PDA

View Full Version : Republicans Vow Filibuster of Reid Debt Limit Plan



Qtec
07-31-2011, 01:36 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 14pt'>Republicans Vow Filibuster of Reid Debt Limit Plan</span>
By: David Dayen Saturday July 30, 2011 12:35 pm

TweetTweet3
digg stumbleupon

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>43 Republicans have signed a letter to Harry Reid saying they will not vote for his plan tonight to increase the debt limit.</span> This dooms passage <span style='font-size: 17pt'>because of the de facto supermajority requirement needed to move legislation in the United States Senate, </span>something that Democrats could have legislated out of existence at the beginning of the Congressional session.

This actually isnít as bad as I expected. Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, Scott Brown and Lisa Murkowski did not sign this letter. That puts Reid only three votes shy of an agreement. In addition, this is a rejection of the original Reid bill. He has time to maneuver to attract those three additional votes. Just as an example, making the Gang of Six plan the trigger would almost certainly attract the three Republican members of the Gang.

However, itís not so much the raw numbers as the act of sending it my Mitch McConnell that speaks volumes. <span style='font-size: 17pt'>It means that McConnell is committed to blocking the Reid plan via filibuster.</span> It means that heís not done extracting concessions. It means that heís essentially operating on behalf of John Boehner and the House Republicans, who want the maximum possible policies in place before committing to increasing the debt limit. The Senate wonít pass their solution with 60 votes, in all likelihood. Itíll probably take 80-85, with minor falloffs on both sides. That deal can only look worse than it does now, and right now it looks pretty bad </div></div>

Q... filibuster (http://news.firedoglake.com/2011/07/30/republicans-vow-filibuster-of-reid-debt-limit-plan/)

LWW
07-31-2011, 03:37 AM
I watched that debacle ... Reid filibustered his own plan, doing so because he claimed the R's would filibuster it ... even though they were calling for a vote, and then Reid's plan lost.

What a sorry lot this senate is.

Qtec
07-31-2011, 04:08 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I watched that debacle ... Reid filibustered his own plan, doing so because he claimed the R's would filibuster it ... even though they were calling for a vote, and then Reid's plan lost.

What a sorry lot this senate is. </div></div>

TOTAL BS. PROVE IT.

Q

Qtec
07-31-2011, 04:17 AM
If Reid's plan had passed the house and went to the senate, would it have been voted on a straight up or down majority vote?

If it needs 60 votes, its been filibustered, right?

Waiting...........

Q

LWW
07-31-2011, 06:58 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">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I watched that debacle ... Reid filibustered his own plan, doing so because he claimed the R's would filibuster it ... even though they were calling for a vote, and then Reid's plan lost.

What a sorry lot this senate is. </div></div>

TOTAL BS. PROVE IT.

Q </div></div>

OK.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Senate Republicans want a 60-vote threshold for a debt-limit bill to pass the chamber, <span style='font-size: 14pt'>but it's actually Democrats who are enforcing the filibuster on their own legislation, insisting on delaying a vote until 1 a.m. Sunday morning.</span>

<span style='font-size: 11pt'>Republicans offered to let the vote happen Friday night, just minutes after the chamber voted to halt a House Republican bill.</span> All sides expect Democrats' bill will fail too, and the GOP said senators might as well kill both at the same time so that negotiations could move on to a compromise.

<span style='font-size: 11pt'>"We would be happy to have that vote tonight," </span>Sen. Mitch McConnell, Republicans' leader, offered.

But Senate Majority Leader <span style='font-size: 14pt'>Harry Reid objected, even though the vote would occur on his own bill. He instead said the chamber would have to run out the full procedural clock, which means a vote in the early hours Sunday morning.</span></div></div>

THAT WAS EASY! (http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2011/jul/30/democrats-enforce-filibuster-against-own-debt-bill/)

Gayle in MD
07-31-2011, 08:04 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"><span style='font-size: 14pt'>Republicans Vow Filibuster of Reid Debt Limit Plan</span>
By: David Dayen Saturday July 30, 2011 12:35 pm

TweetTweet3
digg stumbleupon

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>43 Republicans have signed a letter to Harry Reid saying they will not vote for his plan tonight to increase the debt limit.</span> This dooms passage <span style='font-size: 17pt'>because of the de facto supermajority requirement needed to move legislation in the United States Senate, </span>something that Democrats could have legislated out of existence at the beginning of the Congressional session.

