PDA

View Full Version : Sickening?



sack316
12-09-2010, 12:39 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/10/nyregion/10health.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

Political posturing by democrats, using 9/11 victims as a ploy to be able to include "republicans hate 9/11 victims" in their 2012 campaign.

First, this bill should pass. But why are they insisting it be included in the tax bill? Why not bring a motion to vote on the bill that passed the house in September, on its own? That would surely pass, and if not... then bring the hammer down on those that vote against it.

But they are choosing to do it this way.

At least that's my take on it.

Sack

eg8r
12-09-2010, 02:13 PM
If this has nothing to do with extending the Bush tax cuts then it should not be in the bill.

eg8r

Chopstick
12-09-2010, 02:19 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If this has nothing to do with extending the Bush tax cuts then it should not be in the bill.

eg8r </div></div>

I agree. That is how things get so screwed up. One bill for one thing.

sack316
12-09-2010, 02:37 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If this has nothing to do with extending the Bush tax cuts then it should not be in the bill.

eg8r </div></div>

Exactly. Yet they choose to throw it in the bill, just because they know the republicans will be voting against it... for the sole purpose of being able to say "republicans voted against aid for 9/11 victims"!

I was debating this with a friend elsewhere, and this is what he said in response to my reasoning:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><u>Yes, they are posturing, and I support it</u>. I want the Republicans, who claim to care about middle-class folks and the deficit, to be put on record as voting against things that are politically popular. I want the Republicans to also be put on the record as voting "no" to provide unemployment relief and allowing extensions of middle-class tax cuts if it means not getting tax cuts for the richest 1%. The strategy of the Democrats is a good one: make the Republicans show that they only give a damn about rich people. </div></div>

So funny, my liberal friend not only acknowledging the posturing behind it, but supporting it! All the while I guess those 9/11 victims will just have to wait and see if they'll be taken care of while our government plays their little games.

Who cares if what needs to be done gets done? All that matters is if "we" can make the other side look bad. This is our government (to be fair, both sides do it).

Sack

Qtec
12-09-2010, 08:58 PM
Did you actually read your own link?

You said,

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Political posturing <span style='font-size: 14pt'>by democrats,</span> using 9/11 victims as a ploy to be able to include "republicans hate 9/11 victims" in their 2012 campaign. </div></div>

The article says,

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 17pt'>Republicans Block U.S. Health Aid for 9/11 Workers</span>

?

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Republican senators blocked Democratic legislation </span>on Thursday that sought to provide medical care to rescue workers and others who became ill as a result of breathing in toxic fumes, dust and smoke at the site of the World Trade Center attack in 2001. </div></div>

?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The 9/11 health bill, a version of which was approved by the House of Representatives in September, was among several initiatives that Senate Democrats had hoped to approve before the close of the 111th Congress. Supporters believe this was <span style='font-size: 17pt'>their last real opportunity to have the bill passed. </span> </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In a vote largely along party lines, the Senate rejected a procedural move by Democrats <span style='font-size: 17pt'>to end debate on the 9/11 health bill and to bring it to a vote;</span> 60 yes votes were needed, but the move received 57, with 42 votes against. </div></div>

Remember this?

link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4zwCMf8dsc&feature=fvw)

Q

sack316
12-09-2010, 10:29 PM
yes Q, I read the NYT article... which is why I posted that as the link. One can read the article and see exactly what the lefts purpose was in putting this in that bill.

And then one can think for themselves, and see what's really up.

Perhaps you can answer for me why they decided to put it in this bill, which they knew republicans would be voting against... instead of bringing a motion (which they can do as they still control it) and allowing a vote on the 9/11 health bill that already passed in the house <u>on its own</u>.

Sack

Qtec
12-10-2010, 04:58 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">instead of bringing a motion (which they can do as they still control it) and allowing a vote on the 9/11 health bill that already passed in the house on its own.

Sack </div></div>

Is it me?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In a vote largely along party lines, the Senate rejected a procedural move by Democrats to end debate on the 9/11 health bill and to bring it to a vote; 60 yes votes were needed, but the move received 57, with 42 votes against. </div></div>

There was a filibuster. Normally with 57 votes you can pass a bill.

