Is this Republican led Senate the most inept in American history?

[kaz]

you continue to display your naivete about international affairs and radical muslims. What exactly are the penalties for non-compliance? Does Kerry stop selling Heinz ketchup to them?

First penalty: Withholding return of funds
Second Penalty: Returning to existing sanctions
Third penalty: Extend the sanction period

yeah, great and in the meantime the Iranians get nuclear bombs. They don't give a shit about what that
"deal" says. they know that obozo the head clown will never even try to enforce it on his muslim brothers.

I cannot believe that you are that fricken stupid.

They are getting a nuclear bomb right now

Failure to ratify the treaty only ensures nothing will impede that process

Regime change, will "impede the process" if not, destroying the reactors will also "impede the process" what wont is, giving Iran 150 billion dollars, modernizing their facilities, and increasing their security. Iran is a pion right now. Obama wants to make them a world power

Again you don't understand what a deal is

I will give you back your money if you deactivate your nuclear program for 15 years

Don't give them back their money and you have no deal. They go back to enriching uranium and have a bomb in one year

A liberal deal is that you want $100 of someone else's money, but you'll take $95 and then squeal like a stuck pick that you didn't get $5

 

[rightwinger]

First penalty: Withholding return of funds
Second Penalty: Returning to existing sanctions
Third penalty: Extend the sanction period

yeah, great and in the meantime the Iranians get nuclear bombs. They don't give a shit about what that
"deal" says. they know that obozo the head clown will never even try to enforce it on his muslim brothers.

I cannot believe that you are that fricken stupid.

They are getting a nuclear bomb right now

Failure to ratify the treaty only ensures nothing will impede that process

Regime change, will "impede the process" if not, destroying the reactors will also "impede the process" what wont is, giving Iran 150 billion dollars, modernizing their facilities, and increasing their security. Iran is a pion right now. Obama wants to make them a world power

Again you don't understand what a deal is

I will give you back your money if you deactivate your nuclear program for 15 years

Don't give them back their money and you have no deal. They go back to enriching uranium and have a bomb in one year

A liberal deal is that you want $100 of someone else's money, but you'll take $95 and then squeal like a stuck pick that you didn't get $5

Not even worthy of a response

 

[Redfish]

yeah, great and in the meantime the Iranians get nuclear bombs. They don't give a shit about what that
"deal" says. they know that obozo the head clown will never even try to enforce it on his muslim brothers.

I cannot believe that you are that fricken stupid.

They are getting a nuclear bomb right now

Failure to ratify the treaty only ensures nothing will impede that process

Regime change, will "impede the process" if not, destroying the reactors will also "impede the process" what wont is, giving Iran 150 billion dollars, modernizing their facilities, and increasing their security. Iran is a pion right now. Obama wants to make them a world power

Again you don't understand what a deal is

I will give you back your money if you deactivate your nuclear program for 15 years

Don't give them back their money and you have no deal. They go back to enriching uranium and have a bomb in one year

and you trust the Iranians do live up to the deal? Pay attention fool. There are many sites that cannot be inspected because they are "military". They get a 24 day warning before any inspections. Duh, what do you think they will use those 24 days for?

We have already released the money, lifted the sanctions, and the ayatollah is screaming "death to america" and the idiot Kerry says "he doesn't really mean it".

Can you libs and your leaders be any more stupid?

Yes, Iran was unwilling to open up its military sites for inspections without 24 hour notice. Like any country, there is classified/sensitive information that would be subject to western spying. That does not equate to Military bases becoming nuclear facilities. Hard to hide a centerfuge in 24 hours

No, we have not released the money...far from it
Not until we have vrification

Your paranoid fantasies do not account for any alternative

If we turn down the deal, what would be the state of Irans nuclear capabilities?

24 DAYS, not hours.

The sanctions have been lifted and the release of the money has been authorized.

"vrification" of what? There is no provision for verification before funds release.

we are also not allowed to see what is in the side deals. Congress has not seen the side deals. WTF?

If we turn down the deal, the sanctions remain in place, the Iranian economy continues to tank and the radical leaders see more and more pressure form the intelligent citizens of Iran.

I good negotiator would have negotiated from a position of strength, we had all the leverage, but the incompetent Kerry and Obama gave it all away and the world will be a much more dangerous place because of their incompetence.

 

[kaz]

yeah, great and in the meantime the Iranians get nuclear bombs. They don't give a shit about what that
"deal" says. they know that obozo the head clown will never even try to enforce it on his muslim brothers.

