NO Bubba, you can't give the math OR a link to show where you got this CONservative "$64" billion "math" cost! Thanks anyways Bubba

Bubba? You are an angry little guy, aren't you, Holmes?

Tell me what difference it would make to you if I show you that Obama was such an idiot he spent more money shutting down government than keeping it running. Would you criticize the dumb ass or would you not give a shit?

 

[jknowgood]

Link?

ONE, 5 Second Google search


When Fox News Shrugged Over A Military Care Scandal (Hint: Bush Was President)


When Fox News Shrugged Over A Military Care Scandal (Hint: Bush Was President)

And Obama promised he would fix it. Another lie.

Weird, did the GOP Congress work with him? MUST be on Obama's shoulders right Bubba?

I'll note you NEVER responded to Clinton shutting down (my link) the PARK SERVICE BOTH TIMES GOV'T SHUT DOWN LIKE OBAMA, Weird Bubba, BUT Bet that will not stop you from AGAIN claiming ONLY Obama did it, lol


NEXT

You forget that Obama had two years of total control, and did nothing. Also the memorials remained opened during Clinton's shut down. What's your point?

Got it, you''ll double down on the lie. Shocking


A fleeting, illusory supermajority

t’s in Republicans’ interest right now to characterize the Democrats’ congressional majority in 2009 and 2010 as enormous. As the argument goes, President Obama could get literally anything he wanted from Congress in his first two years, so Democrats don’t have any excuses.

The stimulus wasn’t big enough? Blame Dems; they had supermajorities in both chambers for two years. There’s no comprehensive immigration reform? Blame Dems; they had supermajorities in both chambers for two years. There was only one big jobs bill? Blame Dems; they had supermajorities in both chambers for two years. And so on.




I realize memories can be short in the political world, and 2010 seems like a long time ago, but it’s unnerving when professionals who presumably keep up with current events are this wrong. Even if various pundits lost track of the specific details, I’d at least expect Fox News hosts to remember Sen. Scott Brown’s (R) special-election win in Massachusetts.

Since memories are short, let’s take a brief stroll down memory lane, giving Wallace a hand with the recent history he’s forgotten.

In January 2009, there were 56 Senate Democrats and two independents who caucused with Democrats. This combined total of 58 included Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), whose health was failing and was unable to serve. As a practical matter, in the early months of Obama’s presidency, the Senate Democratic caucus had 57 members on the floor for day-to-day legislating.

In April 2009, Pennsylvania’s Arlen Specter switched parties. This meant there were 57 Democrats, and two independents who caucused with Democrats, for a caucus of 59. But with Kennedy ailing, there were still “only” 58 Democratic caucus members in the chamber.

In May 2009, Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) was hospitalized, bringing the number of Senate Dems in the chamber down to 57.

In July 2009, Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) was finally seated after a lengthy recount/legal fight. At that point, the Democratic caucus reached 60, but two of its members, Kennedy and Byrd, were unavailable for votes.

In August 2009, Kennedy died, and Democratic caucus again stood at 59.

In September 2009, Sen. Paul Kirk (D-Mass.) filled Kennedy’s vacancy, bringing the caucus back to 60, though Byrd’s health continued to deteriorate.

In January 2010, Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) replaced Kirk, bringing the Democratic caucus back to 59 again.

In June 2010, Byrd died, and the Democratic caucus fell to 58, where it stood until the midterms. [Update: Jonathan Bernstein reminds me that Byrd’s replacement was a Dem. He’s right, though this doesn’t change the larger point.]

Wallace believes the Dems’ “filibuster proof majority in the Senate” lasted 24 months. In reality, he’s off by 20 months, undermining the entire thesis pushed so aggressively by Republicans. (as the us economy had dumped 9%+ the last quarter of 2008 and was losing 700,000+ jobs a month!)