Again.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Republicans Block U.S. Health Aid for 9/11 Workers


Republican senators blocked Democratic legislation on Thursday that sought to<u> provide medical care to rescue workers and others who became ill as a result of breathing in toxic fumes, dust and smoke at the site of the World Trade Center attack in 2001.</u> </div></div>


Who would be against that? <span style='font-size: 23pt'>The Defence party? The patriot party?</span>

Again, listen to the guy. link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4zwCMf8dsc&feature=fvw)

If you are against it, vote no. If you are for it, vote yes.

Simple.

Q

LWW
12-10-2010, 05:34 AM
Your argument is, as usual, ridiculous.

It was voted down because they viewed the bill as a whole and not just the spoon fed sliver you salivated over.

A good analogy would be that if I said I will give someone a winning $100,000,000,000.00 lottery ticket if they accept 4 rounds of .45ACP through the brain.

Whoever wants to jump forward and say "I'M RICH!" probably voted a straight (D) ticket.

LWW

Gayle in MD
12-10-2010, 08:53 AM
Your "Take" is inaccurate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4zwCMf8dsc&feature=related

sack316
12-10-2010, 11:01 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Your "Take" is inaccurate.
</div></div>

Perhaps it is, as I said that's my take. Some will agree, some will disagree.

What I do know for certain is it has been 3377 days since the attacks. Shame on all of 'em for this becoming an issue later rather than sooner.

Sack

Chopstick
12-10-2010, 11:37 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Your "Take" is inaccurate.
</div></div>

Perhaps it is, as I said that's my take. Some will agree, some will disagree.

What I do know for certain is it has been 3377 days since the attacks. Shame on all of 'em for this becoming an issue later rather than sooner.

Sack </div></div>

I agree. If it was such a big deal then why did it take ten years to get around to it. They had the majority. They could have passed that bill at any time. It is an obvious ploy to discredit the other side and nothing more. It is going to take more than one flush of that toilet to get rid of them.

sack316
12-10-2010, 11:40 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Chopstick</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Your "Take" is inaccurate.
</div></div>

Perhaps it is, as I said that's my take. Some will agree, some will disagree.

What I do know for certain is it has been 3377 days since the attacks. Shame on all of 'em for this becoming an issue later rather than sooner.

Sack </div></div>

I agree. If it was such a big deal then why did it take ten years to get around to it. They had the majority. They could have passed that bill at any time. It is an obvious ploy to discredit the other side and nothing more. It is going to take more than one flush of that toilet to get rid of them. </div></div>

True enough Chop... but in fairness republicans had plenty of time to do something too, had they really wanted to. I wouldn't say anybody is innocent on this one...

Sack

Gayle in MD
12-10-2010, 12:25 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Your "Take" is inaccurate.
</div></div>

Perhaps it is, as I said that's my take. Some will agree, some will disagree.

What I do know for certain is it has been 3377 days since the attacks. Shame on all of 'em for this becoming an issue later rather than sooner.

Sack </div></div>



It was an issue for Democrats all along.

Republicans blocked it.

I would think you'd be more sickened by what Republicans did this week, blocking the money for the first responders, than anything else.

g.

Gayle in MD
12-10-2010, 12:27 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Chopstick</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Your "Take" is inaccurate.
</div></div>

Perhaps it is, as I said that's my take. Some will agree, some will disagree.

What I do know for certain is it has been 3377 days since the attacks. Shame on all of 'em for this becoming an issue later rather than sooner.

Sack </div></div>

I agree. If it was such a big deal then why did it take ten years to get around to it. They had the majority. They could have passed that bill at any time. It is an obvious ploy to discredit the other side and nothing more. It is going to take more than one flush of that toilet to get rid of them. </div></div>

Democratics have not had the majoority for ten years.

G.

eg8r
12-10-2010, 01:23 PM
They have for the past few years. Why did they wait till now to do something?

eg8r

sack316
12-10-2010, 02:57 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They have for the past few years. Why did they wait till now to do something?

eg8r </div></div>

To throw up a middle finger on their way out the door, and to put some shell casings in their bag to fire off sometime in 2012.

Sack

Gayle in MD
12-11-2010, 07:47 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They have for the past few years. Why did they wait till now to do something?

eg8r </div></div>

They didn't wait, they've been trying to get it done for years, and Republiocans have blocked it.

