Republicans shut 'er down, boys!

[Oldstyle]

You can always tell the people who aren't approaching this budget crisis in a rational manner...they are the ones who use terms like "hostage takers" and "domestic terrorists" to describe an opposition that simply doesn't have the same belief as them that BIG Government is the answer to all our problems and that we don't have a spending problem.

Watch any press conference with Barack, Nancy or Harry and you'll be treated to a LOT of those kinds of outrageous remarks. How do you compromise with people that refuse to negotiate on anything...who defame you in the process?

The reason you don't understand why those terms are appropriate to describe the GOP in this case is because you are ignoring the fact that while both sides often disagree with each other, those differences are settled by the legislative process of voting on bills. And since the House leadership refuses to put the Senate bill to a vote, they are acting like hostage takers. I wouldn't go as far as to call them terrorists since that would entail the use violence, which they are not resorting to. But they are behaving tyrannical.

As it stands, some peoples' representative in the House gets a voice on this in the House if their representative happens to be one be of the House leaders who is squashing the vote. I, and millions like me, are not in that position. My representative is being silenced by the House leadership.

That is tyranny.

Kindly explain why Harry Reid holding dozens of House bills without letting them come to the floor of the Senate for even discussion isn't tyranny?

 

[Oldstyle]

In a hostage situation, the hostage taker is the one making demands. In this case, it was the GOP making the demand to neutralize ObamaCare or the government would be shut down. Refusing to negotiate with hostage takers does not then make Democrats the hostage takers.

The House is PART of our governmental makeup for a reason. They control the purse strings for a reason. People sent conservatives to the House in the 2010 mid-terms to counter the progressive agenda of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. Those voters didn't send them there to bow down to Barack Obama...they sent them there to fight against what they view as a fatally flawed health care "reform" that doesn't lower the cost of health care (which was what the voters WANTED!) but simply shifts the burden of who will pay for health care while taking us one step closer to government controlled health care.

What liberals can't seem to admit is that a majority of the people don't want ObamaCare. They are intelligent enough to have figured out that progressives lied to them when they quoted costs and how you would be able to keep your doctor. They are intelligent enough to know that having Government take over something seldom if ever makes it more efficient or cost less. If you want it to take twice as long and cost three times as much...let the government do it!

You too need a lesson in civics. The House does not control the purse strings -- the Congress does. The House's role is to initiate spending and revenue bills.

And if America didn't want ObamaCare, they would have elected the guy running for president who said his first action would be to work on ending it. Instead, America elected the guy dedicated to fighting to keep it.

America spoke to the matter on November 6th, 2012.

If that were the case then why didn't America send progressives to the House in order to allow Barack Obama to continue on with his agenda? America spoke to the matter during the mid-term elections of 2010 as well but Barry, Harry and Nancy decided that election didn't have the same consequences as the election did in 2008.

 

[Faun]

You can always tell the people who aren't approaching this budget crisis in a rational manner...they are the ones who use terms like "hostage takers" and "domestic terrorists" to describe an opposition that simply doesn't have the same belief as them that BIG Government is the answer to all our problems and that we don't have a spending problem.

Watch any press conference with Barack, Nancy or Harry and you'll be treated to a LOT of those kinds of outrageous remarks. How do you compromise with people that refuse to negotiate on anything...who defame you in the process?

The reason you don't understand why those terms are appropriate to describe the GOP in this case is because you are ignoring the fact that while both sides often disagree with each other, those differences are settled by the legislative process of voting on bills. And since the House leadership refuses to put the Senate bill to a vote, they are acting like hostage takers. I wouldn't go as far as to call them terrorists since that would entail the use violence, which they are not resorting to. But they are behaving tyrannical.

As it stands, some peoples' representative in the House gets a voice on this in the House if their representative happens to be one be of the House leaders who is squashing the vote. I, and millions like me, are not in that position. My representative is being silenced by the House leadership.

That is tyranny.

Kindly explain why Harry Reid holding dozens of House bills without letting them come to the floor of the Senate for even discussion isn't tyranny?

