PDA

View Full Version : Both Sides Aren't Doing It



Qtec
06-04-2012, 01:14 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="color: #3333FF">Mann and Ornstein point out something that won't be said on any other show: the Republicans are vastly abusing the filibuster, for no other reason than to reflexively obstruct anything that might be perceived as a victory for the president:
</span>
We have been studying Washington politics and Congress for more than 40 years, and never have we seen them this dysfunctional. In our past writings, we have criticized both parties when we believed it was warranted. Today, however, we have no choice but to acknowledge that the core of the problem lies with the Republican Party.

The GOP has become an insurgent outlier in American politics. It is ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition.

When one party moves this far from the mainstream, it makes it nearly impossible for the political system to deal constructively with the country’s challenges.

“Both sides do it” or “There is plenty of blame to go around” are the traditional refuges for an American news media intent on proving its lack of bias, while political scientists prefer generality and neutrality when discussing partisan polarization. Many self-styled bipartisan groups, in their search for common ground, propose solutions that move both sides to the center, a strategy that is simply untenable when one side is so far out of reach. </div></div>


watch it. (http://crooksandliars.com/nicole-belle/both-sides-arent-doing-it)

Q

LWW
06-04-2012, 04:37 AM
God bless them.

Qtec
06-04-2012, 04:39 AM
Anarchist.

Q

LWW
06-04-2012, 04:41 AM
There you go using words you don't understand ... again.

Qtec
06-04-2012, 05:49 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There you go using words you don't understand ... again. </div></div>

When you have a system of Govt that is being sabotaged, what would you call it?

TREASON??

I'm good with that! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

When the opposition, who are honour bound to work in good faith with the POTUS for the good of the country, oppose ,stall and do everything in their power to bring any change to a halt, then you HAVE to call them out for what they are. <span style='font-size: 17pt'>Extremists.</span>

They are a cancer who will bring down the USA just in order to gain power. They have already shown this many times.

Q

eg8r
06-04-2012, 08:15 AM
You cannot prove that our system of Government is being sabotaged. That is just your "sky is falling" fantasy.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
06-04-2012, 09:36 AM
The Founders and the COTUS knew all about supermajority votes. They called for them. But only in a very few and limited cases of extreme importance.

To ratify a treaty in the Senate. To over-ride a presidential veto. To convict upon Senate trial simple majority of the House-passed articles of impeachment. To pass an amendment to the Constitution. These are all among the most serious business the Congress can perform.

No other supermajority was agreed to by the Founders, or enshrined in the COTUS, which the Originalists think is God-inspired holy writ of a kind. Whether that last is true, surely our system of government is the COTUS.

Now we routinely hear of things like 'the motion to proceed to vote' lost, with 51 ayes and 49 nays, or up to 59 ayes and as little as 41 nays, and few bat an eyelash. Actually, they don't even mention the vote totals, and just say, 'it failed to pass.' Do they mean by 'failed to pass,' failed to achieve a majority of those present and voting? No, because usually, in such cases, it does have a majority that by the COTUS would have seen it pass. The COTUS sets forth passage of almost everything except the few exceptions on grave matters I mention (maybe forgot one or two) based upon simple majority vote.

That was the will of the Founders, reached after rigorous debate on this exact question. They REJECTED supermajority votes for all normal Congressional activities. That is the clear language of the COTUS, and it reflects the decision of the Constitutional Convention, and was ratified in that form by the states.

OF COURSE our system of government, already abundant with balance of powers, is sabotaged by this new normal. The level of abuse now seen, and never before seen, grinds the machinery of government to a halt with monkey wrench in the gears.

eg8r
06-04-2012, 01:28 PM
If what they are doing is allowed by the COTUS then there is nothing sabotaged. The rules are in place and are being followed. If you disagree then why aren't you jumping on a plane and heading to DC to get things moving along. Surely your knowledge is greater than all those Dems that are allowing this to happen.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
06-04-2012, 01:52 PM
Both sides want to keep the filibuster for when they are in the minority. It's legitimacy is that it is part of the Senate rules of procedure, and the COTUS says both houses of Congress may set their own rules. Perhaps as a rarely used procedure only for matters of national urgency and concern, it would be an allowable procedure, and that is how it WAS used, for almost its entire existence (which was not the entire history of the Congress).

That it is being so abused NOW is the issue, and it is that very abuse that is the sabotage.