Republicans had the majority, until January of 07, years after 9/11, and after we knew of the health repercussions of those first responders, and Republicans refused to do anything to help the first Responders. PERIOD!

Just showss your own gross bias, when you seek to bash the party which is trying to help these people, and slander their efforts, instead of being outraged over Repiglicans, who want to just dump all of them.

G.

G.

Gayle in MD
12-11-2010, 07:48 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They have for the past few years. Why did they wait till now to do something?

eg8r </div></div>

To throw up a middle finger on their way out the door, and to put some shell casings in their bag to fire off sometime in 2012.

Sack </div></div>

<span style="color: #660000">That is a complete lie, period. </span>

pooltchr
12-11-2010, 08:27 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

They didn't wait, they've been trying to get it done for years, and Republiocans have blocked it.

G. </div></div>

Maybe, if these idiots in Washington would start writing individual bills, rather than trying to slip a good bill through on top of a bad one for political purposes, they might have more success in accomplishing something.

Why can't a bill be debated on it's merits, rather than packaging it with a tax bill, or unemployment?

If they couldn't get something done with the majorities they held for the past 4 years, maybe they are going about things all wrong.

Steve

eg8r
12-11-2010, 12:24 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Republicans had the majority, until January of 07, years after 9/11, and after we knew of the health repercussions of those first responders, and Republicans refused to do anything to help the first Responders. PERIOD!

</div></div>Well and the Dems have done nothing since 2007. PERIOD!!!

eg8r

LWW
12-11-2010, 03:30 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Republicans had the majority, until January of 07, years after 9/11, and after we knew of the health repercussions of those first responders, and Republicans refused to do anything to help the first Responders. PERIOD!

</div></div>Well and the Dems have done nothing since 2007. PERIOD!!!

eg8r </div></div>

I must disagree ... the democrooks have used them as stage props for partisan political theater.

LWW

Qtec
12-11-2010, 11:01 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They have for the past few years. Why did they wait till now to do something?

eg8r </div></div>

Totally irrelevant. Whatever happened in the past is past, they NOW had a chance to pass it and they didn't.

Q

eg8r
12-12-2010, 12:07 AM
LOL, so your guys drop the ball and you want to say the past is the past. What about Obama blaming the past on day one? Obama has had a chance to do something about unemployment, but he didn't. I take that back, he has made it totally worse but that isn't what he said he would do.

eg8r

Qtec
12-12-2010, 05:00 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LOL, so your guys drop the ball </div></div>

This isn't a game. People who risked their lives in the aftermath of 9/11 in the forlorn hope that there might be survivors didn't worry about their own safety.

AGAIN, listen Anthony.

link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBqtyvn7OVw&feature=channel)

Q lol

Gayle in MD
12-12-2010, 07:20 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LOL, so your guys drop the ball and you want to say the past is the past. What about Obama blaming the past on day one? Obama has had a chance to do something about unemployment, but he didn't. I take that back, he has made it totally worse but that isn't what he said he would do.

eg8r </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Obama has had a chance to do something about unemployment, but he didn't. </div></div>

<span style="color: #990000">that is not true. Economists from both sides of the isle have stated that without the President's stimulus, unemployment would be as high as thirty percent.

This President diverted the Bush Gloobal Depression.

CBO has provided numbers to prove that millions of jobs were saved, and well over million jobs created.

Stop with the misstatements.

You continue to deny the facts.</span>

Gayle in MD
12-12-2010, 07:23 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LOL, so your guys drop the ball </div></div>

This isn't a game. People who risked their lives in the aftermath of 9/11 in the forlorn hope that there might be survivors didn't worry about their own safety.

AGAIN, listen Anthony.

link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBqtyvn7OVw&feature=channel)

Q lol </div></div>


<span style="color: #990000">There is no debating with these righties. They'd prefer petty, juvenile, school yard games.

G.
</span>

pooltchr
12-12-2010, 10:19 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Totally irrelevant. Whatever happened in the past is past, they NOW had a chance to pass it and they didn't.

Q </div></div>

So, if that is your position, than whatever happened to the economy during the last administration is in the past and totally irrelevant. Obama has had two years to fix the economy and he didn't.

Is that about right??????????????

(you said it, not me!)