This actually isnít as bad as I expected. Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, Scott Brown and Lisa Murkowski did not sign this letter. That puts Reid only three votes shy of an agreement. In addition, this is a rejection of the original Reid bill. He has time to maneuver to attract those three additional votes. Just as an example, making the Gang of Six plan the trigger would almost certainly attract the three Republican members of the Gang.

However, itís not so much the raw numbers as the act of sending it my Mitch McConnell that speaks volumes. <span style='font-size: 17pt'>It means that McConnell is committed to blocking the Reid plan via filibuster.</span> It means that heís not done extracting concessions. It means that heís essentially operating on behalf of John Boehner and the House Republicans, who want the maximum possible policies in place before committing to increasing the debt limit. The Senate wonít pass their solution with 60 votes, in all likelihood. Itíll probably take 80-85, with minor falloffs on both sides. That deal can only look worse than it does now, and right now it looks pretty bad </div></div>

Q... filibuster (http://news.firedoglake.com/2011/07/30/republicans-vow-filibuster-of-reid-debt-limit-plan/) </div></div>

Repiglicans won't be happy until they bring about another complete economic collapse, hence, they will be able to move Their REAL plan forward, The Shock Doctrine.

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come waving the flag, carrying the cross."

LWW
07-31-2011, 08:32 AM
Should these enemies of the state also be "THINNED OUT" mein fuehrerette?

Qtec
07-31-2011, 09:37 AM
The VERY first line from your link dumba$$.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 17pt'>Senate Republicans want a 60-vote threshold for a debt-limit bill to pass the chamber,</span> </div></div>

ie, filibuster.

Also,

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> But Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid objected, even though the vote would occur on his own bill. He instead said the chamber would have to run out the full procedural clock, which means a vote in the early hours Sunday morning.

He said he would be willing to move up the vote <span style='font-size: 17pt'>if Republicans didn't insist on a 60-vote threshold,</span>

ie filibuster.</div></div>

All the GOP are doing is time wasting.

Q

Gayle in MD
07-31-2011, 10:11 AM
And damaging the recovery, destablizing the markets, and lying to the public.

I've been thinking of standing at the door of the Senate Office Building and handing out diapers and binkies to the Repigs as they go in.

G.

LWW
07-31-2011, 02:51 PM
You are truly an uber tool.

Just for grins:

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>ďIn the Senate, itís always been the case you need 60 votes.Ē</span>
<span style='font-size: 11pt'>-Harry Reid-</span>
<span style='font-size: 8pt'>5 March, 2007</span>

OH DEAR! (http://republican.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/blog?ID=e2851d67-297b-4855-a8cf-e2a1ca6db0a6)

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>"The Need To Muster 60 VotesÖ Is A Tool That Serves The Long-Term Interest Of The Senate And The American People And Our Country."</span>
<span style='font-size: 11pt'>-Harry Reid-</span>
<span style='font-size: 8pt'>8 December, 2006</span>

OH MY! (http://startthinkingright.wordpress.com/2011/07/31/unconscionable-worm-harry-reid-demonizes-republicans-for-60-vote-requirement-read-reids-own-previous-words/)

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>ď60 votes are required for just about everything.Ē</span>
<span style='font-size: 11pt'>-Harry Reid-</span>
<span style='font-size: 8pt'>30 January, 2007</span>

SNOOPY CRASHES AGAIN! (http://startthinkingright.wordpress.com/2011/07/31/unconscionable-worm-harry-reid-demonizes-republicans-for-60-vote-requirement-read-reids-own-previous-words/)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Senate Republicans want a 60-vote threshold for a debt-limit bill to pass the chamber, but it's actually Democrats who are enforcing the filibuster on their own legislation, insisting on delaying a vote until 1 a.m. Sunday morning.</div></div>

TRUTH VERSUS TRUTHINESS (http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2011/jul/30/democrats-enforce-filibuster-against-own-debt-bill/)

Soflasnapper
07-31-2011, 05:26 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><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">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I watched that debacle ... Reid filibustered his own plan, doing so because he claimed the R's would filibuster it ... even though they were calling for a vote, and then Reid's plan lost.