I cannot believe that you are that fricken stupid.

They are getting a nuclear bomb right now

Failure to ratify the treaty only ensures nothing will impede that process

Regime change, will "impede the process" if not, destroying the reactors will also "impede the process" what wont is, giving Iran 150 billion dollars, modernizing their facilities, and increasing their security. Iran is a pion right now. Obama wants to make them a world power

Again you don't understand what a deal is

I will give you back your money if you deactivate your nuclear program for 15 years

Don't give them back their money and you have no deal. They go back to enriching uranium and have a bomb in one year

A liberal deal is that you want $100 of someone else's money, but you'll take $95 and then squeal like a stuck pick that you didn't get $5

Not even worthy of a response

yet I got one

 

[Dad2three]

More whining from the party that officially refuses to compromise on anything and issues severe retribution to anyone who tries it

Whining ...Its not me...its you
Does not change that

name one issue that obama has offered to compromise on. just one.

He offered to support a long term budget compromise with one dollar in taxes for three dollars of cuts. He upped it to four dollars in cuts, but he'd never have gotten Pelosi to sign on, and had Boehner angered the tea party for agreeing to even those taxes (which were not on income but merely tax breaks) Boehner would have needed Pelosi to pass it.

Ask Reagan how that deal works out with Democrats. Fool me once...

The historical myth that Reagan raised $1 of taxes in exchange for $3 of spending cuts

The Facts


Despite Reagan’s claim that he made a deal with the Democrats, the Senate at the time was controlled by Republicans. Sen. Bob Dole of Kansas — then chairman of the Finance Committee and later the majority leader and Republican nominee for president — was a driving force behind a big tax increase because he was concerned about soaring deficits after Reagan had boosted defense spending and slashed taxes.

Dole warned the White House that the final year of Reagan’s three-year tax cut was at risk unless revenue could be raised in other ways. Under Dole’s leadership, the Senate Finance Committee led the way in crafting a big tax bill, fending off efforts by Democrats to halt Reagan’s tax cut.


If people want to cite the lessons of history, they need to get the history right in the first place.



Four Pinocchios

The historical myth that Reagan raised $1 of taxes in exchange for $3 of spending cuts

Spending must be proposed in the House, Holmes

Good you agree, Ronnie NEVER made a deal the House didn't follow, despite your right wing LIE


But NO, spending can be PROPOSED by ANYONE, that's why the Prez, including Ronnie submits a budget proposal dumbas! SPENDING BILL originate in the House is all Bubs, generally based on PRESIDENTIAL policy!

 

[g5000]

I am curious what this Republican Congress has achieved.

Did they roll back any of Obama's socialist programs?

Nope.

Have they enacted any significant conservative legislation?

Nope.

Have they been able to stop the Iran deal?

Nope.

Have they passed a budget?

Nope.

Have they changed a fucking thing?

Nope.


About as incompetent as it gets. They are sitting around with their thumbs up their asses while Donald Trump TP's their house.

That's why McConnell did not make any promises as to what a GOP Congress would do. That's why he did not put a single plan on the table. He knew they would be as useless as a kickstand on a tank.

 

[kaz]

name one issue that obama has offered to compromise on. just one.

He offered to support a long term budget compromise with one dollar in taxes for three dollars of cuts. He upped it to four dollars in cuts, but he'd never have gotten Pelosi to sign on, and had Boehner angered the tea party for agreeing to even those taxes (which were not on income but merely tax breaks) Boehner would have needed Pelosi to pass it.

Ask Reagan how that deal works out with Democrats. Fool me once...

The historical myth that Reagan raised $1 of taxes in exchange for $3 of spending cuts

The Facts


Despite Reagan’s claim that he made a deal with the Democrats, the Senate at the time was controlled by Republicans. Sen. Bob Dole of Kansas — then chairman of the Finance Committee and later the majority leader and Republican nominee for president — was a driving force behind a big tax increase because he was concerned about soaring deficits after Reagan had boosted defense spending and slashed taxes.

Dole warned the White House that the final year of Reagan’s three-year tax cut was at risk unless revenue could be raised in other ways. Under Dole’s leadership, the Senate Finance Committee led the way in crafting a big tax bill, fending off efforts by Democrats to halt Reagan’s tax cut.


If people want to cite the lessons of history, they need to get the history right in the first place.



