Poll: Americans Want Obama to Negotiate

[P@triot]

In 2006, every Democrat Senator voted against raising the debt ceiling, including Obama.

So? How many Republicans voted for it?

Here Are Three Debt-Ceiling Lies You’ll Hear From the GOP This Week

2. Obama is a big hypocrite because he voted against a debt-limit increase while Bush was president.

Yes, he did cast such a vote, but no, he’s not a hypocrite, not even a small one. The reason is simple. Democrats made no threats when they cast their votes. They knew they were going to lose and had no real intention of winning.

It was March 16, 2006, when Obama cast the fateful vote. But the Democrats’ votes, Obama’s included, were purely symbolic. The Republicans controlled the Senate at the time, 55-45. The increase in the debt limit, the fourth in George W. Bush’s tenure, passed, 52-48, with three Republicans voting with all the Democrats.

But the Democrats knew they were going to lose. They were in the minority; duh. They did not choose to filibuster, which they could have done and which would have meant the Republicans needed 60 votes. If they’d done so, that would have been hardball, and in that case, Obama would have been a participant in a real threat against American creditworthiness. Even then it wouldn’t have been the same as what the GOP is doing now, unless those 45 Democrats had demanded, oh, that Bush rescind his tax cuts or his Medicare Part D bill or some other signal legislative achievement.

But the Democrats did no such thing. They cast symbolic votes to force Republicans to vote to increase the debt limit. So Obama’s 2006 vote means nothing and bears no resemblance to what’s going on today.​

Then why do it [MENTION=24452]Seawytch[/MENTION]? Because they are partisan hack HYPOCRITES!!!!!

 

[Avorysuds]

Could that possibly be because Americans are idiots who don't understand what the fuck the debt ceiling even is?

Like Obama, who voted to not raise the debt ceiling under Bush. Yeah, I suppose you have a point there!

 

[JoeB131]

Sure they can:

Slave Owner: "Slave, would you like to have sex?"

Slave: "Yes"

Boom! Consent...! (you continue to take stupidity to previously unforeseen levels)

Guy, once you have a situation where someone can legally FLOG you or SELL you, it's not like you can say "Not tonight honey, I have a headache." (I'm sure you hear that a lot.)

Sure you can. And if the slave owner respects that, it's NOT rape. ...This is pretty basic stuff, even for a desperate buffoon like you.

Guy, you can't own a person as a slave and STILL respect them. That's kind of the point.

This is what makes slavery UNLIKE a thankless job in a cubicle (not that I think you can hold one of those, either.)

You have a choice. You can always quit.

You can't quit being a slave when you decide you don't like it.

 

[P@triot]

In 2006, every Democrat Senator voted against raising the debt ceiling, including Obama.

So? How many Republicans voted for it?

Here Are Three Debt-Ceiling Lies You’ll Hear From the GOP This Week

2. Obama is a big hypocrite because he voted against a debt-limit increase while Bush was president.

Yes, he did cast such a vote, but no, he’s not a hypocrite, not even a small one. The reason is simple. Democrats made no threats when they cast their votes. They knew they were going to lose and had no real intention of winning.

It was March 16, 2006, when Obama cast the fateful vote. But the Democrats’ votes, Obama’s included, were purely symbolic. The Republicans controlled the Senate at the time, 55-45. The increase in the debt limit, the fourth in George W. Bush’s tenure, passed, 52-48, with three Republicans voting with all the Democrats.

But the Democrats knew they were going to lose. They were in the minority; duh. They did not choose to filibuster, which they could have done and which would have meant the Republicans needed 60 votes. If they’d done so, that would have been hardball, and in that case, Obama would have been a participant in a real threat against American creditworthiness. Even then it wouldn’t have been the same as what the GOP is doing now, unless those 45 Democrats had demanded, oh, that Bush rescind his tax cuts or his Medicare Part D bill or some other signal legislative achievement.