What a sorry lot this senate is. </div></div>

TOTAL BS. PROVE IT.

Q </div></div>

OK.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Senate Republicans want a 60-vote threshold for a debt-limit bill to pass the chamber, <span style='font-size: 14pt'>but it's actually Democrats who are enforcing the filibuster on their own legislation, insisting on delaying a vote until 1 a.m. Sunday morning.</span>

<span style='font-size: 11pt'>Republicans offered to let the vote happen Friday night, just minutes after the chamber voted to halt a House Republican bill.</span> All sides expect Democrats' bill will fail too, and the GOP said senators might as well kill both at the same time so that negotiations could move on to a compromise.

<span style='font-size: 11pt'>"We would be happy to have that vote tonight," </span>Sen. Mitch McConnell, Republicans' leader, offered.

But Senate Majority Leader <span style='font-size: 14pt'>Harry Reid objected, even though the vote would occur on his own bill. He instead said the chamber would have to run out the full procedural clock, which means a vote in the early hours Sunday morning.</span></div></div>

THAT WAS EASY! (http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2011/jul/30/democrats-enforce-filibuster-against-own-debt-bill/) </div></div>

That's spin from the WaTimes BLOG! An opinion, a characterization, nothing more.

You are easily fooled. But I repeat myself.

Soflasnapper
07-31-2011, 05:29 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Repiglicans won't be happy until they bring about another complete economic collapse, hence, they will be able to move Their REAL plan forward, The Shock Doctrine.

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come waving the flag, carrying the cross." </div></div>

Sorta true, not entirely. (The last quote IS true, and is coming about as we speak).

I don't think the average Republican, or even the average Republican in the Congress, will really be that happy if/when that occurs. They have an alternate reality they've been indoctrinated into, as a cult, where the results of this will be good, not disastrous.

I think when that happens, they will echo the disputed and probably apocryphal quote attributed to Wilson, re: the Federal Reserve (paraphrasing): "I am a most unhappy person. I have unwittingly brought ruin to the country."

cushioncrawler
07-31-2011, 06:58 PM
No, they will say what their types allways says.
[1] Our medicine woz good, but we didnt uze enuff.
[2] Our medicine woz good, but we were too late.
[3] Our medicine woz good, but things were so sick overseas that it didnt work.
[4] Yes, the patient died, but heshe would hav been much worse off if not for our medicine.
[5] If there woz a better medicine dont u think we would hav tryd it.
mac.

Gayle in MD
07-31-2011, 07:41 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Repiglicans won't be happy until they bring about another complete economic collapse, hence, they will be able to move Their REAL plan forward, The Shock Doctrine.

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come waving the flag, carrying the cross." </div></div>

Sorta true, not entirely. (The last quote IS true, and is coming about as we speak).

I don't think the average Republican, or even the average Republican in the Congress, will really be that happy if/when that occurs. They have an alternate reality they've been indoctrinated into, as a cult, where the results of this will be good, not disastrous.

I think when that happens, they will echo the disputed and probably apocryphal quote attributed to Wilson, re: the Federal Reserve (paraphrasing): "I am a most unhappy person. I have unwittingly brought ruin to the country." </div></div>


I'm sorry, but I am not following you. Your two paragraphs seem to contradict one another.

The last paragraph predicts something I have never witnessed. The right, admitting they screwed up and destroyed the country?

That would surely be a first! I've never seen them own up to any of their failed policies, or the resulting disastrous consequences they created.

G.

Stretch
07-31-2011, 07:49 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cushioncrawler</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No, they will say what their types allways says.
[1] Our medicine woz good, but we didnt uze enuff.
[2] Our medicine woz good, but we were too late.
[3] Our medicine woz good, but things were so sick overseas that it didnt work.
[4] Yes, the patient died, but heshe would hav been much worse off if not for our medicine.
[5] If there woz a better medicine dont u think we would hav tryd it.
mac. </div></div>

The only side effect to this medicine is bankruptcy. St.

