PDA

View Full Version : Christie called a 'Bully', a 'Punk' and a' 'pr--k'



Qtec
07-05-2011, 12:31 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There was a lot of anger pouring out from Democrats in New Jersey over their budget battle. I've heard Sweeney is in hot water also and he responded to Christie's line-item veto by having one of the angriest responses I've ever heard.


Senate President Stephen Sweeney went to bed furious Thursday night after reviewing the governor’s line-item veto of the state budget.

He woke up Friday morning even angrier.

“<span style='font-size: 11pt'>This is all about him being a bully and a punk</span>,” he said in an interview Friday.

“I wanted to punch him in his head.”

Sweeney had just risked his political neck to support the governor’s pension and health reform, and his reward was a slap across the face. The governor’s budget was a brusque rejection of every Democratic move, and Sweeney couldn’t even get an audience with the governor to discuss it.

“You know who he reminds me of?” Sweeney says. “Mr. Potter from ‘It’s a Wonderful Life,’ <u>the mean old bastard who screws everybody.”</u>

This is not your regular budget dispute. This is personal. And it could have seismic impact on state politics.

Because the working alliance between these two men is the central political fact in New Jersey these days. If that changes, this brief and productive era of bipartisan cooperation is over.

“Last night I couldn’t calm down,” Sweeney said. “To prove a point to me – a guy who has stood side by side with him, and made tough decisions – for him to punish people to prove his political point? He’s just a rotten bastard to do what he did.”

It is a law of nature that Democrats and Republicans fight over budgets, like dogs chasing cats. And both parties are playing to their ideological scripts in this dispute.

But Sweeney’s beef with the governor goes much deeper. He feels the governor has acted in bad faith.

<span style='font-size: 11pt'>The governor’s budget, he says, is full of vindictive cuts designed to punish Democrats, and anyone else who dared to defy him. And he is furious that the governor refused to talk to him during the final week</span>.

“After all the heavy lifting that’s been done – the property tax cap, the interest arbitration reform, the pension and health care reform – and the guy wouldn’t even talk to me?” Sweeney asks.

The details are even uglier. The governor, Sweeney said, personally told him they would talk. His staff called Sweeney and asked him to remain close all day Wednesday. At one point, the staff told him the governor planned to call in five minutes.

No call.

No negotiations.

“I sat in my office all day like a nitwit, figuring we were going to talk,” Sweeney says.

As for the vindictive cuts, Sweeney’s list of suspects is a long one. </div></div>

link (http://blog.nj.com/njv_tom_moran/2011/07/democrats_cry_foul_at_gov_chri.html)

It gets worse.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><u>When Democrats tried to restore money to a few favorite programs — including college scholarships for poor students, and legal aid for the needy — the governor not only rejected the additions, he added new cuts on top of that.</u>

He mowed down a series of Democratic add-ons, including <span style='font-size: 14pt'>$45 million in tax credits for the working poor, $9 million in health care for the working poor, $8 million for women’s health care, another $8 million in AIDS funding and $9 million in mental-health services.</span>

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>But the governor added $150 million in school aid for the suburbs, including the wealthiest towns in the state. That is enough to restore all the cuts just listed.</span>

"Listen, you can punch me in the face and knock me down, do what you want," Sweeney says. <span style="color: #3333FF">"But don’t be vindictive and punish innocent people. These people didn’t do anything to him. It’s like a bank robber taking hostages. And now he’s starting to shoot people. </span></div></div>

This is what you get when a New Republican gets into power.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Democrats, who Christie said were "pandering to special interests" are expected to return next week and fight the reductions.
"<span style='font-size: 14pt'>There are special interests</span>," Senate President Stephen Sweeney (D-Gloucester) responded. <span style='font-size: 17pt'>"They are called seniors, the middle class and low-income families who the governor just decimated. We are just beginning to digest the cuts in the budget, but they are extremely cruel and mean-spirited. </span></div></div>

...and Christie says "Happy 4th people" ...as he steps onto the chopper.

Watch this video from Current’s Countdown with Keith Olbermann, (http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/07/all-out-war-between-new-jerseys-senate-president-and-governor/)

Q

Q

LWW
07-05-2011, 05:04 AM
And ... on cue ... you cheerfully support those who advocate violence.

