Finally Boehner is be rational, clean debt ceiling increase being voted on

[thraashman]

Really?

1860s democrats fought against freeing the slaves.

1940s president fdr (democrat) signed an executive order detaining Japanese-Americas to detainment camps.

2008 - 2014 - obama kills US citizens with drone strikes and refuses to close gitmo.

Please tell me again how democrats have changed?

Ok, let's forget about the part of your post that ignores that the 60's and 70's happened where racists went to the GOP in droves. But the bolded part shows you clearly aren't paying attention if you think it's the President who refused to close Gitmo.

 

[thraashman]

The debt ceiling shouldn't be raised, spending needs to be cut and it's irresponsible to raise the debt ceiling.

The debt ceiling is about paying for spending that's already occurred. Refusing to raise the debt ceiling would be akin to if you ran up charges on your credit card and refused to then pay the credit card bill.

 

[piasabird]

Why bother showing up just let the spendo crats have their way.

 

[Texashiker]

Ok, let's forget about the part of your post that ignores that the 60's and 70's happened where racists went to the GOP in droves. But the bolded part shows you clearly aren't paying attention if you think it's the President who refused to close Gitmo.

Didn't obama say the other day he would bypass congress?

So what is he waiting on?

 

[Genx87]

Why bother showing up just let the spendo crats have their way.

Republicans can solve the debt problem if they had the balls. When spending bills come up dont vote for them. Instead they have decided to not risk a re-election by voting for these bills. Then when this pointless debt ceiling comes around they tap dance like morons and piss people off. I cant think of a worse way to approach curtailing deficit spending.

 

[Incorruptible]

The debt ceiling is about paying for spending that's already occurred. Refusing to raise the debt ceiling would be akin to if you ran up charges on your credit card and refused to then pay the credit card bill.

Cut spending, The government already takes in enough revenue and the problem is they're wasting far too much money on useless government programs.

 

[berzerker60]

^Oh brother, not this revisionist bullshit again. This time with even more made-up, oversimplified bullshit! LOL!

Give it a rest already. The Democrat party's record on race absolutely stinks- stop trying to pawn it off on Republicans.

Oh okay, so show me how the States Rights Democratic Party didn't break off from the Demorats then, please. I surely made that up. Also the GOP chairman's apology to the NAACP never happened?

Yes, the Democratic party's record on race is abhorrent through the New Deal, and for a good bit afterwards. Literally no one thinks the Democrats have always been the party of civil rights for minorities. Happily, political parties change and evolve over time. Unless you think the tariff is one of the most important issues in Republican politics today, and whether or not to allow silver to be counted alongside gold in issuing specie?

I'm sorry yours is the party that Southern Democrats turned to when the Democratic party as a whole decided to push integration over segregation and civil rights over white power. Denial doesn't make it better, though.

Didn't obama say the other day he would bypass congress?

So what is he waiting on?

He said he would bypass Congress when he can legally do so. There are explicit laws against closing Gitmo or moving those held there onto US soil.

 

[Texashiker]

He said he would bypass Congress when he can legally do so. There are explicit laws against closing Gitmo or moving those held there onto US soil.

And?

Is obama going to get the law get in the way of human rights?

He has no problem killing US citizens without due process, but does not want to break the law in the name of protecting rights?

I see how it works. As long as obama gets to kill people he is all for breaking the law. But when he has to break the law to ensure rights are protected, screw that.

That does not seem backwards to you?

 

[thraashman]

Cut spending, The government already takes in enough revenue and the problem is they're wasting far too much money on useless government programs.

I'm not saying they shouldn't cut spending. They absolutely should. But it is and should be discussed as a separate situation from the debt ceiling.

 

[CrackRabbit]

Cut spending, The government already takes in enough revenue and the problem is they're wasting far too much money on useless government programs.

We should start with the government program that allows you to live in Canada.

 

[TheSiege]

I'm not saying they shouldn't cut spending. They absolutely should. But it is and should be discussed as a separate situation from the debt ceiling.

This. And the cuts need to happen gradually. Inversely with the economy. As the economy gets better, and more tax is collected, entitlements should be scaled back.

 

[werepossum]

"I'm all for fiscal responsibilty, but..."

"I'm not a racist, but..."

LOL!

I'm confused now. Is it two out of three Barack Obamas are for a debt ceiling increase, or two out of three Barack Obamas feel a debt ceiling increase is irresponsible?

 

[Matt1970]

Oh okay, so show me how the States Rights Democratic Party didn't break off from the Demorats then, please. I surely made that up. Also the GOP chairman's apology to the NAACP never happened?

Yes, the Democratic party's record on race is abhorrent through the New Deal, and for a good bit afterwards. Literally no one thinks the Democrats have always been the party of civil rights for minorities. Happily, political parties change and evolve over time. Unless you think the tariff is one of the most important issues in Republican politics today, and whether or not to allow silver to be counted alongside gold in issuing specie?

I'm sorry yours is the party that Southern Democrats turned to when the Democratic party as a whole decided to push integration over segregation and civil rights over white power. Denial doesn't make it better, though.


He said he would bypass Congress when he can legally do so. There are explicit laws against closing Gitmo or moving those held there onto US soil.

A good bit afterwards means up until there were no more KKK members to elect Senate leader? Denial does make it better in your case since Dems showed their true colors with segregation in 1965. Good job trying to make your shit not stink, but we can still smell it.

 

[zinfamous]

The debt ceiling shouldn't be raised, spending needs to be cut and it's irresponsible to raise the debt ceiling.

you see--it's already been allotted. that's the problem.

the amount of money that is spent has nothing to do with the debt ceiling.