Four Pinocchios

The historical myth that Reagan raised $1 of taxes in exchange for $3 of spending cuts

Spending must be proposed in the House, Holmes

Good you agree, Ronnie NEVER made a deal the House didn't follow, despite your right wing LIE


But NO, spending can be PROPOSED by ANYONE, that's why the Prez, including Ronnie submits a budget proposal dumbas! SPENDING BILL originate in the House is all Bubs, generally based on PRESIDENTIAL policy!

Republicans do like playground insults, don't you? You right wingers need to learn the Constitution though, you're wrong

 

[rightwinger]

I am curious what this Republican Congress has achieved.

Did they roll back any of Obama's socialist programs?

Nope.

Have they enacted any significant conservative legislation?

Nope.

Have they been able to stop the Iran deal?

Nope.

Have they passed a budget?

Nope.

Have they changed a fucking thing?

Nope.


About as incompetent as it gets. They are sitting around with their thumbs up their asses while Donald Trump TP's their house.

That's why McConnell did not make any promises as to what a GOP Congress would do. That's why he did not put a single plan on the table. He knew they would be as useless as a kickstand on a tank.

Passing any legislation involves negotiating with the extremes in the Republican party and then negotiating with the Dems and the President

Republicans are incapable of doing either

 

[Dad2three]

He offered to support a long term budget compromise with one dollar in taxes for three dollars of cuts. He upped it to four dollars in cuts, but he'd never have gotten Pelosi to sign on, and had Boehner angered the tea party for agreeing to even those taxes (which were not on income but merely tax breaks) Boehner would have needed Pelosi to pass it.

Ask Reagan how that deal works out with Democrats. Fool me once...

The historical myth that Reagan raised $1 of taxes in exchange for $3 of spending cuts

The Facts


Despite Reagan’s claim that he made a deal with the Democrats, the Senate at the time was controlled by Republicans. Sen. Bob Dole of Kansas — then chairman of the Finance Committee and later the majority leader and Republican nominee for president — was a driving force behind a big tax increase because he was concerned about soaring deficits after Reagan had boosted defense spending and slashed taxes.

Dole warned the White House that the final year of Reagan’s three-year tax cut was at risk unless revenue could be raised in other ways. Under Dole’s leadership, the Senate Finance Committee led the way in crafting a big tax bill, fending off efforts by Democrats to halt Reagan’s tax cut.


If people want to cite the lessons of history, they need to get the history right in the first place.



Four Pinocchios

The historical myth that Reagan raised $1 of taxes in exchange for $3 of spending cuts

Spending must be proposed in the House, Holmes

Good you agree, Ronnie NEVER made a deal the House didn't follow, despite your right wing LIE


But NO, spending can be PROPOSED by ANYONE, that's why the Prez, including Ronnie submits a budget proposal dumbas! SPENDING BILL originate in the House is all Bubs, generally based on PRESIDENTIAL policy!

Republicans do like playground insults, don't you? You right wingers need to learn the Constitution though, you're wrong

I'm shocked you don't understand how the US Constitution works Bubba , seriously I am

 

[Dad2three]

I am curious what this Republican Congress has achieved.

Did they roll back any of Obama's socialist programs?

Nope.

Have they enacted any significant conservative legislation?

Nope.

Have they been able to stop the Iran deal?

Nope.

Have they passed a budget?

Nope.

Have they changed a fucking thing?

Nope.


About as incompetent as it gets. They are sitting around with their thumbs up their asses while Donald Trump TP's their house.

That's why McConnell did not make any promises as to what a GOP Congress would do. That's why he did not put a single plan on the table. He knew they would be as useless as a kickstand on a tank.

 

[paulitician]

It's your guy's awful deal. Neither Party should have supported it. It's another NAFTA. American Workers will continue to suffer.

Dems don't support TPP, in fact 60% of Dems in Congress vote against ALL "free trade" agreements!

Yet they all seem to pass. And your guys sign em. This latest deal is a disaster for American Workers. Hence them trying desperately to keep it secret.

We agree it's the GOP getting that "free trade " passed in Congress. Thanks

Both Parties support these awful deals for American Workers. But it's usually Democrat Presidents who sign the worst ones. This latest deal your guy signed, is gonna hurt American Workers for many years to come. It's probably worse than NAFTA. There's a reason they frantically tried to keep it secret.

Weird "both" parties support the "free trade" agreements YET 60%+ OF DEMS IN CONGRESS VOTE AGAINST THEM??