Steve

Gayle in MD
12-12-2010, 11:29 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/10/nyregion/10health.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

Political posturing by democrats, using 9/11 victims as a ploy to be able to include "republicans hate 9/11 victims" in their 2012 campaign.

First, this bill should pass. But why are they insisting it be included in the tax bill? Why not bring a motion to vote on the bill that passed the house in September, on its own? That would surely pass, and if not... then bring the hammer down on those that vote against it.

But they are choosing to do it this way.

At least that's my take on it.

Sack
</div></div>


September 8, 2010 5:51 PM

9/11 Responders Health Bill Will Get New Vote, Reps Vow




Lawmakers from New York promised today that the House will hold another vote on a bill to provide $7.4 billion in aid to 9/11 first responders before the month is out.


The James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act, which failed to pass in the House this past July, would provide free health care and compensation payments to 9/11 rescue and recovery workers who fell ill after working in the trade center ruins.





Democratic Reps. Carolyn Maloney and Jerrold Nadler issued a joint statement today saying that House Democratic leadership has promised to bring the bill up for another vote after Congress comes back from its summer recess.


"We anticipate that the bill will be taken up the second week we are back in session and will be considered under regular order, with the expectation and belief that neither side will play politics with this vitally-important legislation," they said.


Most Republicans this summer voted against the bill, complaining that Democrats chose to bypass voting on amendments, opting instead for a process that sped up the vote but required a two-thirds majority. The measure received 255 votes, but it failed to get the two-thirds needed to pass. This time around, the bill will only need a simple majority to pass.



Democratic Reps. Carolyn Maloney and Jerrold Nadler issued a joint statement today saying that House Democratic leadership has promised to bring the bill up for another vote after Congress comes back from its summer recess.


"We anticipate that the bill will be taken up the second week we are back in session and will be considered under regular order, with the expectation and belief that neither side will play politics with this vitally-important legislation," they said.


Most Republicans this summer voted against the bill, complaining that Democrats chose to bypass voting on amendments, opting instead for a process that sped up the vote but required a two-thirds majority. The measure received 255 votes, but it failed to get the two-thirds needed to pass. This time around, the bill will only need a simple majority to pass.



http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20015896-503544.html



Dems Expect 9/11 ‘First Responders’ Bill To Pass Today
September 29 2010

CongressDaily: “At the urging of what one aide called 12 ‘pushy’ New York lawmakers, House Democratic leaders plan to bring to the floor this day legislation that would extend health-care aid to 9/11 first responders. … The $7.4 billion measure would provide health monitoring and treatment benefits to first responders and survivors of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. … The bill’s supporters told the leadership they want to challenge Republican opponents of the measure to cast another recorded vote against it and force them to defend those votes. House Republicans have stated the bill creates ‘a big new entitlement program’ and oppose the reopening of the compensation fund.” (Fung, 9/29).


The Hill: “The bill is expected to get the 218 votes needed to pass; it garnered 255 votes in July when it came up under suspension of the rules, which requires a two-thirds majority for passage” (Pecquet, 9/28).


This is part of Kaiser Health News’ Daily Report – a summary of health policy coverage from more than 300 news organizations. The full summary of the day’s news can be found here and you can sign up for e-mail subscriptions to the Daily Report here. In addition, our staff of reporters and correspondents file original stories each day, which you can find on our home page.




http://med-updates.com/public-health/dems-expect-911-first-responders-bill-to-pass-today/



Republican obstructionism delayed the 9/11 first responders aid bill
I have to disagree somewhat with Jeff’s last post blaming the Democrats as well as the Republicans for the failure to pass the bill. King was supposed to get enough Republican but couldn’t because they claimed the bill was a massive new entitlement program. They were going to kill the bill by attaching a poison pill, an amendment that would have prohibited any help at all going to any first responder who was not here legally.

I agree with those who say that any first responder, regardless of citizenship status, should get help. And the Republicans knew the Democrats would vote against such an odious amendment but they would use that vote to accuse them of giving millions to ‘illegals’ in sound bite driven campaign commercials.