A fleeting, illusory supermajority

Oh well then that proves Obama isn't a leader. Clinton still got things done with a republican majority. Reagan got things done with a democrat majority. Obama couldn't do anything with a democrat majority. Lol

 

[bravoactual]

Yes, you conservatives suck at math and history, I agree with that. When did Republicans "take credit" for the money the incompetent Obama spent shutting down government? I don't remember when you did that. But if you say so, you probably did. At least you are now. Conservatives are idiots, stop listening to Faux News and believing whatever they tell you

Conservatives are idiots and bad with math and history?

Liberals pretty much agree that the economy started going south under Bush his last 2 years in his final term in office. THIS was the economic decline Obama and Liberals claim Obama 'inherited'. Liberals also pretty much agree that whoever controls Congress controls the purse strings, and therefore the economy / budget as well....unless it is THEY who control Congress / the purse strings.

During Bush's 1st 6 years in office 9/11 occurred, the economic aftermath of 9/11 happened, and 2 wars were fought. No 'economic decline' was experienced, but approx. 2 1/2 Trillion was added to the debt...in 6 (SIX YEARS)...during a time when there was a pretty close split in Congress. (2 1/2 trillion in 6 years in approx. 1/3rd of the debt Obama added in his 1st 4 years!)

Democrats secured a Super-Majority Control of Congress, controlling the purse strings / budget the last 2 years of Bush's administration...during which time the Liberals say the economy started going south. During this 1 1/2 - 2 year period another 1 1/2 TRILLION was added to the debt...in only 2 years. WHAT was the difference between Bush's 1st 6 years and his last 2? Oh yeah, Democrats took over Congress! They held this Super Majority control of Congress through the end of Obama's 2nd year in office.

The economic decline Obama claims to have inherited came from 2 years of Liberal control of the budget and 2 more years of horrendous fiscal irresponsibility. For instance, while supposedly in a declining economy Obama and the Liberals passed the tremendously FAILED Stimulus bill, a nearly $1 TRILLION addition to the nation's debt in one shot that contained over 7,000 pieces of DNC-ONLY pork, continued such horrible programs as 'Cash for Clunkers' that ended up hurting the economy/poor & middle class families, and ended up costing OVER $742,000 PER JOB Obama claimed to have created / saved!

In Obama's 1st 4 years he set US records for 'monthly', 'annual', and 'total' deficit spending - adding over $6 trillion to the US debt in ONLY 4 years, more debt added than by EVERY US President from Washington to Bush COMBINED, single-handedly securing the 1st US Credit rating down-grade by refusing to accept more budget cuts to prove he was serious about reducing the deficit as he was warned, and added a record number of job-creation / business-strangling regulations.

These are DOCUMENTED, HISTORICAL FACTS which speak for themselves. Responding with opinion or personal attacks do not effect me at all because you are arguing with these documented history / facts, not me.

The final statistical and historical fact is that Obama is ARGUABLY the worst President in US history. Personally, though, I would award that title to the racist LBJ, the man who started the whole liberal program of 'Economic Slavery' that has been used to oppress blacks, ensure more and more Americans remain UN-successful and dependent on the government, and that they continue to vote for the liberal politicians who will keep the 'free' money and handouts flowing.

Democrats never had a super majority in Congress under Bush ....EVER
Bush blocked any legislative effort from the Democrats. You are welcome to post any legislation pushed through by the Democrats that caused an economic meltdown

Republicans never had a super majority under Bush either, which means they needed to make an agreement. The Democrats were zero compromise, gimme my way

WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Republicans held the Majority in the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate.

When bush43 was assumed office in January 2001, there were Repubican Majorities in both the House and the Senate.

Republicans Lost those majorities in 2008.

Some of us actually know the truth, your NOT one of them.

You're claiming that the GOP lost it's majority in the House in 2008? Sure you want to go with that?

My bad, 2006. Bush had Republican Majorities in both the House and in the Senate from 2001 - 2006.

 

[kaz]

Conservatives are idiots and bad with math and history?