Yet your Democrat President is the one who negotiated and signed the deal. Go figure?

 

[Dad2three]

Dems don't support TPP, in fact 60% of Dems in Congress vote against ALL "free trade" agreements!

Yet they all seem to pass. And your guys sign em. This latest deal is a disaster for American Workers. Hence them trying desperately to keep it secret.

We agree it's the GOP getting that "free trade " passed in Congress. Thanks

Both Parties support these awful deals for American Workers. But it's usually Democrat Presidents who sign the worst ones. This latest deal your guy signed, is gonna hurt American Workers for many years to come. It's probably worse than NAFTA. There's a reason they frantically tried to keep it secret.

Weird "both" parties support the "free trade" agreements YET 60%+ OF DEMS IN CONGRESS VOTE AGAINST THEM??

Yet your Democrat President is the one who negotiated and signed the deal. Go figure?

Yep, second best conservative Prez since Ike, only BJ Bill was better


STILL doesn't refute the FACT that 60% of Dems voted against EVERY 'free trade" deal and they ONLY pass because of majority GOP support, go figure

 

[paulitician]

Yet they all seem to pass. And your guys sign em. This latest deal is a disaster for American Workers. Hence them trying desperately to keep it secret.

We agree it's the GOP getting that "free trade " passed in Congress. Thanks

Both Parties support these awful deals for American Workers. But it's usually Democrat Presidents who sign the worst ones. This latest deal your guy signed, is gonna hurt American Workers for many years to come. It's probably worse than NAFTA. There's a reason they frantically tried to keep it secret.

Weird "both" parties support the "free trade" agreements YET 60%+ OF DEMS IN CONGRESS VOTE AGAINST THEM??

Yet your Democrat President is the one who negotiated and signed the deal. Go figure?

Yep, second best conservative Prez since Ike, only BJ Bill was better


STILL doesn't refute the FACT that 60% of Dems voted against EVERY 'free trade" deal and they ONLY pass because of majority GOP support, go figure

Your Democrat Presidents seem to love em. Way to help American Workers out.

 

[Dad2three]

We agree it's the GOP getting that "free trade " passed in Congress. Thanks

Both Parties support these awful deals for American Workers. But it's usually Democrat Presidents who sign the worst ones. This latest deal your guy signed, is gonna hurt American Workers for many years to come. It's probably worse than NAFTA. There's a reason they frantically tried to keep it secret.

Weird "both" parties support the "free trade" agreements YET 60%+ OF DEMS IN CONGRESS VOTE AGAINST THEM??

Yet your Democrat President is the one who negotiated and signed the deal. Go figure?

Yep, second best conservative Prez since Ike, only BJ Bill was better


STILL doesn't refute the FACT that 60% of Dems voted against EVERY 'free trade" deal and they ONLY pass because of majority GOP support, go figure

Your Democrat Presidents seem to love em. Way to help American Workers out.

Yep they tend to get passed the GOP Prez bills (Ronnie NAFTA, Dubya's TPP)

 

[paulitician]

Both Parties support these awful deals for American Workers. But it's usually Democrat Presidents who sign the worst ones. This latest deal your guy signed, is gonna hurt American Workers for many years to come. It's probably worse than NAFTA. There's a reason they frantically tried to keep it secret.

Weird "both" parties support the "free trade" agreements YET 60%+ OF DEMS IN CONGRESS VOTE AGAINST THEM??

Yet your Democrat President is the one who negotiated and signed the deal. Go figure?

Yep, second best conservative Prez since Ike, only BJ Bill was better


STILL doesn't refute the FACT that 60% of Dems voted against EVERY 'free trade" deal and they ONLY pass because of majority GOP support, go figure

Your Democrat Presidents seem to love em. Way to help American Workers out.

Yep they tend to get passed the GOP Prez bills (Ronnie NAFTA, Dubya's TPP)

Ha, so it's the Republican's fault your guys negotiate and sign awful trade deals that hurt American Workers. Ok, whatever.

 

[Dad2three]

Weird "both" parties support the "free trade" agreements YET 60%+ OF DEMS IN CONGRESS VOTE AGAINST THEM??

Yet your Democrat President is the one who negotiated and signed the deal. Go figure?

Yep, second best conservative Prez since Ike, only BJ Bill was better


STILL doesn't refute the FACT that 60% of Dems voted against EVERY 'free trade" deal and they ONLY pass because of majority GOP support, go figure

Your Democrat Presidents seem to love em. Way to help American Workers out.