Soflasnapper
07-31-2011, 08:07 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I'm sorry, but I am not following you. Your two paragraphs seem to contradict one another.

The last paragraph predicts something I have never witnessed. The right, admitting they screwed up and destroyed the country?

That would surely be a first! I've never seen them own up to any of their failed policies, or the resulting disastrous consequences they created.</div></div>

Good point. The admissions are only done behind the scenes.

When David Stockman (head of Reagan's OMB) gave the forecast of $200 billion dollar deficits 'as far as the eye can see,' James A. Baker, III (one of the 3 Reagan aides known as 'the troika') exclaimed, 'Holy sh!t! You mean it really IS voodoo economics!?!?!' (This is from the well-regarded book, 'The Role of a Lifetime,' by Lou Cannon, or perhaps the equally well-respected 'The Acting President,' by Bob Shieffer. Sorry, forget which just now.)

No public admission followed, but suddenly, in the throes of a very bad economy, his advisors induced Reagan to accept the largest tax hike still to this very day in human history, via canceling the corporation side of his tax cuts just the previous year. Moreover, in an unusual and perhaps unprecedented (not to mention, possibly unConstitutional) act, writing the bill was done by the Republican Chairman of the Finance Committee, Sen. Bob Dole, not originated in the House.

The Republicans WERE far more responsible then, and willing to backtrack on the horrible consequences of their prior act.

Ultimately, I do not believe most Republicans are hard right. And even if they are, surely, as their policies bring on their inevitable ruin, at least they will rue what that does to their re-election chances, if not personally felt disgrace.

cushioncrawler
07-31-2011, 08:19 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Stretch</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cushioncrawler</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No, they will say what their types allways says.
[1] Our medicine woz good, but we didnt uze enuff.
[2] Our medicine woz good, but we were too late.
[3] Our medicine woz good, but things were so sick overseas that it didnt work.
[4] Yes, the patient died, but heshe would hav been much worse off if not for our medicine.
[5] If there woz a better medicine dont u think we would hav tryd it.
mac. </div></div>The only side effect to this medicine is bankruptcy. St.</div></div>The medicine i am talking about iz krappynomix. If krappynomix iz taken in accordance with the instructions the rezult iz a dead ekonomy.
mac.

Gayle in MD
07-31-2011, 08:48 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I'm sorry, but I am not following you. Your two paragraphs seem to contradict one another.

The last paragraph predicts something I have never witnessed. The right, admitting they screwed up and destroyed the country?

That would surely be a first! I've never seen them own up to any of their failed policies, or the resulting disastrous consequences they created.</div></div>

Good point. The admissions are only done behind the scenes.

When David Stockman (head of Reagan's OMB) gave the forecast of $200 billion dollar deficits 'as far as the eye can see,' James A. Baker, III (one of the 3 Reagan aides known as 'the troika') exclaimed, 'Holy sh!t! You mean it really IS voodoo economics!?!?!' (This is from the well-regarded book, 'The Role of a Lifetime,' by Lou Cannon, or perhaps the equally well-respected 'The Acting President,' by Bob Shieffer. Sorry, forget which just now.)

No public admission followed, but suddenly, in the throes of a very bad economy, his advisors induced Reagan to accept the largest tax hike still to this very day in human history, via canceling the corporation side of his tax cuts just the previous year. Moreover, in an unusual and perhaps unprecedented (not to mention, possibly unConstitutional) act, writing the bill was done by the Republican Chairman of the Finance Committee, Sen. Bob Dole, not originated in the House.

The Republicans WERE far more responsible then, and willing to backtrack on the horrible consequences of their prior act.

Ultimately, I do not believe most Republicans are hard right. And even if they are, surely, as their policies bring on their inevitable ruin, at least they will rue what that does to their re-election chances, if not personally felt disgrace. </div></div>

<span style="color: #990000"> I must respectfully disagree with your last paragraph.

I don't believe "most' Republicans are not hard right, at least, that isn't what I am seeing or hearing.

I'm not even sure their disgraceful behavior, and obvious destruction to our country, will be sufficiently understood, or that they will be sufficiently punished for it, by the voters.

The last election was a commentary to the dumbing down of the American public, and to the power of propaganda.

