Ding Dong the second witch is dead
- Thread starter TarHeelEer
- Start date
Or perhaps someone who negotiates something that is a fair trade rather than handing the keys over to Dirty Harry... oh wait, Obama via Muddling Mitch.
Lol, The adults are leaving the playground, Boehner was old school, conservative but not crazy, he wanted to Govern, the wingnuts just want to burn it down. Not sure who the right wing thinks is left in their silent majority, I can't think of anyone their candidates haven't alienated so far. I like what Boehners aid called them, Lemmings with Life jackets. I guess if you live in the alternate reality of the bubble you would cheer this. I take it to mean their is no more dealing with the tea people caucus.
Dealing or caving? Republicans have caved on every conservative issue in almost 20 years. A compromise to a Democrat means moving overall left regardless of circumstances.
Like blocking Presidential appointees?
Like trying to eliminate women's health from the ACA?
Like trying to make gay marriage illegal?
Like restricting voter access in several states?
I think the libs think Nancy is in control. This House was elected to accomplish a few things beyond rubberstamping Obama. Personally, I would be disappointed if they fund PP. I am not sure that their goal should be to not shut it down. There have always been two sides, and Repubs never did have the intestinal fortitude to see if their position was the preferred. Of course it will be difficult fight with media. What is new about that, media didn't support them as candidates.
Please explain how they can do that under the current political demographics? Short of shutting down the Government, or is that the plan? make The Prez veto what he has already said he would veto and then try and blame him?
Like blocking Presidential appointees?
Who's not appointed at present time?
Like trying to eliminate women's health from the ACA?
Caved. Love your choice of terms.
Like trying to make gay marriage illegal?
All have since caved under liberal pressure. Didn't promote the appropriate solution that cannot be presented now.
Like restricting voter access in several states?
All have since caved under liberal pressure, including my own North Carolina. Again, love your choice of words.
Who's not appointed at present time?
Like trying to eliminate women's health from the ACA?
Caved. Love your choice of terms.
Like trying to make gay marriage illegal?
All have since caved under liberal pressure. Didn't promote the appropriate solution that cannot be presented now.
Like restricting voter access in several states?
All have since caved under liberal pressure, including my own North Carolina. Again, love your choice of words.
Works for me. He has never had to veto anything. Repubs have backed down from the threat every time, or Harry has protected Obama by demanding 60 votes to shut off the filibuster.
Congress is to provide consent. Women's healthcare requires free condoms. Multi denom prayer referred to man and woman in marriage have children - Muslim Koran. Restricting voter rights by requiring positive identification that accurate person is voting.
Last edited:
Can you post in English please? Doesn't really matter though, I'm getting to the point that I don't read much of what you post anyway.
Gee, he threatened to do it before hand. Repubs could avoid shut down by doing what the Prez said. Duh, and that is the way that thing is supposed to work. Just do what you are told and Nancy said we could get along.
Gee, if you are trying to insult me - you are a miserable failure there too.
No man is as dangerous as one who has nothing left to lose. Boehner's resignation paves the way for him to bring up the "clean" Continuing Resolution -- without attempting to defund Planned Parenthood -- which McConnell is ready to bring up in the Senate, probably on Monday. When it comes to the House, Boehner will do what he has said all along he would do, which is ensure there would not be a shutdown this time by enlisting votes on the other side of the aisle.
Ted Cruz was on his stump, talking about how there were 6 shutdowns while Ronald Reagan was president "and the world didn't end." I'm no fan of Reagan, Senator, but let me tell you, you're no Ronald Reagan and you should be struck by lightning for comparing yourself to him. Not one of those shutdowns -- the longest was 3 days -- came about because one or a handful in the House or Senate made it their preferred tactic of getting what they wanted, the way you and your Know-Nothing buddies in the House have done repeatedly.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...hutdown-why-they-happened-and-how-they-ended/
Ted Cruz was on his stump, talking about how there were 6 shutdowns while Ronald Reagan was president "and the world didn't end." I'm no fan of Reagan, Senator, but let me tell you, you're no Ronald Reagan and you should be struck by lightning for comparing yourself to him. Not one of those shutdowns -- the longest was 3 days -- came about because one or a handful in the House or Senate made it their preferred tactic of getting what they wanted, the way you and your Know-Nothing buddies in the House have done repeatedly.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...hutdown-why-they-happened-and-how-they-ended/
McConnell has already scheduled a vote for Monday on a CR that goes through 11 December and keeps PP funding at last year's level.
Obama has had his way with the legislature ever since he has been in office, as well as I can remember. Initially he had a veto proof congress. So, he did whatever he wanted. He then lost the 60 seat majority in the senate, but he had Pa Senator in his pocket and the two whores from Maine for a price. It was unusual for Snowe and Collins not to go along except when their vote did not have impact on outcome. After he lost majority access to legislature, he ran roughshod over them with rules or just plain applying Exec Priv and saying congress was not doing their job, or do an appointment while congress was "not in session". A couple of those actions were struck down by SCOTUS for stepping too far over the line.