Yep they tend to get passed the GOP Prez bills (Ronnie NAFTA, Dubya's TPP)

Ha, so it's the Republican's fault your guys negotiate and sign awful trade deals that hurt American Workers. Ok, whatever.

You mean that the MAJORITY of GOP in Congress vote for and only minority of the Dem's in Congress? Yep, AGAIN, BJ BILL best conservative Prez since Ike, Obama looks to be coming in second...

BTW, Poppy negotiated NAFTA....

 

[paulitician]

Yet your Democrat President is the one who negotiated and signed the deal. Go figure?

Yep, second best conservative Prez since Ike, only BJ Bill was better


STILL doesn't refute the FACT that 60% of Dems voted against EVERY 'free trade" deal and they ONLY pass because of majority GOP support, go figure

Your Democrat Presidents seem to love em. Way to help American Workers out.

Yep they tend to get passed the GOP Prez bills (Ronnie NAFTA, Dubya's TPP)

Ha, so it's the Republican's fault your guys negotiate and sign awful trade deals that hurt American Workers. Ok, whatever.

You mean that the MAJORITY of GOP in Congress vote for and only minority of the Dem's in Congress? Yep, AGAIN, BJ BILL best conservative Prez since Ike, Obama looks to be coming in second...

BTW, Poppy negotiated NAFTA....

So why do your guys continue to screw American Workers? They're not Republicans. Your guys negotiate and sign these awful deals. Congress doesn't negotiate the deals. No President is forced to sign them. So why do your guys keep signing them?

 

[kaz]

I am curious what this Republican Congress has achieved.

Did they roll back any of Obama's socialist programs?

Nope.

Have they enacted any significant conservative legislation?

Nope.

Have they been able to stop the Iran deal?

Nope.

Have they passed a budget?

Nope.

Have they changed a fucking thing?

Nope.


About as incompetent as it gets. They are sitting around with their thumbs up their asses while Donald Trump TP's their house.

That's why McConnell did not make any promises as to what a GOP Congress would do. That's why he did not put a single plan on the table. He knew they would be as useless as a kickstand on a tank.

Passing any legislation involves negotiating with the extremes in the Republican party and then negotiating with the Dems and the President

Republicans are incapable of doing either

Extremes in the Republican party, extremes in the Democrat party, tom-ay-to, tom-ah-to. They are all the same, Holmes, you just play for different teams

 

[paulitician]

Pretty awful, but not the worst. The Republicans are at least attempting to read Legislation before voting on it. That's a huge step up from the Democrats advising members to only read Legislation after voting on it. So yeah, it's pretty bad. But certainly not the worst.

 

[Dad2three]

Yep, second best conservative Prez since Ike, only BJ Bill was better


STILL doesn't refute the FACT that 60% of Dems voted against EVERY 'free trade" deal and they ONLY pass because of majority GOP support, go figure

Your Democrat Presidents seem to love em. Way to help American Workers out.

Yep they tend to get passed the GOP Prez bills (Ronnie NAFTA, Dubya's TPP)

Ha, so it's the Republican's fault your guys negotiate and sign awful trade deals that hurt American Workers. Ok, whatever.

You mean that the MAJORITY of GOP in Congress vote for and only minority of the Dem's in Congress? Yep, AGAIN, BJ BILL best conservative Prez since Ike, Obama looks to be coming in second...

BTW, Poppy negotiated NAFTA....

So why do your guys continue to screw American Workers? They're not Republicans. Your guys negotiate and sign these awful deals. Congress doesn't negotiate the deals. No President is forced to sign them. So why do your guys keep signing them?

Ignored Poppy negotiating the deal Ronnie proposed huh Bubs?


TPP:



February 2008, when President Bush announced that the US would join the deferred P-4 negotiations on financial services and investment, that the US came into the picture.

One key reason for the US’s interest in the trade talks is to be found in the US President’s 2008 Annual Report on the Trade Agreements Programme. It says, in part, ‘US participation in the TPP could position US businesses better to compete in the Asia-Pacific region, which is seeing the proliferation of preferential trade agreements among US competitors and the development of several competing regional economic integration initiatives that exclude the United States."

The Origins and Evolution of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)


AGAIN, WITHOUT THE GOP CONGRESS VOTING YES, THE TPP CAN'T GO FORWARD. WEIRD RIGHT BUBS? lol