I wish I could say I was surprised.

Qtec
07-05-2011, 05:22 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And ... on cue ... you cheerfully support those who advocate violence.

I wish I could say I was surprised. </div></div>

Yeah. LWW finally admits it, he is a moron!

Explain how your nutjob statement has anything to do with the topic.

Q.......nutjob.

LWW
07-05-2011, 05:32 AM
I must confess ... I have an unfair advantage, I read your link.

To answer your question, and show what an uber-nit you truly are, this is from your link:

<span style="color: #FF0000"><span style='font-family: Comic Sans MS'><u><span style='font-size: 26pt'>“I wanted to punch him in his head.”</span></u></span></span>

Anything else I can help you to understand?

Sev
07-05-2011, 06:03 AM
7500 union layoffs coming. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

LWW
07-05-2011, 07:04 AM
I wonder how many of them will resort to violence?

eg8r
07-05-2011, 08:01 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This is what you get when a New Republican gets into power.</div></div>I would prefer this over what the nation got when we elected a Democrat. At least this guy is talking budget cuts. Our new Democrat is spending our future away. It seems he is hell bent on beating W as the worst fiscal President in our history.

Why is it so tough for Dems to understand that tough times call for tough decisions.

eg8r

LWW
07-05-2011, 08:06 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why is it so tough for Dems to understand that tough times call for tough decisions.

eg8r </div></div>

Because the left's leadership incites the mob with imagery and emotion that the entire problem is the fault of (Insert demon of the day here.) ... that and mobs are incapable of rational thought.

Sev
07-05-2011, 06:26 PM
Because good intentions trump reality.

Qtec
07-05-2011, 07:11 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">This is what you get when a New Republican gets into power.</div></div>I would prefer this over what the nation got when we elected a Democrat. At least this guy is talking budget cuts. Our new Democrat is spending our future away. It seems he is hell bent on beating W as the worst fiscal President in our history.

Why is it so tough for Dems to understand that tough times call for tough decisions.

eg8r </div></div>

As usual, you are totally misinformed.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> But a close look at the numbers reveals a few important, and frequently overlooked facts. Domestic discretionary spending is a small sliver of the budget. Our deficit and debts can be traced to the fact that spending on entitlement programs and defense has shot up, and tax revenues have plummeted to their lowest level in decades. But spending on domestic discretionary programs has grown much more slowly. And, if you correct for inflation, and for growing population, it turns out we're spending exactly the same amount on these programs as we were a full decade ago.

These numbers come from Democrats on the Senate Appropriations Committee, who are doing their best to guard this turf.

"Although non-defense discretionary spending in nominal dollars has increased, when taking inflation and population growth into account the amount contained in the [2011 budget] represents no increase over what we spent in 2001, a year in which we generated a surplus of $128 billion," said chairman Daniel Inouye (D-HI) in a prepared statement. "So the right question to ask is: Are we really spending too much on non-defense programs? The answer is clearly no."

Committee staff put together the below table to emphasize the point.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/images/AppropsTable.jpg

In the wake of the Bush tax cuts, and the Great Recession, tax revenue has fallen through the floor to near-historic lows. As a percentage of GDP, it's fallen 24 percent since 2001, and if you correct for inflation, the government is collecting nearly 20 percent less per person than it was a decade ago. At the same time, the population-adjusted costs of mandatory spending programs -- driven by Medicare, including its new prescription drug benefit, and Medicaid -- have increased by over 30 percent. And, of course, defense spending has skyrocketed. But if you isolate domestic discretionary programs, a decade later we're spending no more on a per-person basis than we were back then.

