House Dems "Nothing left to cut in budget — ‘the cupboard is bare’"

[shadow9d9]

Why can't Congress just raise the debt ceiling to infinity or a really large number? Why do they have to keep voting on increasing the debt ceiling?

If they have to keep voting on it as a sort of "check" for the system, then we should apply strings to it instead of just raising it without any repurcussions. If I recall correctly, Obama the Senator also voted against raising the debt ceiling at one point.

I imagine it is more of a reminder of overspending. It makes sense to stop making legislation spending.. You can't have your cake and eat it too... They voted for it so they could look good to their constituents and then fight against OTHER peoples' spending to look good...

One senator voting against something means nothing if they KNOW itll pass. It becomes symbolic at that point...

 

[shadow9d9]

They controlled things for at most 2 years. During which they were preoccupied with other things such as you know the whole recession thing and passing Obamacare.

And as you pointed out lacked a filibuster proof Senate. As well as the fact that not every Democrat will be a far left-winger.



I am saying that the left-wing definition of equal pay is. Which is not equal pay for equal work, but whining about the fact that men and women make different life choices resulting in unequal pay for unequal work.

So, you admit that did not have a fillibuster proof senate.. which means they had nothing... Thanks for admitting that.

Then they pushed the Republicans' own plan. Is that liberal to you?

What makes you think that the bill was "left wing" though... I understand what you are saying, but I don't see what makes that bill "left wing." Also, PLEASE show me a list of 5-10 bills proposed in the last TWENTY YEARS... Surely one half of the politicians in this country being "liberal" should have TONS of such bills out there.

 

[chucky2]

I think the problem you're going to have here is people think you're a joke with your 'there is no left in America' schtick you're failing at pushing, hence they're not going to take the 10 minutes of Google to embarrass you further.

In other news, in the face of almost bankruptcy and crushing pension obligations from the 'not left enough' politicians running IL, one of the nations largest cities that happens to reside in the state that has 'it takes a village' raised people running around shooting everything that moves has their 'not left' politicians spending time wanting to ban lasers on guns.

If you were all locked up in your own little paradise, it really would be funny to watch...oh wait, that's the nightly news here, sorry.

 

[shadow9d9]

I think the problem you're going to have here is people think you're a joke with your 'there is no left in America' schtick you're failing at pushing, hence they're not going to take the 10 minutes of Google to embarrass you further.

In other news, in the face of almost bankruptcy and crushing pension obligations from the 'not left enough' politicians running IL, one of the nations largest cities that happens to reside in the state that has 'it takes a village' raised people running around shooting everything that moves has their 'not left' politicians spending time wanting to ban lasers on guns.

If you were all locked up in your own little paradise, it really would be funny to watch...oh wait, that's the nightly news here, sorry.

The real reason is that no such legislation exists. Obama follows Bush's policies and enacts republican healthcare legislation. That is pretty right in my book. Let's see... 5 people and all you could come up with is fair pay and enacting republican legislation...

It is always funny when people making bogus claims say that they just don't feel like providing evidence.. who do you think that fools?

 

[chucky2]

Obviously more than your 'there are no Left politicians in the US' inanity. I came up with one in about 1/2 second. Wasting 10 minutes of my life to appease you is...wasting 10 minutes of my life. Others might wish to do so for amusement purposes, but really, what would it accomplish? You'll still keep on your bent, it'll just be a waste of time.

 

[Jhhnn]

Self sealing denial?

Notice how this article at the NYTs from today says much the same thing as I did about liberal goals

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/25/b...rican-women-is-it-enough-to-lean-in.html?_r=0

Of course whether anyone, beyond some butt-hurt man hating feminists is happy with liberal changes is another matter:

None of which addresses Lilly Ledbetter's actual work situation, or that of some other women in the slightest. It's merely another lame attempt to justify your own prejudice.

What happened to the claim that the Lilly Ledbetter Act is somehow "Leftist", anyway? I realize that many Reactionaries are male chauvinists, no doubt, but that doesn't make women's equality any more "Leftist" than racial equality.

Oh, wait, I forgot. You hold that racist businessmen's property rights trump civil rights, iirc...

