The plan to Obstruct Obama. He shall pass nothing.

[Lonestar_logic]

• David Obey, then chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, met with his GOP counterpart, Jerry Lewis, to explain what Democrats had in mind for the stimulus and ask what Republicans wanted to include. “Jerry’s response was, ‘I’m sorry, but leadership tells us we can’t play,’ ” Obey told me. “Exact quote: ‘We can’t play.’ What they said right from the get-go was, It doesn’t matter what the hell you do, we ain’t going to help you. We’re going to stand on the sidelines and bitch.”

Lewis blames Obey and the Democrats for the committee’s turn toward extreme partisanship, but he doesn’t deny that GOP leaders made a decision not to play. “The leadership decided there was no play to be had,” he says. Republicans recognized that after Obama’s big promises about bipartisanship, they could break those promises by refusing to cooperate. In the words of Congressman Tom Cole, a deputy Republican whip: “We wanted the talking point: ‘The only thing bipartisan was the opposition.’ ”

This comes as no surprise, of course. But it indeed confirms the fact that conservative and republican opposition to ‘everything Obama’ was purely partisan, devoid of fact or evidence, to the detriment of the Nation.

This is why the economy’s recovery isn’t as robust as it should be, due to republican foot-dragging and obstructionism.

People seem to forget the disgraceful way Republicans carried on during the Clinton Presidency. They focused on completely destroying the Democratic President and came very close to succeeding. That laid the ground work for what we are witnessing now.

This is no accident. It's a deliberate strategy to insure the rule of the minority. All the while this is happening? The wealthiest 1 percent are absolutely sucking all profit out of the economy.

Unlike you libturds, conservatives wasn't too happy with Clinton getting blowjobs in the People's House on the peoples dime. A man that would cheat on his wife can't be trusted. But you libidiots have no morals.

 

[TooTall]

The Republican plan to destroy the Obama Presidency.
The New New Deal: Why the GOP Became the Party of No | TIME.com

Interesting, but Obama's presidency has pretty much self-destructed under the weight of its own incompetency.

hers the problem with the congress harry reid he should have move the filibuster to 51 votes ... we dems would have got a lot of bills passed from the get go...

we would of passed a jobs bill ... the public option, the iimmigration bill, the debt ceiling a stimulus bill for 21.2 trillion dollars people would be up to their necks in wealth ... but obama tried to work with the repub-lie-turds and harry reid didn't want to change the filibuster rule ... that's what you get when you try to work with repub-lie-turds ...

I doubt that the Chinese would loan us 21.2 trillion dollars to piss away on more social welfare programs.

 

[Nosmo King]

This comes as no surprise, of course. But it indeed confirms the fact that conservative and republican opposition to ‘everything Obama’ was purely partisan, devoid of fact or evidence, to the detriment of the Nation.

This is why the economy’s recovery isn’t as robust as it should be, due to republican foot-dragging and obstructionism.

People seem to forget the disgraceful way Republicans carried on during the Clinton Presidency. They focused on completely destroying the Democratic President and came very close to succeeding. That laid the ground work for what we are witnessing now.

This is no accident. It's a deliberate strategy to insure the rule of the minority. All the while this is happening? The wealthiest 1 percent are absolutely sucking all profit out of the economy.

Unlike you libturds, conservatives wasn't too happy with Clinton getting blowjobs in the People's House on the peoples dime. A man that would cheat on his wife can't be trusted. But you libidiots have no morals.

High crimes and misdemeanors. How do Clinton's actions come up to that threshold?

 

[jknowgood]

• David Obey, then chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, met with his GOP counterpart, Jerry Lewis, to explain what Democrats had in mind for the stimulus and ask what Republicans wanted to include. “Jerry’s response was, ‘I’m sorry, but leadership tells us we can’t play,’ ” Obey told me. “Exact quote: ‘We can’t play.’ What they said right from the get-go was, It doesn’t matter what the hell you do, we ain’t going to help you. We’re going to stand on the sidelines and bitch.”

