PDA

View Full Version : happening now...



sack316
12-21-2009, 12:02 AM
at midnight central, 1:00 Eastern... bout to see a vote

Sack

eg8r
12-21-2009, 07:07 AM
Pretty sad that they are voting on a bill at 1 AM of which they have not even had enough time to digest all the changes let alone all the backroom deals to secure votes.

eg8r

llotter
12-21-2009, 08:35 AM
It isn't so bad living in a dictatorship....so far.

pooltchr
12-21-2009, 08:48 AM
So much for a more transparent government. They won't even let each other see the bills they are voting on!!!

Steve

Qtec
12-21-2009, 01:56 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Commonly known as the PATRIOT Act, the bill contained provisions aimed at expanding the federal government’s ability to gather intelligence, engage in domestic surveillance and secret searches and detain immigrants with little restraint. The provisions in <span style='font-size: 17pt'>the PATRIOT Act became immediately controversial, as civil liberties groups argued that these provisions <u>gutted constitutional protections provided to citizens for generations.</u></span>

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>The bill was brought to the floor of the House of Representatives on October 23, <u>the same day it was introduced.</u> </span>

Many Democrats expressed extreme displeasure over the hurried nature of the process. Rep. Bobby Scott said, “I think it is appropriate to comment on the process by which the bill is coming to us. <span style='font-size: 17pt'>This is not the bill that was reported and deliberated on in the Committee on the Judiciary. It came to us late on the floor. No one has really had an opportunity to look at the bill to see what is in it since we have been out of our offices.”</span> Rep. John Conyers, the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, declared, <span style='font-size: 20pt'>“we are now debating at this hour of night, <u>with only two copies </u>of the bill that we are being asked to vote on available to Members on this side of the aisle.”</span> Conyers was later famously pictured in the Michael Moore documentary “Fahrenheit 9/11” explaining that <u>no lawmaker reads all the bills in Congress.</u> The bill passed on October 24 by a vote of 357-66.

The Senate passed the bill the very next day and the president signed the bill on October 26, 2001. </div></div>

Didn't hear you complaining when THAT happened.

To be clear, there WAS a Bill that had been negotiated.
On the DAY of the vote, the WH brought in a NEW Bill that they had written ALL ON THEIR OWN and it was voted on with only two copies available for the opposition.

Can't remember the outrage from you guys on that one.

The right to privacy died the day Bush passed that Law and now you are stuck with it. One more step to control and socialism......... /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/eek.gif ?
You moaning about Obama acting like Bush is typical....... not to mention hypocritical.

Q

LWW
12-21-2009, 02:00 PM
<span style='font-family: Arial Black'><span style='font-size: 26pt'>MOMMY .... MOMMY ... ALL THE OTHER KIDS ARE DOING IT!!!</span></span>

How lame.

LWW

pooltchr
12-21-2009, 02:01 PM
so that's your arguement? Because it has happened in the past, that makes it ok?

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

Steve

wolfdancer
12-21-2009, 02:56 PM
you already had 8 years of a one man f**k the constitution, rule...
"I'm the decider"....and if I want a war, and Dick wants to raid the treasury for his HAL. buddies......

eg8r
12-21-2009, 03:11 PM
qtip, if you found an issue with that happening back then why do you feel it is OK now. You don't but are too stupid to be able to stand up against a group with your common agenda.

eg8r

wolfdancer
12-21-2009, 03:14 PM
do you cover all your idiotic posts with a smiley?....just in case someone points out that you ain't said nothing, or that what you said didn't amount to anything ?????
You got something to say... spit it out and, then take the heat when they point out the er, "flaws".
Try rereading Q's post.....if you want to make disparaging remarks about this President...., then don't be offended when it is pointed out how your boy GW, by comparison, would be a pimple on President Obama's butt.

You spent 8 years whining about Bill Clinton.... I'll spend the next 8 years retelling the truisms about the most corrupt, inept President in U.S. History (with apologies to U.S. Grant, and Richard Nixon.....

DickLeonard
12-21-2009, 03:52 PM
Mommy why does that Idiot have all the Pictures of the War Lords.####

pooltchr
12-21-2009, 04:33 PM
Try to pay attention, Wolfie. It's not a smily face...it is a crazy face, which is what I thought of his post. I know things can be a little difficult to comprehend, but at least you could try.

You're going to feel pretty foolish if you sit back and deny the destruction of this country that is taking place right now. Right or Left, we are all going to pay dearly for the actions of those in Washington right now.

Steve

sack316
12-21-2009, 04:54 PM
What sickens me is how it's gone about.

IF it is to pass, for all the $$$ we are putting into it, then hell it may as well be the whole shebang.

And IF it is not to pass, then it is just not to pass.

As is, we're still gonna be spending money we don't have to spend... all for a watered down bill that really isn't changing or fixing very much (if anything) just so they can say "we did it".

At this point in what it is... what's the point? Other than some faux victory to claim on the campaign trail for some people.

It's still gonna be too much for the right to like it. It's still gonna be too little for the left to like it. Yet I imagine for some reason it will still be celebrated as "progress".

Sack

p.s. when I have time, I want to look into this bill, and the defense spending bill to see exactly how many votes were bought... unless someone else already has an idea.