But the Democrats did no such thing. They cast symbolic votes to force Republicans to vote to increase the debt limit. So Obama’s 2006 vote means nothing and bears no resemblance to what’s going on today.​

What's your excuse for this one [MENTION=24452]Seawytch[/MENTION]?

"Mr. President, I rise today to talk about America's debt problem.

The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can't pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies.

Over the past 5 years, our federal debt has increased by $3.5 trillion to $8.6 trillion. That is "trillion" with a "T." That is money that we have borrowed from the Social Security trust fund, borrowed from China and Japan, borrowed from American taxpayers. And over the next 5 years, between now and 2011, the President's budget will increase the debt by almost another $3.5 trillion.

Numbers that large are sometimes hard to understand. Some people may wonder why they matter. Here is why: This year, the Federal Government will spend $220 billion on interest. That is more money to pay interest on our national debt than we'll spend on Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program. That is more money to pay interest on our debt this year than we will spend on education, homeland security, transportation, and veterans benefits combined. It is more money in one year than we are likely to spend to rebuild the devastated gulf coast in a way that honors the best of America." - Senator Barack Obama, 2006

 

[P@triot]

Guy, once you have a situation where someone can legally FLOG you or SELL you, it's not like you can say "Not tonight honey, I have a headache." (I'm sure you hear that a lot.)

Sure you can. And if the slave owner respects that, it's NOT rape. ...This is pretty basic stuff, even for a desperate buffoon like you.

Guy, you can't own a person as a slave and STILL respect them. That's kind of the point.

This is what makes slavery UNLIKE a thankless job in a cubicle (not that I think you can hold one of those, either.)

You have a choice. You can always quit.

You can't quit being a slave when you decide you don't like it.

But you can consent to sex... Game. Set. Match.

 

[JoeB131]

[

I hope you realize that you violated rules by accusing me of crimes that you have no evidence I committed.

You mean like you have with Thomas Jefferson?

Fact: Thomas Jefferson was NEVER convicted of rape
Fact: You falsely accuse him of being a rapist

?

Except we have evidence of Thomas Jefferson's crime. Namely that all of Sally Hemming's male descendents are walking around with his Y chromosone.

 

[JoeB131]

Sure you can. And if the slave owner respects that, it's NOT rape. ...This is pretty basic stuff, even for a desperate buffoon like you.

Guy, you can't own a person as a slave and STILL respect them. That's kind of the point.

This is what makes slavery UNLIKE a thankless job in a cubicle (not that I think you can hold one of those, either.)

You have a choice. You can always quit.

You can't quit being a slave when you decide you don't like it.

But you can consent to sex... Game. Set. Match.

No, you can't truly "consent" when you are PROPERTY.

This is why Slavery was a bad thing.

 

[P@triot]

So? How many Republicans voted for it?

Here Are Three Debt-Ceiling Lies You’ll Hear From the GOP This Week

2. Obama is a big hypocrite because he voted against a debt-limit increase while Bush was president.

Yes, he did cast such a vote, but no, he’s not a hypocrite, not even a small one. The reason is simple. Democrats made no threats when they cast their votes. They knew they were going to lose and had no real intention of winning.

It was March 16, 2006, when Obama cast the fateful vote. But the Democrats’ votes, Obama’s included, were purely symbolic. The Republicans controlled the Senate at the time, 55-45. The increase in the debt limit, the fourth in George W. Bush’s tenure, passed, 52-48, with three Republicans voting with all the Democrats.

But the Democrats knew they were going to lose. They were in the minority; duh. They did not choose to filibuster, which they could have done and which would have meant the Republicans needed 60 votes. If they’d done so, that would have been hardball, and in that case, Obama would have been a participant in a real threat against American creditworthiness. Even then it wouldn’t have been the same as what the GOP is doing now, unless those 45 Democrats had demanded, oh, that Bush rescind his tax cuts or his Medicare Part D bill or some other signal legislative achievement.