To give another hypothetical example, under the parliamentary rules, a parliamentary question raised from the floor has priority treatment. Meaning whoever controls the floor and is allotting speaking time must recognize that person and have the parliamentary inquiry stated and then ruled on.

If a party were so inclined, they could tie up the entire body all day, all week, with nothing but parliamentary inquiries.

Those inquiries are allowed by rule, but using such a rule to obstruct all other business would be an abuse. That they are allowed doesn't make such a use not an abuse.

Our form of government requires good faith and statesmanlike behavior to work. We don't have that, because of lack of good faith, partisanship replacing statesmanship, and a willingness to abuse the process for partisan gains.

Gayle in MD
06-04-2012, 02:09 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Both sides want to keep the filibuster for when they are in the minority. It's legitimacy is that it is part of the Senate rules of procedure, and the COTUS says both houses of Congress may set their own rules. Perhaps as a rarely used procedure only for matters of national urgency and concern, it would be an allowable procedure, and that is how it WAS used, for almost its entire existence (which was not the entire history of the Congress).

That it is being so abused NOW is the issue, and it is that very abuse that is the sabotage.

To give another hypothetical example, under the parliamentary rules, a parliamentary question raised from the floor has priority treatment. Meaning whoever controls the floor and is allotting speaking time must recognize that person and have the parliamentary inquiry stated and then ruled on.

If a party were so inclined, they could tie up the entire body all day, all week, with nothing but parliamentary inquiries.

Those inquiries are allowed by rule, but using such a rule to obstruct all other business would be an abuse. That they are allowed doesn't make such a use not an abuse.

Our form of government requires good faith and statesmanlike behavior to work. We don't have that, because of lack of good faith, partisanship replacing statesmanship, and a willingness to abuse the process for partisan gains. </div></div>

TAP TAP TAP!

Soflasnapper
06-04-2012, 02:46 PM
Surely your knowledge is greater than all those Dems that are allowing this to happen.

Your snark is duly noted, sir!

Everyone in DC knows exactly what I'm talking about already.

Senate Majority Leader Reid was urged to change the filibuster rules as of the beginning of the Senate term this year, which can allegedly be done by simple majority vote. Several Democratic senators publicly backed that proposal. Reid declined at the time, and now has expressed interest to revisit the proposal. Now in mid-stream, changing the Senate rules requires MORE than the 60% for cloture-- I think it's 2/3rds-- something that is insurmountable until the new Senate session begins in January 2013.

eg8r
06-04-2012, 02:56 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">and that is how it WAS used, for almost its entire existence</div></div>Doesn't mean the way it is currently being used is wrong. You only think so because it is being used to stop Obama from getting his horrible programs off the ground. They are being used to save the country but you don't care about that, you just want to see Obama get whatever he wants.

eg8r

eg8r
06-04-2012, 02:57 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Your snark is duly noted, sir!
</div></div>Call it what you want, but if you think you know so much then do something about it. Plain and simple is you aren't getting what you want so you want to blame someone else. Don't be sorry though, that is the Dem way.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
06-04-2012, 03:16 PM
Doesn't mean the way it is currently being used is <s>wrong</s> right. You only think so because it is being used to stop Obama from <s>getting his horrible programs off the ground</s> staffing the executive branch, including the Treasury Department during the aftermath of a huge financial crisis, or staffing up the federal bench to avoid gross delays in carrying out justice, to the point that the Chief Justice cries out to end the obstruction. They are being used to <s>save</s> sabotage the country and discredit our institutions and but you don't care about that, you just want to see <s>Obama</s> the American people not get what<s>ever he</s> the country voted for by a wide margin. <s>wants.</s>

if you think you know so much then do something about it

What an unusual demand for this forum! If you are to be consistent, then stop making your points unless you have become an activist on them.

And frankly, you have no idea what I do or what, or who, I support or how I do that. "Shut up," you 'argued'? ROFL!

Public Citizen and Common Cause both work on this topic, and I've supported them for decades (among others).

LWW
06-04-2012, 03:51 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If what they are doing is allowed by the COTUS then there is nothing sabotaged. The rules are in place and are being followed.

eg8r </div></div>

It's deeper than that. They are following rules put inpace by the demokrooks.

eg8r
06-05-2012, 06:21 AM
LOL, you can read word my post all you like but again, we know that you don't care about saving the US, you only care about saving Obama.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
06-05-2012, 08:26 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LOL, you can read word my post all you like but again, we know that you don't care about saving the US, you only care about saving Obama.

eg8r </div></div>

Again, nothing but more personal attacks.