Also seem to remember someone saying they won't sign anything that doesn't include a public option. I think we will soon see if that word is kept.

pooltchr
12-21-2009, 05:10 PM
You missed what went unsaid. "I refuse to vote for a bill without a public option" (Until I have made sure my home state will get a significant amount of money set aside in the bill to pay for my vote)

The only purpose of this bill as it is, will be for Obama to stand in front of the cameras during his state of the union address and tell us how he managed to do something that even the Clintons couldn't accomplish. He doesn't care what's in it, as long as it's called healthcare reform.

Steve

eg8r
12-21-2009, 05:37 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Try rereading Q's post.....if you want to make disparaging remarks about this President...., then don't be offended when it is pointed out how your boy GW, by comparison, would be a pimple on President Obama's butt.
</div></div>I read his post and you are correct, I am not offended if someone finds the same problem with W. The issue is that if this was such a problem when W did it why isn't there any outrage when it is happening NOW?

I understand you only intent is to start an argument here so I will ask this question knowing you have no intent of honestly replying, but here we go...Why are you defending someone that is changing the subject without addressing the subject of the thread? OK, it happened during W's watch and it was wrong (I honestly did not remember anything about it) but why is it OK now?

eg8r

Bobbyrx
12-21-2009, 06:57 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">On the DAY of the vote, the WH brought in a NEW Bill that they had written ALL ON THEIR OWN and it was voted on with only two copies available for the opposition.
</div></div>

If this is true, then why did every Democratic senator exept 2 vote FOR the bill (and 1 of the 2 was absent)? It passed 98 to 1 in the senate link (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=1&vote=00313) and 357 to 66 in the House link (http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2001/roll398.xml)

It passed overwelmingly, unlike the healthcare bill which had Democrats holding their own party hostage in both the House and Senate to get the votes needed. And there is NO proof the Patriot Act has done anything to our right to privacy. I haven't seen the newspapers filled with cases of U.S. citizens being arrested with information obtained via the Patriot Act.

Qtec
12-21-2009, 11:31 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">qtip, if you found an issue with that happening back then why do you feel it is OK now. You don't but are too stupid to be able to stand up against a group with your common agenda.

eg8r </div></div>

egOr, did I say it was OK?


Q
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The USA PATRIOT Act,............ signed into law on <span style='font-size: 17pt'>October 26, 2001. </span></div></div>

Qtec
12-21-2009, 11:41 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">so that's your arguement? Because it has happened in the past, that makes it ok?

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

Steve </div></div>

Did I say it was OK?

What I am pointing out see is the false outrage. eg, Something is only wrong when a Dem does it.

Q

LWW
12-22-2009, 07:31 AM
What's funny is that after all the Obamatrons nodded their collectivist heads in unison over the EEEVILLL plan to subsidize private insurance under the McCain plan, they now wet themselves with glee over the plan to subsidize private insurance.

LWW

Qtec
12-22-2009, 07:57 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What's funny is that after all the Obamatrons nodded their collectivist heads in unison over the EEEVILLL plan to subsidize private insurance under the McCain plan, they now wet themselves with glee over the plan to subsidize private insurance.

LWW </div></div>

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>Really? They are all jumping with joy? </span>

Did you read my "Special Interests" thread? ....Nah... The 'Obamatronic' Huff Post editor [ M.Huffington] disagrees with this bill, in fact, <u>the progressives are split on the issue.</u>
Some say its a step in the right direction, [the best they could get with the Party of No in opposition] and others say its a total let down. A betrayal by Obama.
I personally am inclined to the latter view.

From another opinion piece from the 'in the bag for Obama' ultra Lib Huff Post.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Get Breaking News Alerts

*
Share
*
Comments 1,740

As the president's job performance numbers and ratings on his handling of virtually every domestic issue have fallen below 50 percent, <span style='font-size: 14pt'><u>the Democratic base has become demoralized, and Independents have gone from his source of strength to his Achilles Heel, it's time to reflect on why.</u></span> The conventional wisdom from the White House is those "pesky leftists" -- those bloggers and Vermont Governors and Senators who keep wanting real health reform, real financial reform, immigration reform not preceded by a year or two of raids that leave children without parents, and all the other changes we were supposed to believe in.
<u>Somehow the president has managed to turn a base of new and progressive voters he himself energized like no one else could in 2008 into the likely stay-at-home voters of 2010, souring an entire generation of young people to the political process.</u> <span style='font-size: 14pt'>It isn't hard for them to see that the winners seem to be the same no matter who the voters select (Wall Street, big oil, big Pharma, the insurance industry).</span> </div></div>

Q

pooltchr
12-22-2009, 09:02 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[.[/u] <span style='font-size: 14pt'>It isn't hard for them to see that the winners seem to be the same no matter who the voters select (Wall Street, big oil, big Pharma, the insurance industry).</span> </div></div>

Q [/quote]

I would agree that the bill the Senate has in front of them will be welcomed by both the insurance and pharmacutical companies. Hell, the insurance companies now have the government threatening every individual in the country who doesn't buy their product with a heafty fine!!! I wish I could get the government to force every pool player in the country to take an instructional class from a certified instructor! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

Steve

Qtec
12-22-2009, 09:22 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I wish I could get the government to force every pool player in the country to take an instructional class from a certified instructor! ;\)

Steve</div></div>

Actually I think that's a good idea. It would save a lot of players from a lot of pain and frustration in the future. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

Q