It was really sleazy of the Republicans. King was diverting attention away from his failure to get Republican support by attaching amendments he knew the Democrats would reject. The Democrats finally got smart and forced the Republicans’ hand and called them out for their naked partisanship. Good for them.



http://blahgblog.wordpress.com/2010/08/0...nders-aid-bill/ (http://blahgblog.wordpress.com/2010/08/02/republican-obstructionism-delayed-the-911-first-responders-aid-bill/)



The 9/11 Bill and Political Maneuvering
Posted by Kate Pickert Wednesday, September 29, 2010 at 6:41 pm
28 Comments • Related Topics: congress, democrats, gop, health care, Immigration, politics, senate,
Today the House passed a bill to provide $7.4 billion to monitor, treat and compensate those who worked at Ground Zero after the 9/11 attacks. It's still unclear if the bill will pass the Senate intact, but it was still a victory for proponents nonetheless.

The bill is noteworthy for the effect it could have on the medics, firemen and volunteers who inhaled toxic dust while they dug through the rubble at Ground Zero in search of survivors and remains. It's also noteworthy because its history shows how members from both sides of the aisle routinely mount political attacks under the guise of legislating.

Yes, this happens all the time, but the 9/11 bill provides an illustrative example that's too perfect not to describe.

Close observers of politics and Youtube might remember when Anthony Weiner lost his cool on the House floor back in July.



Read more: http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/09/29/the-911-bill-and-political-maneuvering/#ixzz17uzhnVOl





In the clip, Weiner accuses Republicans of “wrapping their arms around Republicans rather than doing the right thing on behalf of the heroes!” Here's what Weiner's tirade and today's House vote were really all about. The short version: political posturing. The long version:

The first House vote on the 9/11 bill was brought up in a way requiring a 2/3 majority vote to pass and prohibiting any amendments. Enough Republicans voted against the bill for it to fall short of a 2/3 majority not because they didn't support the bill itself, <span style='font-size: 14pt'>but because they wanted the chance to offer amendments. Specifically, they wanted to offer an amendment that would exclude illegal immigrants from the benefits provided in the bill. Allowing this amendment to be offered would have forced Democrats to take a tough stand on illegal immigrants in a way that most likely would have divided them and made them vulnerable to political attacks later on. Democrats would not allow this.</span>The result was that the 9/11 bill did not pass, despite having, at that time, fairly broad bipartisan support.

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>Then today, Democrats brought the bill up again under normal House rules. This meant they were basically assured passage, but had to stomach Republican proposals to change the bill. Republicans were eager for this opportunity because it gave them a chance to offer what's called a “motion to recommit.” The Republican motion, as it turns out, had almost nothing to do with the 9/11 bill.

Instead, the motion would have rolled back a few key provisions in the Affordable Care Act, particularly those that are highly unpopular or easy to caricature. The motion would have, for example, repealed the Independent Payment Advisory Board, a 15-member independent panel created by the ACA and charged with figuring out ways to cut Medicare payment rates to keep them from increasing so quickly. (Political attack version: “Mr. Congressman voted to ration Medicare.”) The motion would have also yanked $100 million in funding in the ACA for a health center at the University of Connecticut. (Political attack version: “Ms. Congressman voted for a sweetheart deal for Connecticut at the expense of taxpayers.”) Additionally, the motion would have enacted strict malpractice reform, setting a 3-year statute of limitations on malpractice claims and capping non-economic damages at $250,000. (Political attack version: “Mr. Congressman voted against tort reform.” Version 2: “Mr. Congressman voted for tort reform.”)

Republicans knew their motion to recommit had no chance of passing. The purpose of offering it was to force House Democrats to take another vote on health care reform.</span>

How many votes on the Affordable Care Act are Democrats going to be forced to make? A lot more, if today is any guide. Over in the Senate, Republican Mike Enzi offered a bill today that he knew would fail. It would have repealed the grandfathering provisions in the ACA; it went down 40-59. (Political attack version: “Mr. Senator voted against allowing you to keep your health insurance even if you like it.”)

Today's votes make you wonder about the viability of rolling back even the most unpopular pieces of the Affordable Care Act. More centrally, they also make you wonder how much our great legislative body could accomplish if they did away with symbolic, purely political maneuvers.

<span style="color: #990000"> <span style='font-size: 20pt'>Who was playing partisan politics, while holding the help for these ill people hostage, to other legislative manueverings? Looks to me like Repupblicans did that, not Democratics! </span> </span>

Read more: http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/09/29/the-911-bill-and-political-maneuvering/#ixzz17v0ImbSu


<span style="color: #990000">Dems have been trying to get this passed for mo0nths upon months.