G.

Soflasnapper
06-05-2012, 10:15 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LOL, you can read word my post all you like but again, we know that you don't care about saving the US, you only care about saving Obama.

eg8r </div></div>

This country cannot last in its historical system if either the GOP policies are put in place, or if their bully boy methods are allowed to short circuit our system. Basically, they are saying whenever they lose, they'll deliberately sabotage the system to prevent what they don't want, but LOST when they took that message to the people.

They dishonor our form of government, and are the clear and present danger to it.

That is why even Democrats or Independents who find many things wrong with Obama and his policies will vote for the man. Not because they think he's all that, but look at the bloody alternatives: Theocrats, Dominionists, repeal the 20th century No-Nothings, all duped by the money powers to restore them to unlimited control? No thank you.

If the debt and the deficit are your concerns, you should remember what Ross Perot had to say about them. He brought this issue to the forefront, led the national polling behind that issue, and forced both national parties to take it far more seriously (an emphasis that led to the later '90s surplus).

What did he say about the deficit? Arguing from his strong business experience (which dwarfed Romney's, btw, making a billion dollar company from scratch from money he made as an IBM sales rep), he said, if a company has negative cash flow, you do not cut its income. "Catch me???" as he used to say in that Texas twang of his.

Gayle in MD
06-05-2012, 10:36 AM
None of the right cares a hoot about debts, when their party is running them up!

"The deficits don't matter"

Dick Cheney said, and obviously Goerge Bush agreed with him, since he ran up more debts and borrowed more money, than all previous administrations, combined.

The Righties on here have purged all of that from their memories, including the devastation which Repiglicans, and The Bush Administration, left in the wake of their outrageous failures.

According to them, ONLY president Obama has raised the deficit, and ONLY president Obama is resonsible for what was predicted all along to be a very slow job recovery.

Nor do any of them admit to the complete obstructionism practiced by the Repiglicans throughout the Obama administration, to prevent jobs programs, to block investment in job creation, education, re-buioding our infrastructure, or to even protect those who are hungry, out of work, or homeless, due to Repiglican policies.

G.

eg8r
06-05-2012, 12:21 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This country cannot last in its historical system if either the GOP policies are put in place, or if their bully boy methods are allowed to short circuit our system. Basically, they are saying whenever they lose, they'll deliberately sabotage the system to prevent what they don't want, but LOST when they took that message to the people.
</div></div>And this is different than a bunch of whiny lefties all packing up and leaving the state so that a vote cannot happen? It is OK for lefties to sabotage but not righties?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They dishonor our form of government, and are the clear and present danger to it.
</div></div>Actually they saved the country but I don't expect to hear a thank you from you.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If the debt and the deficit are your concerns</div></div>Why aren't they your concern also?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That is why even Democrats or Independents who find many things wrong with Obama and his policies will vote for the man. Not because they think he's all that, but look at the bloody alternatives:</div></div>The same can be said of why Reps and Independants will vote for Romney. He surely is not all that but look at the alternative: Obama.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What did he say about the deficit? Arguing from his strong business experience (which dwarfed Romney's, btw, making a billion dollar company from scratch from money he made as an IBM sales rep), he said, if a company has negative cash flow, you do not cut its income. "Catch me???" as he used to say in that Texas twang of his.</div></div>This is very true which is why I have not suggested any new tax breaks yet have suggested spending cuts. So since you bring this up, tell me how is the US any better by the not allowing Apple, Google and others to repatriate their overseas money at 6% and instead forcing them to leave the money outside of our economy? Don't you think 6% of a trillion dollars is better than 35% of zero dollars?

eg8r

eg8r
06-05-2012, 12:25 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">None of the right cares a hoot about debts, when their party is running them up!
</div></div>Well if you are going to butt in on a conversation at least don't start out with your lies off the bat. The one major complaint we have always had with W was his out of control spending.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
06-05-2012, 12:58 PM
Bush was already out of control on his spending, before his second term, and you all voted for him anyway.

Who do you think you're kidding? Certainly, not me!

Every single one of us who were here and writing about how angry we were over what Bush was doing, lying us into a ointless war, digging us into the biggest debt ditch in our history, breaking law after loaw, while you regularly attacked and insulted all of us, along with your other RW radical denyers and protectors of corrupt Repiglican policies, straight through to today!

AND, you're all STILL denying what Bush did to all of us, and trying to blame president Obama for all of it.