Now, the congress is going to exercise its responsibility of being equal status to Admin and Judicial branches - I hope. Legislative branch has been MIA for the past 7 years. The House controls the purse strings by Constitutional rule. If Congress as a body does not desire funding PP, they have a right or obligation to not fund it. If the budget does not fund PP, the Admin has the right to veto.
If neither will give, the government may be shut down until one capitulates. Who is at fault? Congress for not funding the entire budget as the President demands, or Exec branch for demanding funding for PP and holding the entire government hostage for that one parcel of the entire budget? Who blinks? There is a history of leaders of the two houses of congress giving in to keep the entire government running - they say. But some, including yours truly, believe they didn't have the heart for a fight and the thing of contention was not worth the fight, and a fear of losing in the court of the press.
Now, the congress is going to exercise its responsibility of being equal status to Admin and Judicial branches - I hope. Legislative branch has been MIA for the past 7 years. The House controls the purse strings by Constitutional rule. If Congress as a body does not desire funding PP, they have a right or obligation to not fund it. If the budget does not fund PP, the Admin has the right to veto.
If neither will give, the government may be shut down until one capitulates. Who is at fault? Congress for not funding the entire budget as the President demands, or Exec branch for demanding funding for PP and holding the entire government hostage for that one parcel of the entire budget? Who blinks? There is a history of leaders of the two houses of congress giving in to keep the entire government running - they say. But some, including yours truly, believe they didn't have the heart for a fight and the thing of contention was not worth the fight, and a fear of losing in the court of the press.
The far right just lives in a bubble and have forgotten all about the reason they wanted "GOP Outreach" after Mitt got creamed. I hope they shut the Government down and run a far right kook next year so maybe they will get the hint that there is no Silent Majority and that most of America thinks Ted Nugent is a Jerk and would never slap a confederate flag sticker on their car because they work somewhere real.
Help me a little bit, please. How do you know what "most of America thinks"? What relevance does Ted Nugent offer to the GOP? Is he supposed to represent a large portion of the voting party? Confederate flag sticker.... because they work somewhere real"? Help me work these out of your *** comments into GOP discussion.
Do no Dems like Ted Nugent and none respect the confederate flag? It is just unreal that you could remotely make your association.
How bout the election results from the last Presidential election? And I could care less if you realize the confederate flag and Ted Nugent are both welcomed by todays GOP base or not. Do you think you guys will pull more Hispanic voters than in 2012? Demographics can be ignored if you imagine there is a silent majority.
Obviously, I am not the one to make a prediction. I didn't think Obama could win his first term with qualifications of Community Organizer and position on Harvard Law Review, but he pulled over 50% of the vote. And I knew there was no way in hell the voters would vote for him again based on the condition and position he had led our country in and the projected future of the country. And again, he won with over 50% - I believe.
After that voting history, I would be disappointed, but not surprised, if Hillary or Joe or Bernie won with clear majority. I am not sure the country could survive economically. We cannot continue operating with a trillion dollar deficit. I do not think we could survive militarily. Both Russia and China are building while we disassemble. I cannot see a positive outcome with a Democrat victory and awards of "investments" that they will make.
Trillion dollar deficit? Really? Are you spouting that even after I let you off on that bet?
And it's interesting to see someone complain about the debt while simultaneously complain we're not spending enough on defense.
Did Obama do anything other than Harvard Law Review and community organizer before he was elected POTUS?
I have no problem that SOME Repubs accept the confederate flag and Ted Nugent. I do not accept ALL Democrats reject the flag and/or Nugent. Do you think there are meaningful numbers in either party would allow their vote to sway based upon either position? I just don't think it is a vote changer.
If you let me off, I did not let myself off. MAC received an extra $250 in my donation. And I was glad to lose, but the future projections would suggest it is going to bounce right back up.
I didn't think Obama had done anything before other than those two. If he did something more to qualify him for the seat, share with me. I guess he fit the basic constitutional requirements, but his resume did not offer a strong background anywhere else. Share if I heve overlooked something.
He taught constitutional law at the U of Chicago for 12 years, was in the Illinois state legislature for seven years and he was a United States Senator from Illinois for four years. Did you think he had been a community organizer since law school and was working as one while he was running for POTUS?
No. He was alleged to be a US Senator at time of Pres Run. Was he more than adjunct professor teaching Con Law? And he was given an office to write his book. Was he a full time state senator? Poorest voting record as he abstained. These are from readings. I did not have a close association with Obama or Barry. Tell me I and wrong where, and I will attempt research if you can source.