Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You too, huh?I guess typing "at the earliest, 2017" was a little too painful, eh?My ability to envision it is irrelevant, I just want all the drooling idiots that think making things worse is a good thing to remember their arguments.
it could happen next year, why wait until 2017?
Here's an 'oh yeah I remember that now' moment for some of you:
Remember back when the GOP had the majority in the Senate, and talk of the 'nuclear option' came up?
Remember what the conservatives - fancying themselves quite clever - came up with as the alternative name for the 'nuclear option'?
The 'constitutional option'.
...lol, oh yeah, now you remember...
What I remember is the Gang of 14 getting together and ending the debate. Then again, you always did live in an alternate universe.
You too, huh?I guess typing "at the earliest, 2017" was a little too painful, eh?
it could happen next year, why wait until 2017?
Even IF the GOP took the senate in 2016 (which I don't think it will) -- it still wouldn't be able to overcome that little thing called a
Guess you didn't think that one through, did you?
I do remember Lindsey saying that.Then you've got Lindsey "Ah do declarh" Graham saying he would put a hold on every single judicial nomination until he gets MORE BENGHAZZII!!11!!
Nothing to do with the nominees. Just hold, cause ghaaaa!
Graham Vows to Block Obama Nominees Over Libya Attack Probe - SFGate
Oct. 28 (Bloomberg) -- Senator Lindsey Graham vowed to block President Barack Obamas nominees unless U.S. lawmakers hear from survivors of the deadly 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
Reid never acted too quickly on anything.Yeah!!! Reid acted too quickly!!!He only waited for 4 1/2 years of Republican inaction!!! He should have just sat down and let the senate go back into its Repub-induced slumber
Lot shorter than that. More like a couple months.You mean those few months in 2009 Senate dems had a 60 vote majority?the dems could have initiated a51 vote rule with a lot more honor and argument and heft on their side when they had a 60 seat senate...why didn't they?
You're actually serious, aren't you?
between july 8th09 and Jan. 2010 when Brown was sworn in? you mean then?
yes..... or maybe they could have voted right after they got the 60 on Christmas eve, taking obamcare over the top.
yes, I am serious.
You too, huh?it could happen next year, why wait until 2017?
Even IF the GOP took the senate in 2016 (which I don't think it will) -- it still wouldn't be able to overcome that little thing called a
Guess you didn't think that one through, did you?
I suggest you go back and reread what I said about Republicans repealing Obamacare with 51 votes. If they stick to their guns, and refuse to pass anything that allows the government to spend a dime on Obamacare, it really doesn't matter what Obama vetoes, does it? He still won't have any money to spend on his pet project, and all the whinging in the world won't change a fucking thing. Then you can look back on your support for the end of the filibuster, and realize that making decisions based on fear of loss is incredibly stupid.
It is also what keeps casinos in business.
In other words, only losers do it. Do you like being a self defined loser?
Here's an 'oh yeah I remember that now' moment for some of you:
Remember back when the GOP had the majority in the Senate, and talk of the 'nuclear option' came up?
Remember what the conservatives - fancying themselves quite clever - came up with as the alternative name for the 'nuclear option'?
The 'constitutional option'.
...lol, oh yeah, now you remember...
What I remember is the Gang of 14 getting together and ending the debate. Then again, you always did live in an alternate universe.
hey for carb and the rest here I guess being a person who has not shot someone and someone who has, equals exactly the same thing, talk about a corruption of logic....
and for those adding gop snippets of the gop sptting the nuclear option, well, vis a vis the dems who said same when they were under the gun, guess what?
its not the gop who are the hypocrites here, its the folks who pulled the trigger.
They did.I do remember Lindsey saying that.Then you've got Lindsey "Ah do declarh" Graham saying he would put a hold on every single judicial nomination until he gets MORE BENGHAZZII!!11!!
Nothing to do with the nominees. Just hold, cause ghaaaa!
Graham Vows to Block Obama Nominees Over Libya Attack Probe - SFGate
Oct. 28 (Bloomberg) -- Senator Lindsey Graham vowed to block President Barack Obamas nominees unless U.S. lawmakers hear from survivors of the deadly 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
holds are BS, no matter who employs them.
and please don't go all selective on us, if you don't know the dems employed holds as well, theres no hope for you.
They did.I do remember Lindsey saying that.
Graham Vows to Block Obama Nominees Over Libya Attack Probe - SFGate
Oct. 28 (Bloomberg) -- Senator Lindsey Graham vowed to block President Barack Obamas nominees unless U.S. lawmakers hear from survivors of the deadly 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
holds are BS, no matter who employs them.
and please don't go all selective on us, if you don't know the dems employed holds as well, theres no hope for you.
But with Obama, they laid it on thicker than anything that had ever happened before in our entire history.
Then that's not repealing, is it?You too, huh?it could happen next year, why wait until 2017?
Even IF the GOP took the senate in 2016 (which I don't think it will) -- it still wouldn't be able to overcome that little thing called a
Guess you didn't think that one through, did you?
I suggest you go back and reread what I said about Republicans repealing Obamacare with 51 votes. If they stick to their guns, and refuse to pass anything that allows the government to spend a dime on Obamacare, it really doesn't matter what Obama vetoes, does it? He still won't have any money to spend on his pet project, and all the whinging in the world won't change a fucking thing. Then you can look back on your support for the end of the filibuster, and realize that making decisions based on fear of loss is incredibly stupid.
It is also what keeps casinos in business.
In other words, only losers do it. Do you like being a self defined loser?
Not a lie.They did.holds are BS, no matter who employs them.
and please don't go all selective on us, if you don't know the dems employed holds as well, theres no hope for you.
But with Obama, they laid it on thicker than anything that had ever happened before in our entire history.
Posting lies really doesn't make your case.
