Meet my Congressional Colostomy Bag

Msut77

Msut77

CAGiversary!
Feedback
14 (100%)
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/07/16/king-no-agenda-please/

BENNETT: Is it enough for Republicans to say we are opposed to what [Obama's] doing — stimulus, health care, we don’t like what he’s doing with the government, and look at the job situation — or do we need to have meat on the bones? And say, this is what we are for? Do we have to have positive proposals? [...]

KING: So, It’s a combination of being against what Obama is for, and also giving certain specifics of what we are for. Having said that, I don’t think we have to lay out a complete agenda, from top to bottom, because then we would have the national mainstream media jumping on every point trying to make that a campaign issue.


I happen to be a constituent of this clown and he spends more time fearmongering about a mosque outside of his jurisdiction than the horrific employment situation his constituents face.
 
GREGORY: Senator, I’m sorry, I’m not hearing an answer here on specifics. What painful choices to really deal with the deficit — is Social Security on the table? — what will Republicans do that will give them, like ‘94, there was the Contract with America, what are voters going to say, hey, this is what Republicans will say yes to.
CORNYN: Well, the president has a debt commission that reports December the first, and I think we’d all like to see what they come back with.
GREGORY: But wait a minute, conservatives need a Democratic president’s debt commission to figure out what it is they need to cut?
Click to expand...

It's so blatant, this outrage and focus on the deficit is just about winning elections. They don't have the stomache to piss off any constituency and cut shit like medicare or social security or whatever the fuck.

Maybe next time they're on MTP they'll have something to fucking talk about instead of Palin-esque generalities. I don't know if that's the proper verbage...if it isn't please refudiate what I just said.
 
^ Yeah , thats painful right there

Heres what I have to deal with: I'm sure you've all heard by now of the Mosque they'd like to build in Murfreesboro TN , which isn't far from me ...
To quote a member of my city council = (who should just learn to keep her trap shut) "They're not even Christian."
[insert vomiting smiley]
 
I don't know why there isn't more outrage over bigoted views like Peter King's, the TN city council guys, etc. regarding building mosques in this country.

Just replace 'Islam' with 'Judaism' or 'Mosque' with 'Synagogue' and you'll realize exactly what we're dealing with here.
 
[quote name='IRHari']

He spoke immediately after your 'congressional colostomy bag', who tries to interrupt Weiner but gets told to sit the fuck down.[/QUOTE]

This does piss me off from what I read and it wasn't much, but the bill would provide free health care to those emergency workers that were sickened resulting from the 9/11 attacks.

Republicans should have voted for it regardless of the procedural rule, it seems they tried to slip something in that would most likely pass because the democrats wouldnt vote no, but the democrats tried a procedure in which they would skip the step in which the republicans could add an item. Republicans weren't happy so voted no because of the lack of procedure. I think they were going to vote for this anyway, but the democrats called their bluff on the procedural issue. I think there needs to be another vote for this, the republicans really screwed up playing the politics game, and now Heroes won't get the things they need.

Not to mention we will need to pay more most likely, if it goes to the courts instead like the articles are saying.
 
I just saw that on the news, Weiner is fucking awesome. There was an proposed amendment that would prevent illegal immigrants from getting aid from the bill. The republicans wanted to be able to vote on things like that, they said the Democrats bucked procesuder because they didn't want to vote on it, so you get what we have here.
 
[quote name='EdRyder']^ Yeah , thats painful right there

Heres what I have to deal with: I'm sure you've all heard by now of the Mosque they'd like to build in Murfreesboro TN , which isn't far from me ...
To quote a member of my city council = (who should just learn to keep her trap shut) "They're not even Christian."
[insert vomiting smiley][/QUOTE]
I keep hearing about that on the news, I swear that the politicians of this state go out of their way to seem like stupid hicks. And people here wonder why everyone else makes fun of the south.
 
[quote name='IRHari']the white alvin greene[/QUOTE]

I Dont remember what Alvin Greene's platform was, but I dont think he ran an anti gold fringe campaign of loosely buttoned shirts
 
[quote name='Knoell']This does piss me off from what I read and it wasn't much, but the bill would provide free health care to those emergency workers that were sickened resulting from the 9/11 attacks.