Your question is based on the false premise that I don't consider that any less tyrannical.

 

[Faun]

The House is PART of our governmental makeup for a reason. They control the purse strings for a reason. People sent conservatives to the House in the 2010 mid-terms to counter the progressive agenda of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. Those voters didn't send them there to bow down to Barack Obama...they sent them there to fight against what they view as a fatally flawed health care "reform" that doesn't lower the cost of health care (which was what the voters WANTED!) but simply shifts the burden of who will pay for health care while taking us one step closer to government controlled health care.

What liberals can't seem to admit is that a majority of the people don't want ObamaCare. They are intelligent enough to have figured out that progressives lied to them when they quoted costs and how you would be able to keep your doctor. They are intelligent enough to know that having Government take over something seldom if ever makes it more efficient or cost less. If you want it to take twice as long and cost three times as much...let the government do it!

You too need a lesson in civics. The House does not control the purse strings -- the Congress does. The House's role is to initiate spending and revenue bills.

And if America didn't want ObamaCare, they would have elected the guy running for president who said his first action would be to work on ending it. Instead, America elected the guy dedicated to fighting to keep it.

America spoke to the matter on November 6th, 2012.

If that were the case then why didn't America send progressives to the House in order to allow Barack Obama to continue on with his agenda? America spoke to the matter during the mid-term elections of 2010 as well but Barry, Harry and Nancy decided that election didn't have the same consequences as the election did in 2008.

It wasn't for lack of trying. They tried to. Democrat candidates running for the U.S. House received about 1 million more votes than their Republican counter parts. Only because of the way districts are carved up, did Republicans end up with more seats.

[edit: speaking of the 2012 election]

 

[RKMBrown]

Oh, for fuck's sake. Can't you follow along? What "finally?" it was voted on, on Monday. The day after the House approved it, sending it to the Senate and before the shut down.

It's not bad enough you were already wrong about them not voting on the House bill at all; that now you have to double down on stupid and wrongly complain they took too long to vote on a bill they received 1 day earlier??

And again, the Democrats voted Democratically on the bill, whereas Republicans have taken tyrannical control of the House and refused to allow the Senate bill be put to a vote by the Entire House. The only way Republicans can get what they want is to drive the heel of their boot into the necks of House Democrats so they can't be heard.

Are you retarded?

The senate took obama care de-funding out with an amendment without voting on it the first time through.

It's cute how you call me retarded when you're the one who has no clue to what's going on.

The vote I just showed you where the Senate voted on a House bill was the second bill. The first House bill the Senate voted on was the one days earlier which defunded ObamaCare. It was after the Senate voted down the House bill that they voted on, and passed, their own bill which was sent back to the House -- which the House has still not voted on.

G'head, this is where you call others a retard with the wasted hope that no one will notice you're the retard.

As I stated you retard, the senate did not vote on the bill de-funding Obuma Care the first time around last week, they amended it removing the defunding before the final vote the first time around the merry go round you stupid fool. Further they did the amendment after cloture tso they could avoid debate on obuma care in the senate. The senate refused to negotiate, as they have for two years, on dimocare.

 

[BreezeWood]

EarthLink - Political News

Boehner ties government reopening to 2-party talks


WASHINGTON (AP) — House Speaker John Boehner is demanding the White House and congressional Democrats negotiate with congressional Republicans about ways to re-open the government and address criticisms of the president's health care law.

Health Insurance Markets Open To Surge Of New Customers « CBS New York


too bad for Bohner, he can shut down the gov't but he can not make the American people listen to (him) why he did it.

.

 

[Oldstyle]

The reason you don't understand why those terms are appropriate to describe the GOP in this case is because you are ignoring the fact that while both sides often disagree with each other, those differences are settled by the legislative process of voting on bills. And since the House leadership refuses to put the Senate bill to a vote, they are acting like hostage takers. I wouldn't go as far as to call them terrorists since that would entail the use violence, which they are not resorting to. But they are behaving tyrannical.

As it stands, some peoples' representative in the House gets a voice on this in the House if their representative happens to be one be of the House leaders who is squashing the vote. I, and millions like me, are not in that position. My representative is being silenced by the House leadership.