Regardless of how it was presented, Republoicans voted against it every time, blocked it every way they c ould think of, and signaled they would NEVER vo9te for providing these people with money for their many illnesses.

How can you, in view of the history of Democratic Attempts, to get this thing through, now accusse them of polaying partisan politics?

NOT FAIR!

G.
G. </span>

eg8r
12-12-2010, 07:35 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">that is not true. Economists from both sides of the isle have stated that without the President's stimulus, unemployment would be as high as thirty percent.
</div></div>Now you are being dishonest or ignoring Obama and his economists own words. They said they would not allow UE to get past 7 or 8% or something like that. LOL, only you would actually believe anything these guys say after being wrong every single time they open their mouth.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">CBO has provided numbers to prove that millions of jobs were saved, and well over million jobs created.
</div></div>Maybe you should pull you nose out of your partisan fluff jobs and actually look at what is happening in reality. Millions of jobs saved while increasing UE another .2%. UE has actually gotten worse in the past few months but if an idiot was to listen to you they would be led to believe jobs were just around the corner.

You deny reality.

eg8r

eg8r

eg8r
12-12-2010, 07:36 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This isn't a game. </div></div>You are darn right, so tell me why your guys have done nothing since 2007? Why don't they have a standalone bill? Why are they trying to tuck it into a bill where it does not belong?

eg8r

eg8r
12-12-2010, 07:36 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There is no debating with these righties. They'd prefer petty, juvenile, school yard games.
</div></div>Actually gayle, I am just doing what you do every time we ask why your guys dropped the ball.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
12-13-2010, 06:10 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There is no debating with these righties. They'd prefer petty, juvenile, school yard games.
</div></div>Actually gayle, I am just doing what you do every time we ask why your guys dropped the ball.

eg8r </div></div>

Actually Ed, you can't debate without being rude. That's a fact.

Also, It was YOUR guys, who ruined this country. Your guys who grew the government, launched two wars, misprosecuting both of them, your guys who cut taxes during wartime, a decision which ecoonomists from the right, and left, deplored, Your guys who failed to oversee the market, refused to get out of Iraq, and holding onto to a foreign policy that only made our country MORE at threat, a policy which five former Secretaries of State, denounced, Your guys, who spent us into a debt ditch, bridges to no where, and crooked deals with jack Abramoff, your guys who lied the country into an illegal, un-necessry, extremely costly war, which we are STILL paying for, your guys who oversaw the worst and most damaging outsourcing of American jobs, in history, and did nothing top stop the hemmorage, your guys who voted in a Liar and Chief, your guys who handed over what all agreed, was the worst mess any president had inherited since Roosevelt, to this president, and YOUR GUYS whose economic policies failed miserably, since economists have written dozens of books, all of them making it very clear, this crashed economy couldn't have been stopped, after 06, when we finally voted Republicans out.

It was YOUR GUYS who were saying give us eight hundred billion dollars, or the whole global economy will collapse, and we will have a decade long Depression.

It was John Behoner crying on the floor of the Senate, trying to get the money to pay off the crooks who crashed the economy.

It was your guys, who said that even if we could divert a Depression, we'd still be dealing with years of job loosses, and a bad economy.

And it's YOUR guys, who would prefer to dump the sick people who damaged teir health, on 9/11, trying to save Americans, than to raise taxes on the top one percent of corporate fascist pigs, who bilked America, with the help of Republican failed economic policies, and drove this country into the colossal mess that President Obama, AND the Democrtic majority, inherited.

It was my guys, who diverted Bush's Depression. We;d be at thirty percent unemployment right now, and have another war, that's right, three of them going, right now, if McInsane, and the Mooseburger, had won.

Why would anything you have to say about anything hold any interest to me, when you think you know more about Valarie Plames, secret covert status, than the Director of the CIA???

I have watched the communist Milton Freidman Economics, destroy more than one country. The Shock Doctrine, used to beat the people of a country into devastation, same way Bush and Cheney used fear, to get those contracts for their cronies in Iraq, in order to control the public, and steal from them long enough, to create a top two percent, making money hand over fists, using none of it to improve their country, but gouging the public, taking subsidies, compliments of the Grand Oil party, and the White HOusse Bush Oil cartel, while raising the price of gas on everyone, jut creat more money for the rich, and all the rest suffering.