But the Democrats did no such thing. They cast symbolic votes to force Republicans to vote to increase the debt limit. So Obama’s 2006 vote means nothing and bears no resemblance to what’s going on today.​

These ignorant Rethugs on here do not have the capacity to understand nuance. Combine lack of intelligence with blind party loyalty and they won't even READ what you presented.
Well, they might read it. But what they will take away from that is; OBAMA VOTED AGAINST RAISING THE DEBT CEILING.

That is all they will read. And they will not believe the Dems didn't intend to shut down the government.

When you are as destructive as todays republicans are, you have to believe lies in order to justify your actions. Rethugs are pitiful, spiteful people.

So you're admitting that Dumbocrats used real Congressional votes for political jockeying and antics?

Yet another example of why Republicans are the only adults in the room...

 

[P@triot]

[

I hope you realize that you violated rules by accusing me of crimes that you have no evidence I committed.

You mean like you have with Thomas Jefferson?

Fact: Thomas Jefferson was NEVER convicted of rape
Fact: You falsely accuse him of being a rapist

?

Except we have evidence of Thomas Jefferson's crime. Namely that all of Sally Hemming's male descendents are walking around with his Y chromosone.

From his BROTHER possibly. But not from Thomas Jefferson. So you are violating forum rules falsely accusing a man of a crime he was never even indicted on, much less convicted of....

 

[P@triot]

Guy, you can't own a person as a slave and STILL respect them. That's kind of the point.

This is what makes slavery UNLIKE a thankless job in a cubicle (not that I think you can hold one of those, either.)

You have a choice. You can always quit.

You can't quit being a slave when you decide you don't like it.

But you can consent to sex... Game. Set. Match.

No, you can't truly "consent" when you are PROPERTY.

This is why Slavery was a bad thing.

Sure they can:

Slave Owner: "Slave, would you like to have sex?"

Slave: "Yes"

Boom! Consent...! (you continue to take stupidity to previously unforeseen levels)

 

[JoeB131]

You mean like you have with Thomas Jefferson?

Fact: Thomas Jefferson was NEVER convicted of rape
Fact: You falsely accuse him of being a rapist

?

Except we have evidence of Thomas Jefferson's crime. Namely that all of Sally Hemming's male descendents are walking around with his Y chromosone.

From his BROTHER possibly. But not from Thomas Jefferson. So you are violating forum rules falsely accusing a man of a crime he was never even indicted on, much less convicted of....

Ooookay, if Thomas Jefferson's Zombie is posting here, he might have a complaint. If you didn't have that pesky DNA evidence.

Also, you are kind of jumping back and forth on your rationalization here.

Was it his brother who did the deed, or did he do the deed, but it was totally okay, because you can totally consent to sex with a man who can have you flogged with an inch of your life.

 

[JoeB131]

But you can consent to sex... Game. Set. Match.

No, you can't truly "consent" when you are PROPERTY.

This is why Slavery was a bad thing.

Sure they can:

Slave Owner: "Slave, would you like to have sex?"

Slave: "Yes"

Boom! Consent...! (you continue to take stupidity to previously unforeseen levels)

That would only count as "consent" if saying "no" was a viable option. WHich it wasn't.

 

[P@triot]

Except we have evidence of Thomas Jefferson's crime. Namely that all of Sally Hemming's male descendents are walking around with his Y chromosone.

From his BROTHER possibly. But not from Thomas Jefferson. So you are violating forum rules falsely accusing a man of a crime he was never even indicted on, much less convicted of....

Ooookay, if Thomas Jefferson's Zombie is posting here, he might have a complaint. If you didn't have that pesky DNA evidence.

Also, you are kind of jumping back and forth on your rationalization here.

Was it his brother who did the deed, or did he do the deed, but it was totally okay, because you can totally consent to sex with a man who can have you flogged with an inch of your life.