I'm not sure there are enough informed Americans around anymore, to properly dole out the slap down that RW radical extremists, deserve, which, IMO, represents the vast majority of Repubicans currently in office.

Sadly, there are only a very few, with any conscience, and fewer still, with any economic knowledge, or even basic common sense, as far as I can tell.

While this time, as in any time, is a good time to reduce wasteful spending, this is no time to make reducing deficits, more important than creating jobs, investing in education, providing aid to the ill, the hungry and the old, and spending on renewable fuels, infrastructure, and the environment.

When the right blocks spending, it will be a straight shot to more unemployment.

We've known this for decades.

Their game is to block and filibuster the recovery, and hope that will get them back into power in the Senate, and in the White House.

Between their irrational spending cuts, and their obstructionist bahavior, and their consistant blocking of spending to stimulate, they could not possibly have the best interests of the people at heart.

They are clearly going to make another economic disaster.

Democratics have not stood their ground to the degree that I believe they should have.

This House of Representatives, deserves a good ASS kicking!

G.
</span>

eg8r
08-01-2011, 07:46 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This actually isnít as bad as I expected. Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, Scott Brown and Lisa Murkowski did not sign this letter. That puts Reid only three votes shy of an agreement. In addition, this is a rejection of the original Reid bill. He has time to maneuver to attract those three additional votes. Just as an example, making the Gang of Six plan the trigger would almost certainly attract the three Republican members of the Gang.
</div></div>Why bold all the fluff that doesn't mean anything and ignore the meat? I applaud every Republican that signed that paper to reject Reid. This should happen every time he opens his mouth.

eg8r

Sid_Vicious
08-01-2011, 10:34 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I'm sorry, but I am not following you. Your two paragraphs seem to contradict one another.

The last paragraph predicts something I have never witnessed. The right, admitting they screwed up and destroyed the country?

That would surely be a first! I've never seen them own up to any of their failed policies, or the resulting disastrous consequences they created.</div></div>

Good point. The admissions are only done behind the scenes.

When David Stockman (head of Reagan's OMB) gave the forecast of $200 billion dollar deficits 'as far as the eye can see,' James A. Baker, III (one of the 3 Reagan aides known as 'the troika') exclaimed, 'Holy sh!t! You mean it really IS voodoo economics!?!?!' (This is from the well-regarded book, 'The Role of a Lifetime,' by Lou Cannon, or perhaps the equally well-respected 'The Acting President,' by Bob Shieffer. Sorry, forget which just now.)

No public admission followed, but suddenly, in the throes of a very bad economy, his advisors induced Reagan to accept the largest tax hike still to this very day in human history, via canceling the corporation side of his tax cuts just the previous year. Moreover, in an unusual and perhaps unprecedented (not to mention, possibly unConstitutional) act, writing the bill was done by the Republican Chairman of the Finance Committee, Sen. Bob Dole, not originated in the House.

The Republicans WERE far more responsible then, and willing to backtrack on the horrible consequences of their prior act.

Ultimately, I do not believe most Republicans are hard right. And even if they are, surely, as their policies bring on their inevitable ruin, at least they will rue what that does to their re-election chances, if not personally felt disgrace. </div></div>

<span style="color: #990000"> I must respectfully disagree with your last paragraph.

I don't believe "most' Republicans are not hard right, at least, that isn't what I am seeing or hearing.

I'm not even sure their disgraceful behavior, and obvious destruction to our country, will be sufficiently understood, or that they will be sufficiently punished for it, by the voters.

The last election was a commentary to the dumbing down of the American public, and to the power of propaganda.

I'm not sure there are enough informed Americans around anymore, to properly dole out the slap down that RW radical extremists, deserve, which, IMO, represents the vast majority of Repubicans currently in office.

Sadly, there are only a very few, with any conscience, and fewer still, with any economic knowledge, or even basic common sense, as far as I can tell.

While this time, as in any time, is a good time to reduce wasteful spending, this is no time to make reducing deficits, more important than creating jobs, investing in education, providing aid to the ill, the hungry and the old, and spending on renewable fuels, infrastructure, and the environment.

When the right blocks spending, it will be a straight shot to more unemployment.

We've known this for decades.