Republicans desroyed my country. Bush, and te blank check Republican majority, put us right where we are, and like all of his other policies, this one leave no good options.

Facts are facts. Tax cuts for the wealthy, does not create jobs, period! The Republoicans have duped you folks AGAIN! Deficit hawks? BWA HA HA HA HA.....what a croock! Republican policies have created a global oligarchy, of thieves, who create slave populations, around the world, and exploit them, and no one improves their plight, except for the filthy rich, who exploit everyone else, and kiol p-e9opole all over the world, for the economic benefit, of the Military Industrial/Republican/Freidman/Oligarchy Complex.

G.

Gayle in MD
12-13-2010, 06:22 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">that is not true. Economists from both sides of the isle have stated that without the President's stimulus, unemployment would be as high as thirty percent.
</div></div>Now you are being dishonest or ignoring Obama and his economists own words. They said they would not allow UE to get past 7 or 8% or something like that.

<span style="color: #990000">Not allow? LMAO! That's got to be one of your most ridiculous statements of all time! So where is your link, to prove, that any Democratic said they would NOT ALLOW, unemployment to go above 8%? Don't be such a fool. Do you thiink the President, sets the unemployment rate?

hey, how about all of Bush's lies???? We[ll be iut in three months, and the Iraqi Oil, will pay for all of it????


You create lies, to support your lies, and then you wonder why I don't usually bother even trying to communicate with you. You're alomost as bad as BUSH! If you con't know the difference between a state goal, and a lie, then that should end the discussion, right there.

YOUR GUYS DESTROYED THE ECONOMY! REPUBLICAN POLICIES, FAILED, COMPLETELY!</span>


LOL, only you would actually believe anything these guys say after being wrong every single time they open their mouth.


<span style="color: #990000">Only YOU, could think your opinion is worthy of serious attention, when you still deny the statements of Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, and the Director of the CIA about Plames, Secret Covert Status, at the time that Bush/Cheney/Rove/Libby, orchestrated that treasonist ACT! Outing a covert CIA agent, to get back at her husband, for outing their colossal LIES they told in order to invade Iraq, for oil contracts for their cronies! They duped our soldiers who signed up because they THOUGHT they would be fighting al Qaeda, in Afghanistan, but that was NEVER in the plan, the PLAN, was struck between Dick cheney, and Halliburton, costing this country billions upon billioins of dollars, and hundreds of thousands of people are dead, and immigrants, because of their filothy underhanded, thievery!

Bush/Cheney/Rove/Libby, orchestrated that treasonist ACT! </span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">CBO has provided numbers to prove that millions of jobs were saved, and well over million jobs created.
</div></div>Maybe you should pull you nose out of your partisan fluff jobs and actually look at what is happening in reality.

<span style="color: #990000">Bush, and the blanc check Republican Majority, borrowed more money than all previous administrations, combined! YOU need to wake up to the facts! The economy, was in a downward spiral, picking up job loss steam, the entire time that Bush was destroying the great shape, that Bill Clintoon left this copuntry enjoying. </span>


Millions of jobs saved while increasing UE another .2%. UE has actually gotten worse in the past few months but if an idiot was to listen to you they would be led to believe jobs were just around the corner.

You deny reality.

<span style="color: #990000">You deny reality, Ed. Your Republicans destroyed this country, and all predicted a very, very slow job recovery. EVERYONE in the field of economiics, predicted this long, slow recovery, and it would have been worse, without the government stepping in to lesson the blow, and try to save jobs, and stimulate the economy.

And the colossally stupid nay sayers, who deny global warming, are now throwing up road blocks, just as Reagan and the F-ed up Republicans have done, all along, for the benefit of the polluting oil corporations, while CHINA, is spending trillions, on their shiney new high speed rail system, and renewable fuels, and super batteries, and solar panels, and using our interest on Bush's debts, to finance it all, and CHINA, is making most of the solar panels, that are sold here! TRACK THAT ALL THE WAY BACK TO RONALD REAGAN, TEARING THE SLAR PANELS OFF THE WHITE HOUSE ROOF, SIGNALING TO BIG OIL, NO CONSERVATION, NO PROGRESS AWAY FROM OIL, NO WORRIES, THE BIGGEST CORPORATE FASCIST PIG THAT EVER LIVED, AND ONLY W. WAS A WORSE PRESIDENT THAN REAGAN!