It plays like this, in case you're totally oblivious to your own headset-

 

[Jhhnn]

Did you even look at the chart?

Notice how according to the chart Democrats are at their most conservative when passing the New Deal. And were still more conservative during Johnson's Great Society.

I that does not immediately make you question the accuracy of said chart...

So, uhh, the new Deal was Conservative, or what? Or did the Democratic party of the time include southern Democrats, who are now all Republicans after Strom Thurmond's Southern strategy?

Dems' majorities at the time were so enormous that they overruled their more conservative elements, anyway.

Are you actually attempting to make some point, or just obfuscate the Repub march into Wingnutlandia territory over the last 30 years?

Yeh, sure, there have always been fringewhacks & nutcases on the right among Repubs, no doubt. It's not like the inmates were always running the asylum, which is the case today.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...re-still-crazy-after-all-these-years-20120316

 

[BoberFett]

So, you admit that did not have a filibuster proof senate.. which means they had nothing...

Don't idiot Democrats get tired of spouting this excuse?

 

[Jhhnn]

Don't idiot Democrats get tired of spouting this excuse?

Don't you get tired of denying the truth? Does it hurt that bad, so bad that you can't stand to face up to it?

 

[chucky2]

I'm not sure why you'd bring up hurting: The Dems blew a colossal, even historic, electoral outcome to accomplish...what again? Token sh1t? I'm not a Dem, but, that has got to be painful.

 

[Jhhnn]

I'm not sure why you'd bring up hurting: The Dems blew a colossal, even historic, electoral outcome to accomplish...what again? Token sh1t? I'm not a Dem, but, that has got to be painful.

So, uhh, if the ACA is token sh1t, why are Repubs so desperate to stop it?

 

[chucky2]

Who knows, ask them. My guess is if it's Dem, the Reps will be against it.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Don't you get tired of denying the truth? Does it hurt that bad, so bad that you can't stand to face up to it?

Having a filibuster proof majority is not needed unless a highly controversial and partisan agenda is being pushed down the throats of Americans.

 

[nehalem256]

I'm not sure why you'd bring up hurting: The Dems blew a colossal, even historic, electoral outcome to accomplish...what again? Token sh1t? I'm not a Dem, but, that has got to be painful.

Well if you listen to the lefties here apparently to pass a right-wing HC plan that basically came straight from the mouth of Ayn Rand

 

[nehalem256]

So, uhh, the new Deal was Conservative, or what? Or did the Democratic party of the time include southern Democrats, who are now all Republicans after Strom Thurmond's Southern strategy?

Dems' majorities at the time were so enormous that they overruled their more conservative elements, anyway.

Are you actually attempting to make some point, or just obfuscate the Repub march into Wingnutlandia territory over the last 30 years?

Yeh, sure, there have always been fringewhacks & nutcases on the right among Repubs, no doubt. It's not like the inmates were always running the asylum, which is the case today.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...re-still-crazy-after-all-these-years-20120316

Liberals are far crazier than conservatives.

See:http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/25/b...rican-women-is-it-enough-to-lean-in.html?_r=0

We need to force women into the workplace.. whether they like it or not.

OMG. Ever since we have pushed women into the workplace, increasing the supply of labor, wages have stagnated, DAMN YOU BASIC ECONOMICS oh wait I mean Reaganomics, because obviosuly reality shouldn't apply to the liberal agenda

Or how about lets de-stigmatize single motherhood what could possibly go wrong. Oh yeah the whole poverty thing.

Or how about the whole trusting 14 year old girls to make choices about their body?

 

[thraashman]

Liberals are far crazier than conservatives.

See:http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/25/b...rican-women-is-it-enough-to-lean-in.html?_r=0

We need to force women into the workplace.. whether they like it or not.

OMG. Ever since we have pushed women into the workplace, increasing the supply of labor, wages have stagnated, DAMN YOU BASIC ECONOMICS oh wait I mean Reaganomics, because obviosuly reality shouldn't apply to the liberal agenda

Or how about lets de-stigmatize single motherhood what could possibly go wrong. Oh yeah the whole poverty thing.

Or how about the whole trusting 14 year old girls to make choices about their body?

We get it, you hate women. Find a new subject to complain about.