Republicans should have voted for it regardless of the procedural rule, it seems they tried to slip something in that would most likely pass because the democrats wouldnt vote no, but the democrats tried a procedure in which they would skip the step in which the republicans could add an item. Republicans weren't happy so voted no because of the lack of procedure. I think they were going to vote for this anyway, but the democrats called their bluff on the procedural issue. I think there needs to be another vote for this, the republicans really screwed up playing the politics game, and now Heroes won't get the things they need.

Not to mention we will need to pay more most likely, if it goes to the courts instead like the articles are saying.[/QUOTE]

Welcome to our side, where we've been noticing that staunchly maintaining a position of voting "NO" on *everything under the sun* has been the order of the day since Obama came into office.

This ain't no one-off. It's another day at the office, but the Brooklynite flipped his shit, Brooklyn-style - and that made for a cute YouTube moment.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Welcome to our side, where we've been noticing that staunchly maintaining a position of voting "NO" on *everything under the sun* has been the order of the day since Obama came into office.

This ain't no one-off. It's another day at the office, but the Brooklynite flipped his shit, Brooklyn-style - and that made for a cute YouTube moment.[/QUOTE]

Actually Republicans were going to vote yes for this bill, they stupidly voted against it because democrats were going against procedure. I say stupidly because people like you are going to tear them a new one for it, and secondly because the people who needed the bill are going to suffer for it. I do not necessarily agree with the democrats skipping through procedure but republicans took a standin the middle of a very important issue, and played politicis with something they shouldn't have, because real people needed it.

Does anyone know how often this procedure is skipped? Is it standard to do this, or were democrats playing games themselves by skipping it?
 
[quote name='Knoell']Actually Republicans were going to vote yes for this bill, they stupidly voted against it because democrats were going against procedure. I say stupidly because people like you are going to tear them a new one for it, and secondly because the people who needed the bill are going to suffer for it. I do not necessarily agree with the democrats skipping through procedure but republicans took a standin the middle of a very important issue, and played politicis with something they shouldn't have, because real people needed it.[/quote]

And that's the very *point*. They're so accustomed to playing politics that they can not allow themselves to vote appropriately on sensible policies and programs.

Guess what? Obstructionism just got called out for what it is and how counterproductive it is to the future of this nation. That's not the fault of a *single* Democrat.

Does anyone know how often this procedure is skipped? Is it standard to do this, or were democrats playing games themselves by skipping it?
Click to expand...

not sure, honestly. are you going to cry "entrapment" or something?
 
Eh no one cried entrapment during that ACORN bullshit thing. I doubt they're going to apply reasonable standards here.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']And that's the very *point*. They're so accustomed to playing politics that they can not allow themselves to vote appropriately on sensible policies and programs.

Guess what? Obstructionism just got called out for what it is and how counterproductive it is to the future of this nation. That's not the fault of a *single* Democrat.



not sure, honestly. are you going to cry "entrapment" or something?[/QUOTE]

Im just not going to say that Democrats aren't playing the same game, and came out on the better end this time.
 
[quote name='Knoell']Actually Republicans were going to vote yes for this bill, they stupidly voted against it because democrats were going against procedure. I say stupidly because people like you are going to tear them a new one for it, and secondly because the people who needed the bill are going to suffer for it. I do not necessarily agree with the democrats skipping through procedure but republicans took a standin the middle of a very important issue, and played politicis with something they shouldn't have, because real people needed it.

Does anyone know how often this procedure is skipped? Is it standard to do this, or were democrats playing games themselves by skipping it?[/QUOTE]
I don't really think it was procedure, see my post a few before yours. They wanted to add an amendment keeping illegals from getting aid from this, the democrats didn't want to give them that chance, so they did this. I think it was more that they didn't get their amendment in than that the dems bucked procedure to stop them.
 
[quote name='Clak']I don't really think it was procedure, see my post a few before yours. They wanted to add an amendment keeping illegals from getting aid from this, the democrats didn't want to give them that chance, so they did this. I think it was more that they didn't get their amendment in than that the dems bucked procedure to stop them.[/QUOTE]

We both agree that what was at stake was too important for politics to interfere with, so let's take that out of the picture. Should the politicians in power be skipping established procedure in order to block other parties from putting their two cents in? My answer is No, but I would still like to know if this is an everyday thing, or did the Democrats pull a new trick out of the book? Will this set a precedent for future bills to pass? I am still in favor of putting blame on the Democrats as well for pulling that trick, although the Republicans should have voted for it regardless.