Liberals pretty much agree that the economy started going south under Bush his last 2 years in his final term in office. THIS was the economic decline Obama and Liberals claim Obama 'inherited'. Liberals also pretty much agree that whoever controls Congress controls the purse strings, and therefore the economy / budget as well....unless it is THEY who control Congress / the purse strings.

During Bush's 1st 6 years in office 9/11 occurred, the economic aftermath of 9/11 happened, and 2 wars were fought. No 'economic decline' was experienced, but approx. 2 1/2 Trillion was added to the debt...in 6 (SIX YEARS)...during a time when there was a pretty close split in Congress. (2 1/2 trillion in 6 years in approx. 1/3rd of the debt Obama added in his 1st 4 years!)

Democrats secured a Super-Majority Control of Congress, controlling the purse strings / budget the last 2 years of Bush's administration...during which time the Liberals say the economy started going south. During this 1 1/2 - 2 year period another 1 1/2 TRILLION was added to the debt...in only 2 years. WHAT was the difference between Bush's 1st 6 years and his last 2? Oh yeah, Democrats took over Congress! They held this Super Majority control of Congress through the end of Obama's 2nd year in office.

The economic decline Obama claims to have inherited came from 2 years of Liberal control of the budget and 2 more years of horrendous fiscal irresponsibility. For instance, while supposedly in a declining economy Obama and the Liberals passed the tremendously FAILED Stimulus bill, a nearly $1 TRILLION addition to the nation's debt in one shot that contained over 7,000 pieces of DNC-ONLY pork, continued such horrible programs as 'Cash for Clunkers' that ended up hurting the economy/poor & middle class families, and ended up costing OVER $742,000 PER JOB Obama claimed to have created / saved!

In Obama's 1st 4 years he set US records for 'monthly', 'annual', and 'total' deficit spending - adding over $6 trillion to the US debt in ONLY 4 years, more debt added than by EVERY US President from Washington to Bush COMBINED, single-handedly securing the 1st US Credit rating down-grade by refusing to accept more budget cuts to prove he was serious about reducing the deficit as he was warned, and added a record number of job-creation / business-strangling regulations.

These are DOCUMENTED, HISTORICAL FACTS which speak for themselves. Responding with opinion or personal attacks do not effect me at all because you are arguing with these documented history / facts, not me.

The final statistical and historical fact is that Obama is ARGUABLY the worst President in US history. Personally, though, I would award that title to the racist LBJ, the man who started the whole liberal program of 'Economic Slavery' that has been used to oppress blacks, ensure more and more Americans remain UN-successful and dependent on the government, and that they continue to vote for the liberal politicians who will keep the 'free' money and handouts flowing.

Democrats never had a super majority in Congress under Bush ....EVER
Bush blocked any legislative effort from the Democrats. You are welcome to post any legislation pushed through by the Democrats that caused an economic meltdown

Republicans never had a super majority under Bush either, which means they needed to make an agreement. The Democrats were zero compromise, gimme my way

WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Republicans held the Majority in the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate.

When bush43 was assumed office in January 2001, there were Repubican Majorities in both the House and the Senate.

Republicans Lost those majorities in 2008.

Some of us actually know the truth, your NOT one of them.

You're claiming that the GOP lost it's majority in the House in 2008? Sure you want to go with that?

My bad, 2006. Bush had Republican Majorities in both the House and in the Senate from 2001 - 2006.

Obama is the only one who ever had a super majority

 

[Dad2three]

What is this "our veterans" crap! We aren't your pawns to be used again and again when you want to pull us out of the drawer to display your "concern" and faux "patriotism". During President Obama's time in office, more has been done in correcting the enormous problems with and within the VA, both VHA (health side) and VBA (benefits side), left over from the Bush & Co administration. Bush flat fucking IGNORED veterans, fool~! Now stuff your neoconservative talking points and learn something, smack!!!!

Link?