Lewis blames Obey and the Democrats for the committee’s turn toward extreme partisanship, but he doesn’t deny that GOP leaders made a decision not to play. “The leadership decided there was no play to be had,” he says. Republicans recognized that after Obama’s big promises about bipartisanship, they could break those promises by refusing to cooperate. In the words of Congressman Tom Cole, a deputy Republican whip: “We wanted the talking point: ‘The only thing bipartisan was the opposition.’ ”

This comes as no surprise, of course. But it indeed confirms the fact that conservative and republican opposition to ‘everything Obama’ was purely partisan, devoid of fact or evidence, to the detriment of the Nation.

This is why the economy’s recovery isn’t as robust as it should be, due to republican foot-dragging and obstructionism.

People seem to forget the disgraceful way Republicans carried on during the Clinton Presidency. They focused on completely destroying the Democratic President and came very close to succeeding. That laid the ground work for what we are witnessing now.

This is no accident. It's a deliberate strategy to insure the rule of the minority. All the while this is happening? The wealthiest 1 percent are absolutely sucking all profit out of the economy.

Well lets see i guess clinton wouldn't have that balanced budget he brags about, or obama wouldn't be bragging on how he has turned the economy around. If it wasn't for the republicans resistance.

 

[bendog]

The Republican plan to destroy the Obama Presidency.
The New New Deal: Why the GOP Became the Party of No | TIME.com

That's actually a good read, but it really only explains 2008-10. The GOP thought the senate and esp Pelosi in the House just stiffed them, and allowed them no policy imput/compromise they were entitled to even as a minority party. So, they got even. There was no bipartisanship in dealing with the meltdown of credit, and then Obama felt no need, or even ability, to look for compromise on health care.

But the teaparty won in 2010. boehner and mcconnel could make a deal on the debt over the phone, but it won't be allowed by the gop. No compromise is now the gop ideology, rather than a negotiating tactic to teach the other party a lesson.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

The Republican plan to destroy the Obama Presidency.
The New New Deal: Why the GOP Became the Party of No | TIME.com

Interesting, but Obama's presidency has pretty much self-destructed under the weight of its own incompetency.

hers the problem with the congress harry reid he should have move the filibuster to 51 votes ... we dems would have got a lot of bills passed from the get go...

we would of passed a jobs bill ... the public option, the iimmigration bill, the debt ceiling a stimulus bill for 21.2 trillion dollars people would be up to their necks in wealth ... but obama tried to work with the repub-lie-turds and harry reid didn't want to change the filibuster rule ... that's what you get when you try to work with repub-lie-turds ...

...21.2 trillion stimulus bill?! Lol!

 

[martybegan]

The Continuing Resolution offered by the GOP 'leadership' locks in the sequester cuts. That means my job is again in danger. I thought the Republicans were pro job growth, but all public sector employees are sweating their policy out in deep worry for our future.

I did nothing wrong. I kept doing my job, paying my taxes and minding my business. But because I draw a paycheck from a public sector employer, I and all my co-workers have become the target of Conservative policy. Why?

Why should I support their actions? The result of which will be the end of my employment and my pension. Why should that be viewed as a political victory by those who claim to be pro-job growth when the result will mean fewer jobs?

If I were rich, did not produce one thing other than numbers in a hedge fund, the Republicans would hoist me on their shoulders and call me an economic hero. But I am in the fast dwindling Middle Class and a public sector employee. So I and others like me are expendable in the short-sighted minds of Conservative policy wonks.

The federal government is a bloated monstronsity. Some State governments are bloated monstrosities. Progressive hellhole city governments are bloated monstrosites.

Public sector jobs are "overhead." Jobs that are there to do work needed to maintain the government for the rest of us. When the overhead costs too much, it has to be cut.

If you want to punish the poor by rolling back programs, that's one thing. But the true effect of the punitive policies of the GOP are the elimination of the jobs administering the programs.

Unless you're willing to say that each and every recipient of government largess is the same as some cartoon anecdote of a Welfare Queen of Food Stamp Surfer, you must keep the programs where legitimately disadvantaged folks are in need. And if that's the case, someone has to administer that aid.