</div></div>

link (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/07/chart-of-the-day-out-of-control-spending-not-really-out-of-control-at-all.php?ref=fpblg)

Q

eg8r
07-05-2011, 07:48 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As usual, you are totally misinformed.
</div></div>And by mis-informed you mean lack of sucking up all the lefty BS you can find on the net.

eg8r

Qtec
07-05-2011, 11:37 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">As usual, you are totally misinformed.
</div></div>And by mis-informed you mean lack of sucking up all the lefty BS you can find on the net.

eg8r </div></div>

Do you dispute the facts? These statistics are in bill S 1323!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">S. 1323
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of
Representatives of the United States of America in
Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON
SHARED SACRIFICE.
(a) Findings.--<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Congress makes the following
findings:</span>
(1) The Wall Street Journal reports that median
pay for chief financial officers of S&P 500 companies
increased 19 percent to $2,900,000 last year.
(2) Over the past 10 years, the median family
income has declined by more than $2,500.
(3) Twenty percent of all income earned in the
United States is earned by the top 1 percent of
individuals.
(4) Over the past quarter century, four-fifths of
the income gains accrued to the top 1 percent of
individuals.
(b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the
Senate that any agreement to reduce the budget
deficit should require that those earning $1,000,000
or more per year make a more meaningful
contribution to the deficit reduction effort </div></div>

in the papers yesterday (http://maxinity.net/2011/07/05/gop-saying-millionaires-should-share-pain-is-pathetic/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gop-saying-millionaires-should-share-pain-is-pathetic)

Q

Qtec
07-06-2011, 12:08 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">This is what you get when a New Republican gets into power.</div></div>I would prefer this over what the nation got when we elected a Democrat. At least this guy is talking budget cuts. Our new Democrat is spending our future away. It seems he is hell bent on beating W as the worst fiscal President in our history.

Why is it so tough for Dems to understand that tough times call for tough decisions.

eg8r </div></div>

Back to the subject.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Sweeney had just risked his political neck to <u>support the governor’s pension and health reform,</u> and his reward was a slap across the face. The governor’s budget was a brusque rejection of every Democratic move, and Sweeney couldn’t even get an audience with the governor to discuss it.</div></div>

This Dem , despite the anger from his own party, DID go along with budget cuts and look what he got in return. Lies and betrayal.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Our new Democrat is spending our future away. </div></div>

BS. Where do you get this stuff from? M Bachmann?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In the wake of the Bush tax cuts, and the Great Recession, <span style='font-size: 14pt'>tax revenue has fallen through the floor to near-historic lows. As a percentage of GDP, it's fallen 24 percent since 2001, and if you correct for inflation, the government is collecting nearly 20 percent less per person than it was a decade ago.</span> At the same time, the population-adjusted costs of mandatory spending programs -- driven by Medicare, including its new prescription drug benefit, and Medicaid -- have increased by over 30 percent. And, of course, defense spending has skyrocketed. <span style='font-size: 17pt'>But if you isolate domestic discretionary programs, a decade later we're spending no more on a per-person basis than we were back then.</span> </div></div>


Q......out of control spending?....remember this?


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Bush Plan a Boon to Drug Companies
Medicare Prescription Proposal Would Also Benefit Insurers, Analysts Say
by Mike Allen


Health care economists said the drug benefit President Bush proposed for Medicare yesterday would be a bonanza for the pharmaceutical and managed-care industries, both of which are huge donors to Republicans.

Bush went before the friendly audience of the American Medical Association at the Washington Hilton to ask Congress to pass incentives for millions of senior citizens to switch from Medicare, the federally funded health insurance program for the elderly, to private health insurance in return for drug coverage. Those who stayed in Medicare would receive more modest benefits, including a discount of 10 percent to 25 percent at the drugstore checkout.

Marilyn Moon, a health economist at the Urban Institute, said Bush's plan would hand tremendous negotiating power to health insurance companies.

"By making the private plans such a central part of the future of Medicare, <span style='font-size: 17pt'>the government is going to have to meet their demands for greater contributions to the cost of care,</span> over and above the subsidy for prescription drugs," Moon said. </div></div>

LWW
07-06-2011, 02:09 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">As usual, you are totally misinformed.
</div></div>And by mis-informed you mean lack of sucking up all the lefty BS you can find on the net.

eg8r </div></div>

I think you nailed it.

LWW
07-06-2011, 02:13 AM
Weren't you guys just recently trumpeting MEDICARE PART D as a shining example of gubmint efficiency and scoffing at the idea that it's efficiency came from it actually being a private sector plan?

And now, when the agenda requires it, you flip completely ... the left's doublethink is on display for all to see. Again.