Their game is to block and filibuster the recovery, and hope that will get them back into power in the Senate, and in the White House.

Between their irrational spending cuts, and their obstructionist bahavior, and their consistant blocking of spending to stimulate, they could not possibly have the best interests of the people at heart.

They are clearly going to make another economic disaster.

Democratics have not stood their ground to the degree that I believe they should have.

This House of Representatives, deserves a good ASS kicking!

G.
</span> </div></div>

"Democratics have not stood their ground to the degree that I believe they should have."

Now that is an understatement. As far as I am concerned, Obama can go ahead and lose the 2012 election, because he has no fortitude nor real leadership. I hate the republicans, yet if you put up 100 Obamas like the one we have here today, against one republican...hell Palin even...Obama wilts and bends over for another 10" thrust.

Compromise? All I see in the Dems faces and hear from this CNN chatter from Dems so far this morning concerning this debt ceiling resolution, is dopey faces and choked and stammered words every time the word compromise comes out of Dems mouths.

The middle class and poor and old have no protector, especially in Obama. We F-d up when we didn't elect Hillary. She had a pair, more than I can say for this president we have here today. He should have flexed a muscle and envoked the 14th at the last minute instead of just "bending over for more wood" like he did. Obama gave up on the needy yesterday, and I personally don't care what happens in 2012 unless we can get someone to run against Obama on the Dems side. This is a pitiful day for true Americans, and our economy will wilt further. The world is not happy either, watch the economy and it's rating here. I would choke and studder on the word compromise too if I had to stand up on TV and defend the left's outcome in all of this. I give up, stick a fork in Barrack Obama, he's done. sid

Gayle in MD
08-01-2011, 10:55 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sid_Vicious</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I'm sorry, but I am not following you. Your two paragraphs seem to contradict one another.

The last paragraph predicts something I have never witnessed. The right, admitting they screwed up and destroyed the country?

That would surely be a first! I've never seen them own up to any of their failed policies, or the resulting disastrous consequences they created.</div></div>

Good point. The admissions are only done behind the scenes.

When David Stockman (head of Reagan's OMB) gave the forecast of $200 billion dollar deficits 'as far as the eye can see,' James A. Baker, III (one of the 3 Reagan aides known as 'the troika') exclaimed, 'Holy sh!t! You mean it really IS voodoo economics!?!?!' (This is from the well-regarded book, 'The Role of a Lifetime,' by Lou Cannon, or perhaps the equally well-respected 'The Acting President,' by Bob Shieffer. Sorry, forget which just now.)

No public admission followed, but suddenly, in the throes of a very bad economy, his advisors induced Reagan to accept the largest tax hike still to this very day in human history, via canceling the corporation side of his tax cuts just the previous year. Moreover, in an unusual and perhaps unprecedented (not to mention, possibly unConstitutional) act, writing the bill was done by the Republican Chairman of the Finance Committee, Sen. Bob Dole, not originated in the House.

The Republicans WERE far more responsible then, and willing to backtrack on the horrible consequences of their prior act.

Ultimately, I do not believe most Republicans are hard right. And even if they are, surely, as their policies bring on their inevitable ruin, at least they will rue what that does to their re-election chances, if not personally felt disgrace. </div></div>

<span style="color: #990000"> I must respectfully disagree with your last paragraph.

I don't believe "most' Republicans are not hard right, at least, that isn't what I am seeing or hearing.

I'm not even sure their disgraceful behavior, and obvious destruction to our country, will be sufficiently understood, or that they will be sufficiently punished for it, by the voters.

The last election was a commentary to the dumbing down of the American public, and to the power of propaganda.

I'm not sure there are enough informed Americans around anymore, to properly dole out the slap down that RW radical extremists, deserve, which, IMO, represents the vast majority of Repubicans currently in office.

Sadly, there are only a very few, with any conscience, and fewer still, with any economic knowledge, or even basic common sense, as far as I can tell.

While this time, as in any time, is a good time to reduce wasteful spending, this is no time to make reducing deficits, more important than creating jobs, investing in education, providing aid to the ill, the hungry and the old, and spending on renewable fuels, infrastructure, and the environment.