Getting rid of the programs is the feature, getting rid of the bloated burecrats who run them is a bonus.

Social welfare programs should be at the lowest level of government possible, that way the people who want them are the people who pay for them. If a city wants to provide free food to people it can, but they can pay for it, and not expect the rest of us to do the same.

 

[Nosmo King]

The federal government is a bloated monstronsity. Some State governments are bloated monstrosities. Progressive hellhole city governments are bloated monstrosites.

Public sector jobs are "overhead." Jobs that are there to do work needed to maintain the government for the rest of us. When the overhead costs too much, it has to be cut.

If you want to punish the poor by rolling back programs, that's one thing. But the true effect of the punitive policies of the GOP are the elimination of the jobs administering the programs.

Unless you're willing to say that each and every recipient of government largess is the same as some cartoon anecdote of a Welfare Queen of Food Stamp Surfer, you must keep the programs where legitimately disadvantaged folks are in need. And if that's the case, someone has to administer that aid.

Getting rid of the programs is the feature, getting rid of the bloated burecrats who run them is a bonus.

Social welfare programs should be at the lowest level of government possible, that way the people who want them are the people who pay for them. If a city wants to provide free food to people it can, but they can pay for it, and not expect the rest of us to do the same.

Funny, but I feel the same way about tax breaks for the wealthy. Defense spending. Corporate welfare. Crony Capitalism. But all of that will be championed by the same lot who believe that we can exist as a nation with two economic classes: the wealthy and the abject poor.

Where will you live? Palm Springs or the Bowery?

 

[martybegan]

If you want to punish the poor by rolling back programs, that's one thing. But the true effect of the punitive policies of the GOP are the elimination of the jobs administering the programs.

Unless you're willing to say that each and every recipient of government largess is the same as some cartoon anecdote of a Welfare Queen of Food Stamp Surfer, you must keep the programs where legitimately disadvantaged folks are in need. And if that's the case, someone has to administer that aid.

Getting rid of the programs is the feature, getting rid of the bloated burecrats who run them is a bonus.

Social welfare programs should be at the lowest level of government possible, that way the people who want them are the people who pay for them. If a city wants to provide free food to people it can, but they can pay for it, and not expect the rest of us to do the same.

Funny, but I feel the same way about tax breaks for the wealthy. Defense spending. Corporate welfare. Crony Capitalism. But all of that will be championed by the same lot who believe that we can exist as a nation with two economic classes: the wealthy and the abject poor.

Where will you live? Palm Springs or the Bowery?

Your assumption is typical of the burecratic progressive class, that a person's money is not thiers, it is the government's and the government gets to decide how much you keep. I can see that from your usual "rich bad, business bad, capitalism bad" screed.

I see people owning thier own wealth, and the government having to come up with a reason for taking some of it each and every time they want to do it.

Progressives like the abject poor to stay that way because they are reliable progressive voters.

 

[bripat9643]

If you want to punish the poor by rolling back programs, that's one thing. But the true effect of the punitive policies of the GOP are the elimination of the jobs administering the programs.

Unless you're willing to say that each and every recipient of government largess is the same as some cartoon anecdote of a Welfare Queen of Food Stamp Surfer, you must keep the programs where legitimately disadvantaged folks are in need. And if that's the case, someone has to administer that aid.

Getting rid of the programs is the feature, getting rid of the bloated burecrats who run them is a bonus.

Social welfare programs should be at the lowest level of government possible, that way the people who want them are the people who pay for them. If a city wants to provide free food to people it can, but they can pay for it, and not expect the rest of us to do the same.

Funny, but I feel the same way about tax breaks for the wealthy. Defense spending. Corporate welfare. Crony Capitalism. But all of that will be championed by the same lot who believe that we can exist as a nation with two economic classes: the wealthy and the abject poor.

Where will you live? Palm Springs or the Bowery?

The lowest level of government possible for defense spending is the federal government. Do you plan on having every county in America provide it's own defense against ballistic missiles? There are no tax breaks for the wealthy. Almost all so-called "corporate welfare" is the product of Democrat policies, like interest free loans to "green energy" companies. Those are also the classic examples of crony capitalism.