Qtec
07-06-2011, 03:19 AM
True story.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> If you have ever wondered why the cost of prescription drugs in the United States are the highest in the world or why it's illegal to import cheaper drugs from Canada or Mexico, you need look no further than the pharmaceutical lobby and its influence in Washington, D.C.

According to a report by the Center for Public Integrity, congressmen are outnumbered two to one by lobbyists for an industry that spends roughly $100 million a year in campaign contributions and lobbying expenses to protect its profits.

One reason those profits have exceeded Wall Street expectations is the Medicare prescription drug bill. It was passed more than three-and-a-half years ago, but as 60 Minutes correspondent Steve Kroft reports, its effects are still reverberating through the halls of Congress, providing a window into how the lobby works.


<span style='font-size: 17pt'>The unorthodox roll call on one of the most expensive bills ever placed before the House of Representatives began in the middle of the night,</span> long after most people in Washington had switched off C-SPAN and gone to sleep.

The only witnesses were congressional staffers, hundreds of lobbyists, and U.S. representatives, like Dan Burton, R-Ind., and Walter Jones, R-N.C.

"The pharmaceutical lobbyists wrote the bill," says Jones. "The bill was over 1,000 pages. And it got to the members of the House that morning, and we voted for it at about 3 a.m. in the morning," remembers Jones.

Why did the vote finally take place at 3 a.m.?

"Well, I think a lot of the shenanigans that were going on that night, they didn't want on national television in primetime," according to Burton.

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>"I've been in politics for 22 years," says Jones, "and it was the ugliest night I have ever seen in 22 years."</span>

The legislation was the cornerstone of Republican's domestic agenda and would extend limited prescription drugs coverage under Medicare to 41 million Americans, including 13 million who had never been covered before.

At an estimated cost of just under $400 billion <span style="color: #990000"> Yeah right! Its more than double that. </span>over 10 years, it was the largest entitlement program in more than 40 years, and the debate broke down along party lines.

<span style="color: #990000">But when it came time to cast ballots, the Republican leadership discovered that a number of key Republican congressmen had defected and joined the Democrats, arguing that the bill was too expensive and a sellout to the drug companies.</span> Burton and Jones were among them.

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>"They're suppose to have 15 minutes to leave the voting machines open and it was open for almost three hours," Burton explains. "The votes were there to defeat the bill for two hours and 45 minutes and we had leaders going around and gathering around individuals, trying to twist their arms to get them to change their votes."</span>

Jones says the arm-twisting was horrible.

"We had a good friend from Michigan, Nick Smith, and they threatened to work against his son who wanted to run for his seat when he retired," he recalls. <u>"I saw a woman, a member of the House, a lady, crying when they came around her, trying to get her to change her votes. It was ugly."</u>

When the prescription drug bill finally passed shortly before dawn, in the longest roll call in the history of the House of Representatives, much of the credit went to former Congressman Billy Tauzin, R-La., who steered it through the house.

"It's just a messy process," Tauzin says. "I mean, the old adage about if you like sausage or laws, you should not watch either one of them being made is true. It's a messy process."

Tauzin says that the voting machines were open for three hours "because the vote wasn't finished."

As for arms being twisted? "People were being talked to," he says.

And of Walter Jones' comment that it was the "ugliest night" he had "ever seen in politics in 22 years?"

"Well, he's a young member," counters Tauzin with a laugh. "Had he been around for 25 years, he'd have seen some uglier nights."
</div></div>

Then if we we add Beohner to the equation - handing out cheques on the Senate floor RIGHT before a vote - what do we have?

A corrupt GOP, bought and paid for by big money.

Q....clear as day......... link (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/29/60minutes/main2625305.shtml)

LWW
07-06-2011, 04:17 AM
I don't see anyone defending the GOP.

I do see plenty of leftists willing to run interference for the Obama regime, no matter what the sin.

Now ... why are you cheering that this thugocrat was inciting the mob to violence?

eg8r
07-06-2011, 09:18 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">BS. Where do you get this stuff from?</div></div>Pull your liberal head out of that sand and look around. You will be amazed at what you will see.

eg8r

eg8r
07-06-2011, 09:19 AM
You wouldn't know a fact if it hit you in the face.

eg8r