ONE, 5 Second Google search


When Fox News Shrugged Over A Military Care Scandal (Hint: Bush Was President)


When Fox News Shrugged Over A Military Care Scandal (Hint: Bush Was President)

And Obama promised he would fix it. Another lie.

Weird, did the GOP Congress work with him? MUST be on Obama's shoulders right Bubba?

I'll note you NEVER responded to Clinton shutting down (my link) the PARK SERVICE BOTH TIMES GOV'T SHUT DOWN LIKE OBAMA, Weird Bubba, BUT Bet that will not stop you from AGAIN claiming ONLY Obama did it, lol


NEXT

You forget that Obama had two years of total control, and did nothing. Also the memorials remained opened during Clinton's shut down. What's your point?

NOV 1995

1995 and 2013: Three differences between two shutdowns - CNNPolitics.com

How the National Parks Became the Biggest Battleground in the Shutdown


This time is different from 1995, thanks to new media and the post-9/11 security environment. But there are surprising similarities, too.


In fact, in 1995 and '96 there were two government shutdowns. The first lasted six days in mid-November 1995, the second from mid-December 1995 to early January 1996. For those 26 days, in addition to the national parks, the Smithsonian museums in Washington were also closed. Veterans' health and welfare services were curtailed, passport applications didn't get processed, new clinical research patients were not accepted at the National Institutes of Health, and federal contractors had to furlough employees.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...-biggest-battleground-in-the-shutdown/280439/



Washington parks and memorials must, by law, close during a shutdown. And as the National Park Service has to furlough the majority of its workers, there isn’t enough staff to ensure the safety and security of park visitors – hence the barricades. They were closed during both the Clinton era shutdowns of 1995 and 1996, and the brief shutdown in October 1990, during the presidency of George H.W. Bush. Whether or not the parks were accessible is another story. It appears from pictures taken at the time that some were, but it’s impossible to know if they all were. However, they were all closed.

Incidentally, the WWII veterans were able to get into the Memorial, as their visit was deemed a free speech issue, and the National Park Service let them in. And it’s true that the WWII memorial didn’t close during any previous shutdown – because it opened in 2004.

Busting Some Myths About the Shutdown


KEEP UP THE RIGHT WING LIES BUBBA, IT'S ALL YOU HAVE!

 

[Dad2three]

So NO , you can't and will not present a credible link to your imaginary "math". Got it

Cruz: GOP leads in 2014 because of shutdown

Where did I do "math," Holmes?

You quoted $64 billion Bubba, isn't that some type of math? PROVE IT DUMBASS!

$64 billion is a number, Poindexter. Math is a field with operations and calculations

So NO Bubba, you can't give the math OR a link to show where you got this CONservative "$64" billion "math" cost! Thanks anyways Bubba

Bubba? You are an angry little guy, aren't you, Holmes?

Tell me what difference it would make to you if I show you that Obama was such an idiot he spent more money shutting down government than keeping it running. Would you criticize the dumb ass or would you not give a shit?

Still biting the ankles Bubba since you can't back up your posit. Got it!

 

[Dad2three]

ONE, 5 Second Google search


When Fox News Shrugged Over A Military Care Scandal (Hint: Bush Was President)


When Fox News Shrugged Over A Military Care Scandal (Hint: Bush Was President)

And Obama promised he would fix it. Another lie.

Weird, did the GOP Congress work with him? MUST be on Obama's shoulders right Bubba?

I'll note you NEVER responded to Clinton shutting down (my link) the PARK SERVICE BOTH TIMES GOV'T SHUT DOWN LIKE OBAMA, Weird Bubba, BUT Bet that will not stop you from AGAIN claiming ONLY Obama did it, lol


NEXT

You forget that Obama had two years of total control, and did nothing. Also the memorials remained opened during Clinton's shut down. What's your point?

Got it, you''ll double down on the lie. Shocking


A fleeting, illusory supermajority

t’s in Republicans’ interest right now to characterize the Democrats’ congressional majority in 2009 and 2010 as enormous. As the argument goes, President Obama could get literally anything he wanted from Congress in his first two years, so Democrats don’t have any excuses.