So, basically, your entire agenda is obvious bullshit.

 

[billyerock1991]

Not worth its own thread and this horse has been beaten enough.

Republicans are trying to save people from their own stupidity.

The people who will be hurt the most under the Stuttering Clusterfuck are the Young.... Guess who gets to pay back this enormous debt? The working Class...... Guess who is losing their job to China? Guess who is losing their Health Care? Guess who can't find worthwhile jobs? Blacks..... Guess who has been hit the hardest in this economy?

And the rest of the dummies who voted for this douchebag.

You don't want to be helped? Fine. I say we stop trying to help and start looking out for ourselves and just say, "Fuck You". Have a nice trip to the Poor House" and move on down the road.

Haven't you people figured it out yet? We're smarter than you are? You can't hurt us.

When the Stuttering Clusterfuck made it clear that Human Resources were no longer a viable solution to work needs, Big Companies simply borrowed BILLIONS and replaced them.

Know what happened? Their profits went through the roof and you're sitting on the sidewalk crying in your bottle of Boones Farm about how unfair life is.

Sucks to be you.

Now? Now we have obamacare which only the most diehard douchebag dimocrap scum are still backing and looky-here.....

July: Walgreens Says It Will Use Its Stores To Help Enroll People In Obamacare ? Today: Walgreens Dumps Company Sponsored Health Care Benefits For Its Employees? | Weasel Zippers

July: Walgreens Says It Will Use Its Stores To Help Enroll People In Obamacare – Today: Walgreens Dumps Company Sponsored Health Care Benefits For Its Employees…

I’m guessing the people who work at Walgreens are less than thrilled with the news they will now be dumped into crappy government-approved health insurance.

Via WSJ:

Rising health-care costs and a climate of change brought about by the new federal health law are prompting American corporations to revisit the pact they’ve long had with employees over medical benefits.

Walgreen Co. is set to become one of the largest employers yet to make sweeping changes to company-backed health programs. On Wednesday, the drugstore giant is expected to disclose a plan to provide payments to eligible employees for the subsidized purchase of insurance starting in 2014. The plan will affect roughly 160,000 employees, and will require them to shop for coverage on a private health-insurance marketplace. Aside from rising health-care costs, the company cited compliance-related expenses associated with the new law as a reason for the switch

Walgreen is the latest in a growing list of companies making changes to their benefits. International Business Machines Corp. and Time Warner Inc. both said in recent weeks they will move thousands of retirees from their own company-administered plans to private exchanges. Sears Holdings Corp. and Darden Restaurants Inc. said last year they would send employees to a private exchange.

Since the 1940s, health benefits have been a key part of many employees’ compensation. A long trend of rising health spending and a wave of changes to the health-care system are prompting many employers to rethink their roles in financing care for employees and their dependents.

Edge:

What a bunch of fucking losers the left is. They're so stupid, they don't even have the good sense to listen to people smarter than they are.

THAT is stupid.

Suck on it, libturds. Good luck in that Rat Maze of gubmint healthcare. I been putting up with it for twenty years (the VA) and let me tell you.... I'll take the Private Market any day.

kind of like that crappy government health care system call medicare ??? I'll take Medicare over and insurance company... you know the one's who feels if you get sick we'll cancel your policy health care program ... or if you make a claim we'll say you met your cap and we will stop paying for your health care or raise your rates program .... the problem you have is you've been duped in the Idea that government is the enemy ... I'll take that gubment program over any thing you can offer to the people

 

[billyerock1991]

Interesting, but Obama's presidency has pretty much self-destructed under the weight of its own incompetency.

hers the problem with the congress harry reid he should have move the filibuster to 51 votes ... we dems would have got a lot of bills passed from the get go...

we would of passed a jobs bill ... the public option, the immigration bill, the debt ceiling a stimulus bill for 21.2 trillion dollars people would be up to their necks in wealth ... but obama tried to work with the repub-lie-turds and harry reid didn't want to change the filibuster rule ... that's what you get when you try to work with repub-lie-turds ...