What a crock you are! You'll never wake up from the fog you live your life in...never!

G.

LWW
06-05-2012, 02:48 PM
<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">There you go using words you don't understand ... again. </div></div>

When you have a system of Govt that is being sabotaged, what would you call it?

TREASON??

Q </div></div>

Patriotism.

Soflasnapper
06-05-2012, 03:14 PM
And this is different than a bunch of whiny lefties all packing up and leaving the state so that a vote cannot happen? It is OK for lefties to sabotage but not righties?

As nothing in law prevents this action, I think you, by your prior allowances, ought to find this totally fine. Of course it is an irregular action that indeed stops the state processes in their tracks. And I agree, if they'd kept it up for the entire duration of the Walker term (hopefully shortened as it will be), or for a long time, or used it in serial fashion on a whole raft of matters, it would be an abuse threatening the state system of government.

In this case, as a one-off more or less political stunt, the purpose was limited, applied to one situation, not a long period of time, not repeated, and so no, it did not rise to the level of a threat to the system of government in that one state. And of course, as affecting just WI, it did not possibly threaten the system of government of the NATION.

Actually they saved the country but I don't expect to hear a thank you from you.

An absurd statement. Saved it from WHAT, EXACTLY? If it's Obamacare you refer to, they didn't save the country from that at all as of this time. What else? Making 1-1/2% of the population pay another 3% in FIT? THAT would have destroyed the country, and now it's been saved? ROFL! Obviously this is an empty talking point from you.

If the debt and the deficit are your concerns
Why aren't they your concern also?

Didn't say they weren't. However, there is the expression, penny wise and pound foolish. It is terribly wrong policy to worry about the deficit NOW, as compared to the medium and longer term. And in fact, doing that will worsen the larger part of the current deficit that relates to the sluggish economy with so many out of work. Fixing THAT PART of this problem is the most important thing, and doing it will cut the deficit in half, by itself. (As the hero to some Reagan quipped, I don't worry about the deficit (maybe he said debt), because it is big enough to take care of itself! Hardeeharhar, on his way to tripling what he inherited, and still a hero to some ignoratii.)

The same can be said of why Reps and Independants will vote for Romney. He surely is not all that but look at the alternative: Obama.

If that is so, then perhaps you'll agree that defenders of ROMNEY may not be such a down-the-line supporter of him. Can't you see that's also true of Obama supporters? Same deal.

tell me how is the US any better by the not allowing Apple, Google and others to repatriate their overseas money at 6% and instead forcing them to leave the money outside of our economy? Don't you think 6% of a trillion dollars is better than 35% of zero dollars?

Giving into this kind of extortion is never a good idea. It just happens over and over again if you do. As this situation was indeed exactly what happened before, which was supposed to be one-off thing. Here it is again, on steroids.

You're setting up a situation where all profits that can be held overseas will be held there, unless given an 83% tax break from what would apply normally (35%). If corporations are to be people, and given that status for free speech purposes, we should apply the same global taxation standards to them that apply to individuals domiciled here. Which is that WHEREVER they have income, they pay tax on it, minus a deduction for whatever taxes they may pay overseas to those authorities. Simple and fair.

eg8r
06-05-2012, 08:00 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And this is different than a bunch of whiny lefties all packing up and leaving the state so that a vote cannot happen? It is OK for lefties to sabotage but not righties?

</div></div><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sofla</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As nothing in law prevents this action, I think you, by your prior allowances, ought to find this totally fine. </div></div>LOL, so you expect me to be OK with both abuses but you are allowed to only be upset when a (R) is abusing and perfectly fine with the (D) doing it.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">An absurd statement. Saved it from WHAT, EXACTLY?</div></div>Hello McFly, they saved the country from the Dems and Obama. Aren't you paying any attention at all?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Didn't say they weren't.</div></div>By the wording you chose you make it sound like you didn't which is why I asked the question.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If that is so, then perhaps you'll agree that defenders of ROMNEY may not be such a down-the-line supporter of him.</div></div>This is another example of you re-wording what was already said just to hear your own voice. I even copied what you posted and switched it around thinking you would catch on but then you re-word it yet again to hear your self talk.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Giving into this kind of extortion is never a good idea.</div></div>Like Obama you believe in keeping this money out of our economy. Pitiful for sure.

eg8r

LWW
06-06-2012, 04:25 AM
In his own words from a prior post ... as always he he'll slavishly support the regime.