BUSH, AND REPUUBLICANS SIGNALED TO THE MARKETS, DO WHAT YOU WANT, NO BODY IS WATCHING! AND THEY DID, THEY BILKED THE REST OF US OUT OF THE COUNTRY'S COMBINED WEALTH, TOOK MOST OF IT, AND NOW REPUBLICANS WANT TO GIVE THEM MORE TAX CUTS!

PIGS!

AGain, Republican policies, that roadblocked progress for all Americans, in the interest of the corporate fascist pigs. Same crooks that crashed the economy.

G.</span>

eg8r

eg8r </div></div>

eg8r
12-13-2010, 09:10 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Do you thiink the President, sets the unemployment rate?

</div></div>What I think is that he doesn't know what he is doing and the country is getting worse because of his policy.

Every time you post something "positive" about the economy it tends to get worse. You never come back and rebut your statements with the corrections made by the people who gave you bad info in the first place. You deny reality.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
12-13-2010, 09:29 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Do you thiink the President, sets the unemployment rate?

</div></div>What I think is that he doesn't know what he is doing and the country is getting worse because of his policy.

Every time you post something "positive" about the economy it tends to get worse. You never come back and rebut your statements with the corrections made by the people who gave you bad info in the first place. You deny reality.

eg8r </div></div>


<span style="color: #990000">When you own up to all of your blind support for the Bush Administration, and their many, many lies and broken laws, and the devastation in which they left this country, you can start throwing stones.

Until then, you haven't even owned up to the reality that there was a concerted effort by the Bush administration, 23 of his top people, involved in outing a covert agent. TREASON.

The fact that the Bush administration, politicized the entire department of Justice, so they could divert Rep[ublican low breaking, seems to slip past your on-going concerted efforts to protect the very Administration which brought this country to it's knees.

G. </span>

http://www.thinkprogress.org/leak-scandal

eg8r
12-13-2010, 09:34 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When you own up to all of your blind support for the Bush Administration, and their many, many lies and broken laws, and the devastation in which they left this country, you can start throwing stones.

</div></div>What was that stuff you were telling us about getting back to the subject?

eg8r

Gayle in MD
12-13-2010, 09:39 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When you own up to all of your blind support for the Bush Administration, and their many, many lies and broken laws, and the devastation in which they left this country, you can start throwing stones.

</div></div>What was that stuff you were telling us about getting back to the subject?

eg8r </div></div>
You are the oje who to0ok us off the subject. I can stay on the subject, just fine, as long as I put YOU on ignore...

Check out your own subjce changing efforts, after the folloowing post by myself.....

It was an issue for Democrats all along.

Republicans blocked it.

I would think you'd be more sickened by what Republicans did this week, blocking the money for the first responders, than anything else.

g.

Also, I haven't seen any reports that have been hugely different from anything that I have posted here, whiloe OTOH&lt; we have righties, denying realoity, daily.

G.

eg8r
12-13-2010, 01:14 PM
What does your post about Bush have to do with anything in this thread?

eg8r

Gayle in MD
12-13-2010, 06:08 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What does your post about Bush have to do with anything in this thread?

eg8r </div></div>

It addresses your pot shots, and addressing your own hypocrisy.

Now go along, Ed, I am not going to allow yu to divert every thread, with your silliness.

I've p[osted the truth, that Democratics, could not have been just using this for politics, when I have posted links, that prove, they have been trying to help our ill first responders, for years!!!!

While your Repuglicans, have been blocking it, for years.

End of Story.

Sickening? Yes, Repiglicans are sickening. That's why I am proud to say, that I would NEVER VOTE FOR A REPIGLICAN!

G.

eg8r
12-13-2010, 07:17 PM
They don't address anything. You told me to stay on subject yet you did not bother to heed your own advice. I guess when you tell people to stay on subject that should as much weight as when you ask them not to call people names. Basically what you are saying is "do as I say NOT as I do".

eg8r

Qtec
12-14-2010, 02:37 AM
Like you have ever made a post when you:

Stayed on topic.
Answered a question.
Not called anyone a name or called them by some childish name you made up...............Qtip?

What a hypocrite you are.

Q