...21.2 trillion stimulus bill?! Lol!

that's a typo it should be 1.2 trillion my bad LOL

 

[TooTall]

Interesting, but Obama's presidency has pretty much self-destructed under the weight of its own incompetency.

hers the problem with the congress harry reid he should have move the filibuster to 51 votes ... we dems would have got a lot of bills passed from the get go...

we would of passed a jobs bill ... the public option, the iimmigration bill, the debt ceiling a stimulus bill for 21.2 trillion dollars people would be up to their necks in wealth ... but obama tried to work with the repub-lie-turds and harry reid didn't want to change the filibuster rule ... that's what you get when you try to work with repub-lie-turds ...

Very true

Reid is a weak leader afraid to change the Filibuster rules. Once republicans started to abuse it to the extent they did and once republicans broke their promise to tone down the number of filibusters, Reid should have reverted to 51 votes

A functioning Senate is more important than maintaining an obsolete filibuster

Actually, Reid knows that if he changes the filibuster rule to 51 votes, as soon as the Republicans get 51 seats in the Senate, ALL of the BS bills passed by Democrats will be repealed and replaced.

 

[EriktheRed]

The Republican plan to destroy the Obama Presidency.
The New New Deal: Why the GOP Became the Party of No | TIME.com

Other than the few bubble heads still supporting the kenyan, who do you think believes this garbage?

No one. Time magazine is a leftist propaganda rag of the highest order. That's why they're going broke.

The tide is turning so fast against Soetoro it isn't funny. How did anyone think this little community organizer was ready to lead the most powerful nation on earth anyway? Only the gullible and the truly ignorant, and at this point, you have to be retarded to still be supporting his communist, immoral, anti American agenda.

Thank God there is someone to tell Hussein NO, otherwise we probably wouldn't even recognize America, since he hates it with such deep vitriol.

Says the dipshit who was hawking Dick Morris' article as proof Romney would win in a landslide.

 

[rightwinger]

hers the problem with the congress harry reid he should have move the filibuster to 51 votes ... we dems would have got a lot of bills passed from the get go...

we would of passed a jobs bill ... the public option, the iimmigration bill, the debt ceiling a stimulus bill for 21.2 trillion dollars people would be up to their necks in wealth ... but obama tried to work with the repub-lie-turds and harry reid didn't want to change the filibuster rule ... that's what you get when you try to work with repub-lie-turds ...

Very true

Reid is a weak leader afraid to change the Filibuster rules. Once republicans started to abuse it to the extent they did and once republicans broke their promise to tone down the number of filibusters, Reid should have reverted to 51 votes

A functioning Senate is more important than maintaining an obsolete filibuster

Actually, Reid knows that if he changes the filibuster rule to 51 votes, as soon as the Republicans get 51 seats in the Senate, ALL of the BS bills passed by Democrats will be repealed and replaced.

Reid is an idiot if he thinks the Republicans are not going to change the filibuster rules the minute they get 51 votes

He has a Senate that does not function. He needs to change back to majority rule the way it was intended

 

[JoeB131]

Suck on it, libturds. Good luck in that Rat Maze of gubmint healthcare. I been putting up with it for twenty years (the VA) and let me tell you.... I'll take the Private Market any day.

Funny, most people I know love the VA and the VA has a high rate of user satisfaction.

Defense.gov News Article: VA Outranks Private Sector in Health Care Patient Satisfaction

Veterans continued to rate the care they receive through the Department of Veterans Affairs health care system higher than other Americans rate private-sector health care for the sixth consecutive year, a new annual report on customer satisfaction reveals.

For VA Secretary R. James Nicholson, the news is affirmation of what he called "the greatest story never told," that the VA offers top-quality care for its patients.

VA medical services received high marks during the annual American Customer Satisfaction Index, which has ranked customer satisfaction with various federal programs and private-sector industries and major companies since 1994.