Also you are right, the Democrats only skipped that part of the process (which was the cause of them needing the 2/3rds vote) because of Republicans wanting to make sure illegals cannot get aid from this. This would have passed if Democrats hadn't done that, and dealt with the Republican amendment. Both sides were playing games, not just Republicans.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am still in favor of putting blame on the Democrats as well for pulling that trick, although the Republicans should have voted for it regardless.
Click to expand...

Of course you are, because you are a hack.

because of Republicans wanting to make sure illegals cannot get aid from this.
Click to expand...

Even if the hypothetical illegal who was a 9/11 responder?
 
Knoell, stop defending the republicans actions. Sure, the dems are at fault too, but the idiot republicans are to blame for most of it.
 
[quote name='dorino']Knoell, stop defending the republicans actions. Sure, the dems are at fault too, but the idiot republicans are to blame for most of it.[/QUOTE]

This isn't what I just said?....
 
[quote name='Msut77']Of course you are, because you are a hack.



Even if the hypothetical illegal who was a 9/11 responder?[/QUOTE]

The Democrats would have passed the bill if it was amended to keep it from illegals. That is why they opted to skip the amendment process and go for a two thirds vote. They gambled on the fact that Republicans would pass it anyway just the same as the Republicans gambled on the fact that the Democrats would back down. It was the same dirty politics on both sides, the Democrats just got out a bit cleaner. Stop lieing to yourselves.
 
[quote name='Knoell']The Democrats would have passed the bill if it was amended to keep it from illegals. [/quote]

I notice you failed to answer my question.
 
[quote name='Msut77']I notice you failed to answer my question.[/QUOTE]

If the government of new york knows the emergency worker is an illegal immigrant then why has that person not been arrested and deported according to the federal law? I am tired of this side stepping of the federal law, either follow it, or change it, but don't completely ignore it. If a bank robber robs a bank, and then saves a woman from a burning building while being breathing in toxic smoke, should he be relieved of his prior crimes? That is up for debate and should have been debated in the procedure in congress.

The whole point is that this could have gone the opposite way, and Fox News and everyone would be shitting on the Democrats, because the Democrats could have went ahead with this bill, added the amendment, and they themselves would have to vote against it based on your claimed morals right?? Since you are holding them on the moral high ground, would they have passed it with that amendment? chose your answer with the knowledge that the Democrats have the majority of the house. The one and only reason they did it this way was because it was a win/win for them, if the republicans rejected it, they would look like gods among assholes, and if they did pass it, they didn't have to even consider the amendment.

Like I said, both parties are playing politics, one side came out worse, but they are both playing the game.
 
[quote name='dorino']the Knoell approach: Rephrase his previous argument and make no attempt to respond to criticism.[/QUOTE]

Dorino's approach "republicans are idiots, hehe"
 
[quote name='Knoell']If the government of new york knows the emergency worker is an illegal immigrant then why has that person not been arrested and deported according to the federal law?[/quote]

Extenuating circumstances?

If there was a (hypothetical here) member of the Armed Forces who was awarded the Medal of Honor and it came out after the recipient was an illegal alien would you deport them?

I am tired of this side stepping of the federal law, either follow it, or change it, but don't completely ignore it. If a bank robber robs a bank, and then saves a woman from a burning building while being breathing in toxic smoke, should he be relieved of his prior crimes? That is up for debate and should have been debated in the procedure in congress.
Click to expand...

You are really bad at this.

The whole point is that this could have gone the opposite way, and Fox News and everyone would be shitting on the Democrats, because the Democrats could have went ahead with this bill, added the amendment, and they themselves would have to vote against it based on your claimed morals right?? Since you are holding them on the moral high ground, would they have passed it with that amendment? chose your answer with the knowledge that the Democrats have the majority of the house.
Click to expand...

You refuse to answer my poignant question and instead respond with a laundry list of meandering nonsense.

I am not going for the bait knoell.

Like I said, both parties are playing politics, one side came out worse, but they are both playing the game.
Click to expand...

You just admitted (you being the hack that you are) are willing to wage scorched earth over a hypothetical illegal alien 9/11 responder.

Spare me.
 
[quote name='Msut77']Yoiu didn't say anything I like hearing so I am not going to listen to you :cry:[/QUOTE]

Don't bother responding to my posts anymore, please ignore me.
 
[quote name='Knoell']Dorino's approach "republicans are idiots, hehe"[/QUOTE]
That's not my argument, that's just the truth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top