When the right blocks spending, it will be a straight shot to more unemployment.

We've known this for decades.

Their game is to block and filibuster the recovery, and hope that will get them back into power in the Senate, and in the White House.

Between their irrational spending cuts, and their obstructionist bahavior, and their consistant blocking of spending to stimulate, they could not possibly have the best interests of the people at heart.

They are clearly going to make another economic disaster.

Democratics have not stood their ground to the degree that I believe they should have.

This House of Representatives, deserves a good ASS kicking!

G.
</span> </div></div>

"Democratics have not stood their ground to the degree that I believe they should have."

Now that is an understatement. As far as I am concerned, Obama can go ahead and lose the 2012 election, because he has no fortitude nor real leadership. I hate the republicans, yet if you put up 100 Obamas like the one we have here today, against one republican...hell Palin even...Obama wilts and bends over for another 10" thrust.

Compromise? All I see in the Dems faces and hear from this CNN chatter from Dems so far this morning concerning this debt ceiling resolution, is dopey faces and choked and stammered words every time the word compromise comes out of Dems mouths.

The middle class and poor and old have no protector, especially in Obama. We F-d up when we didn't elect Hillary. She had a pair, more than I can say for this president we have here today. He should have flexed a muscle and envoked the 14th at the last minute instead of just "bending over for more wood" like he did. Obama gave up on the needy yesterday, and I personally don't care what happens in 2012 unless we can get someone to run against Obama on the Dems side. This is a pitiful day for true Americans, and our economy will wilt further. The world is not happy either, watch the economy and it's rating here. I would choke and studder on the word compromise too if I had to stand up on TV and defend the left's outcome in all of this. I give up, stick a fork in Barrack Obama, he's done. sid </div></div>

I don't agree Martin.

I've been brushing up on this deal, and the President did stand his ground on some things.

And, IMO, he's been the only adult in the whole process, along with a few of the Dems.

For one thing, the radical RW won't be able to pull this extortion again on raising the debt ceiling during the next several years.

For another, the panel will be bi-partisan, three from each party, when the time for hashing over any SS, Medicare, or Medicaid cuts comes along. Dems have insisted no cuts except to cut any identifiable waste, but not access, and nothing that increases costs for the beneficiaries.

We got some cuts to defense, on our side of the ledger, which is exactly where we should be cutting costs, and several other protections from the Pigs.

I don't know what more can be expected from him, given the unprecedented obstructionism, lies and slander he has had to deal with.

IMO, it's impossible to know what could have been, without him, but one thing is for sure, we'd have ended up in a depression, without his stimulus, and sure, he could have been better, if he hadn't had to deal with the Party Of NO.

He compromises to prevent total destruction, and more hardship for the average American, but he hasn't made compromises that will devastate the average American, as Repiglicans want to do.

IMO, the next election will be another very important election. Every Democratic supporter should vote. Look what happened last time, all because Dems didn't show.

We surely cannot afford that again, or Repiglicans will create Hoovervilles all over this country.

I hope you change your mind and vote. Your vote is the most important priviledge you have as an American. Imagine what it would be like with Romney, Bachman, or Heaven forbid, Rick Perry, in the White House. Or, A congress full of Tea Partiers!!! OMG!


You might just as well be voting for the Koch brothers, and Halliburton, if you stay home.

G.

Soflasnapper
08-01-2011, 11:37 AM
I agree with Sev, AND with G.

This is a p!sspoor result, and the country will be paying for it for a long time.

Realistically, however, the 14th amendment-based presidential action was the alternative, and that wasn't a good thing either. One can only imagine the charges of dictatorship that would have ensued, and really then, a Constitutional crisis would have commenced, and consumed the entire rest of this term. 'Angry black man seizes control of Congress's control of the purse!!!,' etc., would be the Fox-driven headlines, and maybe armed people would have hit the streets in violent protest. The appropriate response to maintain order would have been caricatured as sending out the brown shirts. I can write the headlines myself.

As much as I feel a chump to say I vote for the Dems because they are not quite so bad as the GOP, as that is weak praise indeed, that's what I do. Not out of any failure to appreciate the bad things the Dems support, but out of the marginal differences, because their policies are a little better for the people on a net basis.