Veterans who recently used VA services and were interviewed for the 2005 ACSI survey gave the VA's inpatient care a rating of 83 on a 100-point scale -- compared to a 73 rating for the private-sector health care industry. Veterans gave the VA a rating of 80 for outpatient care, five percentage points higher than the 75 rating for private-sector outpatient care and 9 percent higher than the average satisfaction rating for all federal services.

 

[Seawytch]

Suck on it, libturds. Good luck in that Rat Maze of gubmint healthcare. I been putting up with it for twenty years (the VA) and let me tell you.... I'll take the Private Market any day.

Funny, most people I know love the VA and the VA has a high rate of user satisfaction.

Defense.gov News Article: VA Outranks Private Sector in Health Care Patient Satisfaction

Veterans continued to rate the care they receive through the Department of Veterans Affairs health care system higher than other Americans rate private-sector health care for the sixth consecutive year, a new annual report on customer satisfaction reveals.

For VA Secretary R. James Nicholson, the news is affirmation of what he called "the greatest story never told," that the VA offers top-quality care for its patients.

VA medical services received high marks during the annual American Customer Satisfaction Index, which has ranked customer satisfaction with various federal programs and private-sector industries and major companies since 1994.

Veterans who recently used VA services and were interviewed for the 2005 ACSI survey gave the VA's inpatient care a rating of 83 on a 100-point scale -- compared to a 73 rating for the private-sector health care industry. Veterans gave the VA a rating of 80 for outpatient care, five percentage points higher than the 75 rating for private-sector outpatient care and 9 percent higher than the average satisfaction rating for all federal services.

Not just the VA, but the "socialist" medical system we have in the military. Beats that "Private Market" hands down every time.

 

[Wolfsister77]

Suck on it, libturds. Good luck in that Rat Maze of gubmint healthcare. I been putting up with it for twenty years (the VA) and let me tell you.... I'll take the Private Market any day.

Funny, most people I know love the VA and the VA has a high rate of user satisfaction.

Defense.gov News Article: VA Outranks Private Sector in Health Care Patient Satisfaction

Veterans continued to rate the care they receive through the Department of Veterans Affairs health care system higher than other Americans rate private-sector health care for the sixth consecutive year, a new annual report on customer satisfaction reveals.

For VA Secretary R. James Nicholson, the news is affirmation of what he called "the greatest story never told," that the VA offers top-quality care for its patients.

VA medical services received high marks during the annual American Customer Satisfaction Index, which has ranked customer satisfaction with various federal programs and private-sector industries and major companies since 1994.

Veterans who recently used VA services and were interviewed for the 2005 ACSI survey gave the VA's inpatient care a rating of 83 on a 100-point scale -- compared to a 73 rating for the private-sector health care industry. Veterans gave the VA a rating of 80 for outpatient care, five percentage points higher than the 75 rating for private-sector outpatient care and 9 percent higher than the average satisfaction rating for all federal services.

Not just the VA, but the "socialist" medical system we have in the military. Beats that "Private Market" hands down every time.

Yeah, I worked at the VA for a number of years and people were happy with their care and got good care.

 

[TooTall]

Very true

Reid is a weak leader afraid to change the Filibuster rules. Once republicans started to abuse it to the extent they did and once republicans broke their promise to tone down the number of filibusters, Reid should have reverted to 51 votes

A functioning Senate is more important than maintaining an obsolete filibuster

Actually, Reid knows that if he changes the filibuster rule to 51 votes, as soon as the Republicans get 51 seats in the Senate, ALL of the BS bills passed by Democrats will be repealed and replaced.

Reid is an idiot if he thinks the Republicans are not going to change the filibuster rules the minute they get 51 votes

He has a Senate that does not function. He needs to change back to majority rule the way it was intended

The Senate functions quite well. They refuse to pass a budget year after year so they can continue funding Obamacare with CR's. Reid is able to do everything Obama tells him to do.

 

[Dot Com]

This is the reason a commentator referred to Boehner as merely the "spokesman" s opposed to "Speaker" yesterday. He's not leading, he's just reporting what his party's eXtremist contingent's demands are from time to time.