This is like you taking a loan out to pay for your Bugatti and pay it off in a year, then telling the bank a year later that you aren't going to pay it off because you arbitrarily put a limit on your own responsibility.

at which point were you being least responsible?

 

[chucky2]

The next year when you appoint yourself the buying power to buy another Bugatti when the last one hasn't been paid off.

 

[berzerker60]

And?

Is obama going to get the law get in the way of human rights?

He has no problem killing US citizens without due process, but does not want to break the law in the name of protecting rights?

I see how it works. As long as obama gets to kill people he is all for breaking the law. But when he has to break the law to ensure rights are protected, screw that.

That does not seem backwards to you?

Killing US citizens deemed enemy combatants isn't taken to be illegal. I think it ought to be, and I think it's an abomination when Bush or Obama have intentionally killed US citizens abroad under that doctrine. But like all legal matters, it's a balancing act rather than a computational binary of legal/illegal, and national security is currently taken to be a super huge deal that tips the scales of that balancing act really far. Bush and Obama both had lawyers who advised them it was legal, and no one in Congress or the judiciary has said (in an official capacity, via court ruling or new law) otherwise. I wish they would, too, but they haven't.

Obama's done some really shitty and immoral things along 'national security' lines, but I haven't seen any evidence that he's done anything illegal. That's an important difference, even if it in no way absolves him of having done the wrong thing. Obama has never had an Andrew Jackson "now let him enforce it" moment to my knowledge, which would be a much more dangerous stance.

 

[zinfamous]

The next year when you appoint yourself the buying power to buy another Bugatti when the last one hasn't been paid off.

well, now you're just being crazy!

 

[IronWing]

The clean bill passed the House. Hopefully, this signals the demise of the tantrum as a political tool at least in the short term.

 

[kurosenpai]

im not American but this post seems to be interesting. question is why raise the debt ceiling.? why dont cut the spending as usa gdp is pretty high. raising the debt ceiling is just raising the debt ceiling. lol. usa cant even pay their old debt now wanted to raise it even more.

 

[chucky2]

well, now you're just being crazy!

If only we could limit them to Bugatti type spending we might have a long term chance. F-35's and Pepsi and Cheetos for millions to infinity ain't cheap... :'(

 

[IronWing]

im not American but this post seems to be interesting. question is why raise the debt ceiling.? why dont cut the spending as usa gdp is pretty high. raising the debt ceiling is just raising the debt ceiling. lol. usa cant even pay their old debt now wanted to raise it even more.

The debt ceiling as a separate issue from taxing/spending. The tax and spending policies have already been passed into law. By law, federal agencies are to collect the taxes specified and spend the money allocated. The debt ceiling is a maximum amount of debt the treasury is allowed to incur. If the debt ceiling is reached, it does not stop government spending, it simply sends the government into default on debts already incurred. Perversely, even if the ceiling were to be reached government agencies, by law, would be required to continue spending. Raising the debt ceiling simply accounts for taxation and spending policies already signed into law. It could be argued, and is argued, that the debt ceiling is a political contrivance designed for the purpose of chest-thumping more than suited to any sound fiscal policy.

 

[chucky2]

im not American but this post seems to be interesting. question is why raise the debt ceiling.? why dont cut the spending as usa gdp is pretty high. raising the debt ceiling is just raising the debt ceiling. lol. usa cant even pay their old debt now wanted to raise it even more.

I had a more detailed reply but it got lost. Let me sum it up for you:

• US Voter = sheeple
• US Politicians = re-election must happen at all costs (costs seldom if ever realized in any meaningful way by said Politician)
• Spending = crumbs thrown to sheeple to ensure they are placated...non-placated sheeple are not sheeple, they're aware and generally dissatisfied voting citizens.
• Dissatisfied voting citizens threaten re-election
• Dissatisfied businesses and interest groups that spent big bucks on Politician re-election compaings threaten re-election.

So given the above, what do you think Politicians do? They spend. They spend money they have and should be spent, they spend money they have that shouldn't be spent, they spend money they don't have but will, they spend money they don't have and never will. Eventually, because they need to keep those crumbs flowing (can you imagine the affect on sheeple/businesses/interests if people on public handouts can't buy Pepsi or Cheetos, or if the Air Force transports the Air Force says it doesn't need being purposefully sourced from multiple congressional districts aren't built?), they run up against this debt ceiling. When this happens, which would normally trigger panic, alarm, and a forced change of ways in normal circumstances for basically any entity other than the US Fed gov, what do you think happens?

The ceiling is simply raised, and the bad spending habits keep right on happening (because the debt ceiling was raised this time to keep the crumbs flowing, and it'll be raised next time to keep the crumbs flowing).

The End.

 

[cyclohexane]

We should start with the government program that allows you to live in Canada.

This.

 

[thraashman]

A good bit afterwards means up until there were no more KKK members to elect Senate leader? Denial does make it better in your case since Dems showed their true colors with segregation in 1965. Good job trying to make your shit not stink, but we can still smell it.

And then during the 1968 election Nixon did everything he could to woo those racists. And he they went to the republican party in droves. I wasn't alive in 1965 and I'd say a good chunk of us who post in here likely either weren't alive or weren't able to vote yet back then. So probably only a few who post in here could have voted for a racist democrat party. But EVERY SINGLE LAST PERSON who votes for the GOP now is voting for the happily still very racist party.

 

[Incorruptible]

I'm not saying they shouldn't cut spending. They absolutely should. But it is and should be discussed as a separate situation from the debt ceiling.

A socialist who wants to cut spending, glad to see we agree on something