That is tyranny.

Kindly explain why Harry Reid holding dozens of House bills without letting them come to the floor of the Senate for even discussion isn't tyranny?

Your question is based on the false premise that I don't consider that any less tyrannical.

So Harry Reid has been holding the legislative process "hostage" since the 2010 mid-terms?

 

[Oldstyle]

You too need a lesson in civics. The House does not control the purse strings -- the Congress does. The House's role is to initiate spending and revenue bills.

And if America didn't want ObamaCare, they would have elected the guy running for president who said his first action would be to work on ending it. Instead, America elected the guy dedicated to fighting to keep it.

America spoke to the matter on November 6th, 2012.

If that were the case then why didn't America send progressives to the House in order to allow Barack Obama to continue on with his agenda? America spoke to the matter during the mid-term elections of 2010 as well but Barry, Harry and Nancy decided that election didn't have the same consequences as the election did in 2008.

It wasn't for lack of trying. They tried to. Democrat candidates running for the U.S. House received about 1 million more votes than their Republican counter parts. Only because of the way districts are carved up, did Republicans end up with more seats.

[edit: speaking of the 2012 election]

And the reason that those districts were made up the way they were was because the GOP took control of so many State's in the 2010 mid-terms...once again a repudiation of the liberal agenda that you maintain Barry, Harry and Nancy have a "mandate" for.

 

[Oldstyle]

EarthLink - Political News

Boehner ties government reopening to 2-party talks


WASHINGTON (AP) — House Speaker John Boehner is demanding the White House and congressional Democrats negotiate with congressional Republicans about ways to re-open the government and address criticisms of the president's health care law.

Health Insurance Markets Open To Surge Of New Customers « CBS New York


too bad for Bohner, he can shut down the gov't but he can not make the American people listen to (him) why he did it.

.

You didn't expect a "rush" of people trying to sign up for their free health care? Really?

 

[Redfish]

You too need a lesson in civics. The House does not control the purse strings -- the Congress does. The House's role is to initiate spending and revenue bills.

And if America didn't want ObamaCare, they would have elected the guy running for president who said his first action would be to work on ending it. Instead, America elected the guy dedicated to fighting to keep it.

America spoke to the matter on November 6th, 2012.

If that were the case then why didn't America send progressives to the House in order to allow Barack Obama to continue on with his agenda? America spoke to the matter during the mid-term elections of 2010 as well but Barry, Harry and Nancy decided that election didn't have the same consequences as the election did in 2008.

It wasn't for lack of trying. They tried to. Democrat candidates running for the U.S. House received about 1 million more votes than their Republican counter parts. Only because of the way districts are carved up, did Republicans end up with more seats.

[edit: speaking of the 2012 election]

meaningless, some districts have more people than others.

BTW, Reid almost lost to a very weak candidate in NV.

 

[SFC Ollie]

I try so very hard, but faun, you're a fucking idiot. You absolutely refuse to see anything other then the inside of Obama's bowels. Really, you need to start to think for yourself instead of toeing the total party line on every little thing.

I notice several points I've made that not one person has commented on. Must be hitting home.....

What is the reason that businesses have another year to offer healthcare to their employees who have to have it on 1 January? Why are these people being forced to buy their own? Why did Obama take that upon himself to put these people in such a predicament ?

So that they will sign with an exchange and be stuck there forever? Why shouldn't they get the same year that their employers got?

You have no answers because Obewan hasn't given you the answers........

 

[BreezeWood]

EarthLink - Political News

Boehner ties government reopening to 2-party talks


WASHINGTON (AP) — House Speaker John Boehner is demanding the White House and congressional Democrats negotiate with congressional Republicans about ways to re-open the government and address criticisms of the president's health care law.

Health Insurance Markets Open To Surge Of New Customers « CBS New York


too bad for Bohner, he can shut down the gov't but he can not make the American people listen to (him) why he did it.

.