The best indications are that his brother *may* have been the father and DNA exonerated Thomas Jefferson. And yes, she could have consented. She could have been crazy about his brother. But only a libtard would call consensual sex "rape" because - well - libtards desperately need a narrative that demonizes their opponents since libtards stand firmly on the wrong side of the facts and firmly against the Constitution.

 

[P@triot]

No, you can't truly "consent" when you are PROPERTY.

This is why Slavery was a bad thing.

Sure they can:

Slave Owner: "Slave, would you like to have sex?"

Slave: "Yes"

Boom! Consent...! (you continue to take stupidity to previously unforeseen levels)

That would only count as "consent" if saying "no" was a viable option. WHich it wasn't.

Sure it was. Why would he ask if it wasn't an option?

 

[JoeB131]

Sure they can:

Slave Owner: "Slave, would you like to have sex?"

Slave: "Yes"

Boom! Consent...! (you continue to take stupidity to previously unforeseen levels)

That would only count as "consent" if saying "no" was a viable option. WHich it wasn't.

Sure it was. Why would he ask if it wasn't an option?

he wouldn't have. It wasn't a question. Just like when he asked all the other slaves, "Hey, who feels like picking tobacco today?"

Um. Nope. They were picking tobacco whether they felt like it or not.

That's what slavery is. Certainly, you understand THAT concept, since squealing about "Freedom" is like your answer to everything.

 

[JoeB131]

[

The best indications are that his brother *may* have been the father and DNA exonerated Thomas Jefferson. And yes, she could have consented. She could have been crazy about his brother. But only a libtard would call consensual sex "rape" because - well - libtards desperately need a narrative that demonizes their opponents since libtards stand firmly on the wrong side of the facts and firmly against the Constitution.

Except DNA did nothing of the sort.

And, no, you can't "consent" when you are "property", something the founders were totally cool with.

 

[SFC Ollie]

3 points....

One I think it's kind of cool that Jefferson is a maternal cousin of my great great great great grandfather....

Second Don't the books and stories tell us of evil hard mean slave owners and slaves who were as good as free the way they were treated.... Fact is many stayed with their former owners after they were emancipated.

Third. None of this has to do with shit going on today..........

 

[hazlnut]

October 3 2013~
Let the nay saying begin!

"A majority of Americans want President Obama to negotiate with Congress over the debt ceiling, and nearly two-thirds oppose raising the debt without significant spending reforms attached, according to a recent poll from Ending Spending and the American Action Forum.

House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio) said Wednesday following a meeting at the White House that the president had ”reiterated one more time tonight that he will not negotiate.” Obama and most Democrats favor a “clean” debt-ceiling hike without spending reforms attached. Meanwhile, House GOP leaders are said to be working on a larger budget deal to end the government and raise the debt ceiling with reforms."

Poll: Americans Want Obama to Negotiate | National Review Online

KEY FINDINGS
1. AN OPPORTUNITY: Obama is badly bruised. The President's numbers aren't strong, with an underwater approval rating (43% approve, 49% disapprove), and a generic congressional ballot that has Republicans ahead by 4 points (40% GOP, 36%DEM)

Just read the rest yourself:

http://www.endingspending.com/docs/debtceilingpoll.pdf

What percentage of Americans actually understand what the debt ceiling is?

The Poll says nothing about the ACA being tied to the debt. It seems to indicate Americans favor some more spending cuts.

What about raising taxes on those making over 1 Million, raising capital gains, raising the estate tax... Getting rid of loopholes.

 

[Noomi]

Obama doesn't need to negotiate, he's the President. The Republicans need to stop acting like fools and start acting like the adults they supposedly are.

 

[P@triot]

The Democrats did not filibuster as the GOP has done nor did they threaten to shut the government down over it.

It simply is not the same. If the Democrats HAD done such a thing, the right would have been apoplectic. "Treason!" they would scream.

The nonsensical battle cry of the Dumbocrats... When Dumbocrats do the exact same thing that Republicans did, it is "simply not the same" because....because....because....well....because it was a Dumbocrat who did it and that makes it ok, damn it!