The stimulus wasn’t big enough? Blame Dems; they had supermajorities in both chambers for two years. There’s no comprehensive immigration reform? Blame Dems; they had supermajorities in both chambers for two years. There was only one big jobs bill? Blame Dems; they had supermajorities in both chambers for two years. And so on.




I realize memories can be short in the political world, and 2010 seems like a long time ago, but it’s unnerving when professionals who presumably keep up with current events are this wrong. Even if various pundits lost track of the specific details, I’d at least expect Fox News hosts to remember Sen. Scott Brown’s (R) special-election win in Massachusetts.

Since memories are short, let’s take a brief stroll down memory lane, giving Wallace a hand with the recent history he’s forgotten.

In January 2009, there were 56 Senate Democrats and two independents who caucused with Democrats. This combined total of 58 included Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), whose health was failing and was unable to serve. As a practical matter, in the early months of Obama’s presidency, the Senate Democratic caucus had 57 members on the floor for day-to-day legislating.

In April 2009, Pennsylvania’s Arlen Specter switched parties. This meant there were 57 Democrats, and two independents who caucused with Democrats, for a caucus of 59. But with Kennedy ailing, there were still “only” 58 Democratic caucus members in the chamber.

In May 2009, Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) was hospitalized, bringing the number of Senate Dems in the chamber down to 57.

In July 2009, Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) was finally seated after a lengthy recount/legal fight. At that point, the Democratic caucus reached 60, but two of its members, Kennedy and Byrd, were unavailable for votes.

In August 2009, Kennedy died, and Democratic caucus again stood at 59.

In September 2009, Sen. Paul Kirk (D-Mass.) filled Kennedy’s vacancy, bringing the caucus back to 60, though Byrd’s health continued to deteriorate.

In January 2010, Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) replaced Kirk, bringing the Democratic caucus back to 59 again.

In June 2010, Byrd died, and the Democratic caucus fell to 58, where it stood until the midterms. [Update: Jonathan Bernstein reminds me that Byrd’s replacement was a Dem. He’s right, though this doesn’t change the larger point.]

Wallace believes the Dems’ “filibuster proof majority in the Senate” lasted 24 months. In reality, he’s off by 20 months, undermining the entire thesis pushed so aggressively by Republicans. (as the us economy had dumped 9%+ the last quarter of 2008 and was losing 700,000+ jobs a month!)

A fleeting, illusory supermajority

Oh well then that proves Obama isn't a leader. Clinton still got things done with a republican majority. Reagan got things done with a democrat majority. Obama couldn't do anything with a democrat majority. Lol

Good you agree the Dems DIDN'T have a super majority but 4 months, AS the Dubya/GOP economy was crashing

Yep, GOP has gone SOOOOO far right, they even vote against things like stimulus they supported under Dubya less than a year before, weird right? Must be on Obama's shoulders, NOT that the Dems loved their country more than party, the opposite of today's GOP!

 

[Dad2three]

Democrats never had a super majority in Congress under Bush ....EVER
Bush blocked any legislative effort from the Democrats. You are welcome to post any legislation pushed through by the Democrats that caused an economic meltdown

Republicans never had a super majority under Bush either, which means they needed to make an agreement. The Democrats were zero compromise, gimme my way

WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Republicans held the Majority in the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate.

When bush43 was assumed office in January 2001, there were Repubican Majorities in both the House and the Senate.

Republicans Lost those majorities in 2008.

Some of us actually know the truth, your NOT one of them.

You're claiming that the GOP lost it's majority in the House in 2008? Sure you want to go with that?

My bad, 2006. Bush had Republican Majorities in both the House and in the Senate from 2001 - 2006.

Obama is the only one who ever had a super majority

In name only, as Byrd/Kennedy both were dying and it was for 4 months TOTAL AS THE DUBYA/GOP economy was crashing!