You didn't expect a "rush" of people trying to sign up for their free health care? Really?

the only thing that made Oct 1st any different than any other day was the beginning of a New Era in publicly desired Health Care Reform and everyone knows it - the Republicans are only fooling themselves ... as Nixon would say, once out you can not put the paste back in the tube.

 

[Redfish]

Health Insurance Markets Open To Surge Of New Customers « CBS New York


too bad for Bohner, he can shut down the gov't but he can not make the American people listen to (him) why he did it.

.

You didn't expect a "rush" of people trying to sign up for their free health care? Really?

the only thing that made Oct 1st any different than any other day was the beginning of a New Era in publicly desired Health Care Reform and everyone knows it - the Republicans are only fooling themselves ... as Nixon would say, once out you can not put the paste back in the tube.

65-70% of americans DO NOT WANT obamacare. The only people who want it are the liberals who want to take over the entire US economy, and the stupid lib/dem voters who think they are going to get it free----------it ain't gonna be free for you or anyone else. Oh, well, maybe illegals will get it free-but they already do.

 

[Oldstyle]

Health Insurance Markets Open To Surge Of New Customers « CBS New York


too bad for Bohner, he can shut down the gov't but he can not make the American people listen to (him) why he did it.

.

You didn't expect a "rush" of people trying to sign up for their free health care? Really?

the only thing that made Oct 1st any different than any other day was the beginning of a New Era in publicly desired Health Care Reform and everyone knows it - the Republicans are only fooling themselves ... as Nixon would say, once out you can not put the paste back in the tube.

Funny thing, Breeze...the public has never desired ObamaCare...a majority has always seen it in a negative light despite a full court press by liberals to convince them that it was going to be the best thing since sliced bread.

As for not being able to put the paste back in the tube? Isn't that what ObamaCare is all about anyways? You know only too well that once people are given freebies that it's next to impossible to take them away. That's the only reason this albatross of a bill was passed in the first place!

 

[Vandalshandle]

I must admit that the longer I read this thread, the more I miss the Pandacam at the National Zoo.

 

[RKMBrown]

Kindly explain why Harry Reid holding dozens of House bills without letting them come to the floor of the Senate for even discussion isn't tyranny?

Your question is based on the false premise that I don't consider that any less tyrannical.

So Harry Reid has been holding the legislative process "hostage" since the 2010 mid-terms?

Yes he has. Well to be fair Obama has been using the Emperor's pen to pardon as many democrats as he can from the pain of his "signature" legislation.

 

[P@triot]

By the way - lets not overlook the fact that Obama violated the Constitution (what are we up to now - three dozen times he has done that) when Obama altered Obamacare. The president cannot alter a bill or law - ONLY Congress can do that as they are the legislative branch.

The marxist asshole who thinks he's a dictator should be impeached for that very serious offense.

You're mistaken...

The GOP says Obama's decision to postpone implementing the "employer mandate" stomps all over the Constitution. It doesn't, and here's why

Sounds like so much BS to me.

That's because it is. If you notice - the very first (and only) thing they mention in defense of Obama violating the Constitution is [MENTION=24452]Seawytch[/MENTION] favorite thing - "judicial precedence".

What "judicial precedence" means is that someone has violated the law (in this case, Obama violating the Constitution) and the libtards - in their panic - have gone out and searched irrelevant case law for that one radical libtard like them who happened to be a judge and who violated the law themselves by ignoring the law and ruling in favor of their ideology. In essence, illegally creating law from the bench.

Because Seawytch doesn't know what she's talking about and is ALWAYS on the wrong side of the facts, she just looks to her liberal master (George Soros) to feed her stuff like this on his dozens of websites.

Here's the major flaw with her ignorance in believing that "case law" actually exists and supersedes the actual law: by her "logic", murder in this country is now legal as O.J. Simpson murdered two people but was found not guilty in a court of law. See, by her "logic" (and damn do I use that phrase lightly), not putting O.J. behind bars has set a "case law" precedence that murder is ok.

Of course, we all know how absurd that is (and by extension - she is for believing in something so ridiculous). No amount of illegal/unetchical actions by judges from a bench, jurors from the box, or prosecutors from their table, changes the law. Laws are not created our altered in the judicial branch. They are created and altered only from the legislative branch.