 

[nehalem256]

We get it, you hate women. Find a new subject to complain about.

So not wanting to push women into things that do nothing to increase their happiness is hating women?

college-educated mothers with careers were no more satisfied with their lives, and might be less so, than stay-at-home college-educated mothers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/25/b...ican-women-is-it-enough-to-lean-in.html?_r=1&

So wanting women and children not to live in poverty is hating women?

So 14 year old girls are considered women now?

:hmm:

 

[JockoJohnson]

I imagine it is more of a reminder of overspending. It makes sense to stop making legislation spending.. You can't have your cake and eat it too... They voted for it so they could look good to their constituents and then fight against OTHER peoples' spending to look good...

One senator voting against something means nothing if they KNOW itll pass. It becomes symbolic at that point...

Good point. Sad but true about the constant need to raise the debt ceiling. And thanks for the clarification on the symbolic vote.

 

[piasabird]

I tend not to trust any budgetary figures over time because the govt keeps changing the way it funds the government. They often take many things off budget. For instance right now the fed prints money (Virtually and electronically) every month to prop up the stock market to the tune of billions of dollars. This is just corporate welfare. For instance for the unaffordable health care act states had to set up and run their own exchanges at their expense so that money is not counted in the accounting process. The Fed Govt is always passing bills but no paying for them.

 

[piasabird]

What do you call a woman that is paid to have unprotected sex? You decide.

 

[piasabird]

If men can reason properly till like age 25 then maybe we should raise the voting age to 30 and require you to pay income taxes to vote. Bring your proof to the poles. If you don't pay any taxes, you should not have a say in how it is spent.

 

[piasabird]

Quote "One senator voting against something means nothing if they KNOW itll pass. It becomes symbolic at that point... "

I think it is important that we make the senate vote against all the bills they refuse to pass. That way they have a voting record and we know who to vote out of office.

 

[chucky2]

We get it, you hate women. Find a new subject to complain about.

FYI: None of these things is hating women.

 

[chucky2]

Well if you listen to the lefties here apparently to pass a right-wing HC plan that basically came straight from the mouth of Ayn Rand

That frankly is so bizarre with the Dems. They get control of Congress in 2006, Bush works with them unless they try and impose a pullout date on Iraq or Afghanistan, which makes sense. Dems are in working with Bush, and vice versa, to run the country. Economy crashes in 2008 - it's all that evil Bush fault...but no mention of the past 2 years of control by Dems. Then in 2008, after knowing the entire time that a Dem is going to be POTUS, and thus having what is years now at that point time for planning and having ready their legislation, we get...a 90's Rep HC plan?!?! Rather than have public meetings on it (that would largely be pre-scripted because they should have already had them to craft their legislation) and then passing a US version of UHC, we get what we got. That is, nothing to really control what makes needing UHC important: costs.

It's like the Dems are so incompetent, they can only snatch failure from the jaws of victory. This is to say nothing of the crazies they have in their party - they are as crazy, if not in more important ways more so, than their Rep crazy counterparts.

HowTF does a responsible US citizen decide who to vote for???

Chuck

 

[TerryMathews]

That frankly is so bizarre with the Dems. They get control of Congress in 2006, Bush works with them unless they try and impose a pullout date on Iraq or Afghanistan, which makes sense. Dems are in working with Bush, and vice versa, to run the country. Economy crashes in 2008 - it's all that evil Bush fault...but no mention of the past 2 years of control by Dems. Then in 2008, after knowing the entire time that a Dem is going to be POTUS, and thus having what is years now at that point time for planning and having ready their legislation, we get...a 90's Rep HC plan?!?! Rather than have public meetings on it (that would largely be pre-scripted because they should have already had them to craft their legislation) and then passing a US version of UHC, we get what we got. That is, nothing to really control what makes needing UHC important: costs.

It's like the Dems are so incompetent, they can only snatch failure from the jaws of victory. This is to say nothing of the crazies they have in their party - they are as crazy, if not in more important ways more so, than their Rep crazy counterparts.

HowTF does a responsible US citizen decide who to vote for???

Chuck

I'll be interested to see how the Obama cheerleaders respond to this.