Lot shorter than that. More like a couple months.You mean those few months in 2009 Senate dems had a 60 vote majority?
You're actually serious, aren't you?
between july 8th09 and Jan. 2010 when Brown was sworn in? you mean then?
yes..... or maybe they could have voted right after they got the 60 on Christmas eve, taking obamcare over the top.
yes, I am serious.
The Big Lies of Mitt Romney V: Obama Had A Super-Majority In Congress For Two Years « The Dish
And you're seriously suggesting the dems should have triggered the "nuclear option" in 2009, well before the pubs started their thick laydown of presidential appointee filibusters - and while Obamacare was being debated?
If that isn't delusional, I don't know what is.
the "dish"
Then that's not repealing, is it?You too, huh?
Even IF the GOP took the senate in 2016 (which I don't think it will) -- it still wouldn't be able to overcome that little thing called a
Guess you didn't think that one through, did you?
I suggest you go back and reread what I said about Republicans repealing Obamacare with 51 votes. If they stick to their guns, and refuse to pass anything that allows the government to spend a dime on Obamacare, it really doesn't matter what Obama vetoes, does it? He still won't have any money to spend on his pet project, and all the whinging in the world won't change a fucking thing. Then you can look back on your support for the end of the filibuster, and realize that making decisions based on fear of loss is incredibly stupid.
It is also what keeps casinos in business.
In other words, only losers do it. Do you like being a self defined loser?
You said "Remember that argument when the Republicans repeal Obamacare with 51 votes."
So, you're obviously changing tack now, and to defunding....have at it. Let the House bog up the bills, the senate refuse to pass -- and see how the chips fall with the reelection campaigns.
Do it.
Then that's not repealing, is it?You too, huh?
Even IF the GOP took the senate in 2016 (which I don't think it will) -- it still wouldn't be able to overcome that little thing called a
Guess you didn't think that one through, did you?
I suggest you go back and reread what I said about Republicans repealing Obamacare with 51 votes. If they stick to their guns, and refuse to pass anything that allows the government to spend a dime on Obamacare, it really doesn't matter what Obama vetoes, does it? He still won't have any money to spend on his pet project, and all the whinging in the world won't change a fucking thing. Then you can look back on your support for the end of the filibuster, and realize that making decisions based on fear of loss is incredibly stupid.
It is also what keeps casinos in business.
In other words, only losers do it. Do you like being a self defined loser?
You said "Remember that argument when the Republicans repeal Obamacare with 51 votes."
So, you're obviously changing tack now, and to defunding....have at it. Let the House bog up the bills, the senate refuse to pass -- and see how the chips fall with the reelection campaigns.
Do it.
Did you think I was talking to you?Then that's not repealing, is it?I suggest you go back and reread what I said about Republicans repealing Obamacare with 51 votes. If they stick to their guns, and refuse to pass anything that allows the government to spend a dime on Obamacare, it really doesn't matter what Obama vetoes, does it? He still won't have any money to spend on his pet project, and all the whinging in the world won't change a fucking thing. Then you can look back on your support for the end of the filibuster, and realize that making decisions based on fear of loss is incredibly stupid.
It is also what keeps casinos in business.
In other words, only losers do it. Do you like being a self defined loser?
You said "Remember that argument when the Republicans repeal Obamacare with 51 votes."
So, you're obviously changing tack now, and to defunding....have at it. Let the House bog up the bills, the senate refuse to pass -- and see how the chips fall with the reelection campaigns.
Do it.
I said defunding 2,3 pages ago.......and? what difference does iot make, they can drown it via not allocating funds..thats the point...
They did.holds are BS, no matter who employs them.
and please don't go all selective on us, if you don't know the dems employed holds as well, theres no hope for you.
But with Obama, they laid it on thicker than anything that had ever happened before in our entire history.
Posting lies really doesn't make your case.
Not a lie.They did.
But with Obama, they laid it on thicker than anything that had ever happened before in our entire history.
Posting lies really doesn't make your case.
Fact.
Did you think I was talking to you?Then that's not repealing, is it?
You said "Remember that argument when the Republicans repeal Obamacare with 51 votes."
So, you're obviously changing tack now, and to defunding....have at it. Let the House bog up the bills, the senate refuse to pass -- and see how the chips fall with the reelection campaigns.
Do it.
I said defunding 2,3 pages ago.......and? what difference does iot make, they can drown it via not allocating funds..thats the point...
This post is just head-shake worthy.Then that's not repealing, is it?I suggest you go back and reread what I said about Republicans repealing Obamacare with 51 votes. If they stick to their guns, and refuse to pass anything that allows the government to spend a dime on Obamacare, it really doesn't matter what Obama vetoes, does it? He still won't have any money to spend on his pet project, and all the whinging in the world won't change a fucking thing. Then you can look back on your support for the end of the filibuster, and realize that making decisions based on fear of loss is incredibly stupid.
It is also what keeps casinos in business.
In other words, only losers do it. Do you like being a self defined loser?
You said "Remember that argument when the Republicans repeal Obamacare with 51 votes."
So, you're obviously changing tack now, and to defunding....have at it. Let the House bog up the bills, the senate refuse to pass -- and see how the chips fall with the reelection campaigns.
Do it.
It is repealing it, you just think the veto means the vote was invalid. That isn't my fault, you should take it up with your teacher.
Besides, by that time the Democrats who are planning on running in 2016 will see the writing on the wall, and it will only take a few of them to jump ship to override the veto. Throw in a return of the filibuster rules, a few bribes here and there, and it really shouldn't be a problem.
Unless, that is, you are still operating under the delusion that Obamacare is only glint to get more popular as time goes by. You have been saying that for over 3 years, and been consistently wrong, but I see no reason for you to start admitting it at this point in time.