 

[edthecynic]

You think the Senate democrats run the peoples house too? What are you talking about? Last I checked the Republicans run the House of Representatives who are responsible for writing the spending bills. Last I checked it was the Senate that was refusing to let the House voice be heard by refusing to put up for vote the version of the bill that does not fund Obama Care. If you know different please link.

Seems to me the Senate and President are throwing a hissy fit because their demands for Obama Care are not being met. More specifically their demands that they get to pick and choose who gets punished with Obama care and who gets the benefits of Obama care. IOW the president exempts democrats, and punishes republicans... that does not sound American to me at all. If you are gonna exempt congress, and unions, and big corporations, exempt everyone. Universal exemption was what the republicans asked for. The democrats refused.

You really should pay better attention to what you debate about. Here's the link you asked for. Note where it points out the Senate voted down the House bill, 54–46...

Government shutdown: Mitch McConnell weighs one-week CR - POLITICO.com

Glad to see they "finally" put that to a vote. If they had done that the week before it might have avoided the shut down. Good to see the Senate is now on the hook for shutting down government because of their refusal to delay funding for Obama Care for 1y given the problems and the 1year delay Obama had already given everyone else you would have thought they would buy into making this fair for everyone else as well. But glad to see partisan politics are still at play the the democrats are 100% behind full implementation of Obama's signature legislation eff up.

Hey dumbass, that was the bill Cruz filibustered!!!! It would have been voted on sooner if the asshole Cruz kept his piehole shut!

 

[P@triot]

Funny you didn't provide this evidence you claim exists.

I didn't....?!?!?!?

Obama: I Had To Violate The Constitution - Downtrend.com

There was no such confession, you imbecile. Obama answered a question about extending a deadline of the law. The author of the article offered his opinion of what Obama meant...

"In other words, President Obama consulted with business leaders before he decided to violate the Constitution. He violated the Constitution, of course, by changing the law on his own."​

In other words, you are an idiot.

Funny, you quote everyone in the article EXCEPT for Obama. Afraid the people might see what he said, are we Faun?

Here is Obama (and I quote): "Now what’s true, Ed, is that in a normal political environment, it would have been easier for me to simply call up the speaker and say, you know what? This is a tweak that doesn’t go to the essence of the law. It has to do with, for example, are we able to simplify the attestation of employers as to whether they’re already providing health insurance or not. It looks like there may be some better ways to do this. Let’s make a technical change of the law. That would be the normal thing that I would prefer to do, but we’re not in a normal atmosphere around here when it comes to, quote- unquote, Obamacare"

So if he's "NOT" violating the Constitution now, that means he always has been violating the Constitution as he admitted he did not follow "the norm".

So which is lil Fauny? Did Obama violate the law when he altered Obamacare or was he violating the law on all of the other (and I quote him) "normal" occassions? You can't have it both ways asshat.



This is all just a dog and pony show by the troll known as Fauny. I know he is ignorant of his own government. But conservatives have already schooled him on this board and he knows that only Congress can create or alter law.

 

[RKMBrown]

You really should pay better attention to what you debate about. Here's the link you asked for. Note where it points out the Senate voted down the House bill, 54–46...

Government shutdown: Mitch McConnell weighs one-week CR - POLITICO.com

Glad to see they "finally" put that to a vote. If they had done that the week before it might have avoided the shut down. Good to see the Senate is now on the hook for shutting down government because of their refusal to delay funding for Obama Care for 1y given the problems and the 1year delay Obama had already given everyone else you would have thought they would buy into making this fair for everyone else as well. But glad to see partisan politics are still at play the the democrats are 100% behind full implementation of Obama's signature legislation eff up.

Hey dumbass, that was the bill Cruz filibustered!!!! It would have been voted on sooner if the asshole Cruz kept his piehole shut!

No it would not have been voted on sooner, it was voted on at the scheduled time, and no what Cruz did was not a filibuster. Any other stupid comments you want to pull out of your ass?