221938 Bullies, 4258 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 501 to 510 of 743
Page 51 of 75 FirstFirst ... 414748495051 5253545561 ... LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. submessenger is offline
    submessenger's Avatar

    Transmaniacon MC

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Delray Beach
    Posts
    1,604

    Posted On:
    10/09/2013 9:05pm

    supporting member
     Style: BJJ

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by goodlun View Post
    What we really need to do is stop spending 40k a year to house fucking prisoners for **** sake how does it cost more to house a prisoner than the median anual income of a family? You know what a good place to start let's stop putting people away for smoking pot.
    STOP making sense. It's interfering with my ability to obstruct the proper legislative process.
  2. hungryjoe is offline
    hungryjoe's Avatar

    Light Heavyweight

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    3,427

    Posted On:
    10/09/2013 9:13pm

    supporting member
     Style: judo hiatus

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I miss Maryjane as I knew her well.

    ....dates self......

    This thread has again turned civil. Where's Bobby?
  3. OwlMatt is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Posts
    891

    Posted On:
    10/09/2013 9:17pm


     Style: aikido

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by submessenger View Post
    Dude, they are 1/2 of Congress. They are the legislative process, even when we disagree with them, but especially when it comes to Power of the Purse.
    The process is the process. You pass a law by vote, you prevent a law from being passed by vote, and you undo a law by vote. A minority of one house of Congress has decided to try to undo a law by a means other than a vote, and I have a problem with that. This minority thinks it shouldn't have to win a vote to get its way on Obamacare. Sorry, yes you do.

    And that goes both ways. After the last election here in Wisconsin, a bill stripping power from public employees' unions was pushed through the new Republican-dominated legislature. It was a bill that pissed a lot of people off (myself included), but it was supported by a majority of the legislators elected by the people, so it was going to pass. Some Democrats decided it was so important that this bill not pass that they fled the state in order to deny the legislature quorum so that it couldn't pass the bill. Some liberal nutriders called this heroism. **** that: it was the minority trying to force its will on the majority by circumventing the voting process, and that's wrong.

    What is happening in the House of Representatives right now is a minority trying to force its will on the majority by circumventing the voting process. If you don't like Obamacare, cool: vote that way. If the people really hate Obamacare as much as the Tea Party thinks they do, then they'll elect more people who will vote against Obamacare. Then Obamacare will be gone. That's how legislative process works.
  4. OwlMatt is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Posts
    891

    Posted On:
    10/09/2013 9:22pm


     Style: aikido

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by hungryjoe View Post
    The Captain Obvious remark was uncalled for. My apologies. Difference was that a lack of work ethic didn't qualify you to live the life of a freeloader, with combined benefits totaling more than many low paid workers make annually.
    I don't necessarily disagree with that.

    Okay here. Hard work pays off eventually. Been 'fucked over', just learned to 'bounce back'.
    Fair enough.

    And the upcoming debt ceiling negotiations have no strategic bearing at all? The 'minority' are looking for, at the least, a years delay before implementation of the individual mandate. You know, until after the next election cycle. They'd like it repealed, but we know that's not going to happen.
    Cool, then they can vote on it. If they're not a minority (as those quotation marks imply), they'll win the vote. Hey, why don't they vote down the Senate resolution to prove they're not a minority? My guess is it's because they are a minority and they can't win a vote.
  5. hungryjoe is offline
    hungryjoe's Avatar

    Light Heavyweight

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    3,427

    Posted On:
    10/09/2013 9:53pm

    supporting member
     Style: judo hiatus

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by OwlMatt View Post
    Cool, then they can vote on it. If they're not a minority (as those quotation marks imply), they'll win the vote. Hey, why don't they vote down the Senate resolution to prove they're not a minority? My guess is it's because they are a minority and they can't win a vote.
    Because they may or may not lose. You've seen this sort of procedural maneuver played out on both sides. Remember, a good majority on both sides are lolyers (sorry Sam, Georgette, Erik and any others I forget about or know not).

    Remember, we have a debt ceiling issue due in what, eight days?
  6. submessenger is offline
    submessenger's Avatar

    Transmaniacon MC

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Delray Beach
    Posts
    1,604

    Posted On:
    10/09/2013 10:07pm

    supporting member
     Style: BJJ

    2
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by OwlMatt View Post
    The process is the process. You pass a law by vote, you prevent a law from being passed by vote, and you undo a law by vote. A minority of one house of Congress has decided to try to undo a law by a means other than a vote, and I have a problem with that. This minority thinks it shouldn't have to win a vote to get its way on Obamacare. Sorry, yes you do.

    And that goes both ways. After the last election here in Wisconsin, a bill stripping power from public employees' unions was pushed through the new Republican-dominated legislature. It was a bill that pissed a lot of people off (myself included), but it was supported by a majority of the legislators elected by the people, so it was going to pass. Some Democrats decided it was so important that this bill not pass that they fled the state in order to deny the legislature quorum so that it couldn't pass the bill. Some liberal nutriders called this heroism. **** that: it was the minority trying to force its will on the majority by circumventing the voting process, and that's wrong.

    What is happening in the House of Representatives right now is a minority trying to force its will on the majority by circumventing the voting process. If you don't like Obamacare, cool: vote that way. If the people really hate Obamacare as much as the Tea Party thinks they do, then they'll elect more people who will vote against Obamacare. Then Obamacare will be gone. That's how legislative process works.
    What happened with the union **** in your state was a travesty, I agree. I don't think we're on the same side of that issue, but I understand where you're coming from.

    The bare truth of the matter at the Federal level is, with ACA, they (Democrats) were going to pass the law no matter what objections were brought up. Deem and pass, though not executed, was a serious consideration. "... we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it..." Remember that gem? Reconciliation, all the little parliamentary "tricks?" Really, it's no different from the Dems hiding out in other states to prevent the vote.

    You want to talk about crybaby obstructionism, there it is. Buying votes with favors, nobody really knowing what was in the bill, party-line voting. That's ACA. So, as much as you want to believe it's "law of the land," there's still a significant chunk - if not a majority - of people that don't want it, never wanted it. But, yeah, that's the legislative process.

    Now, you're presenting your state's union vote as some sort of peace offering, "yeah, we got fucked, too." I'm not inclined to accept that, because I had nothing to do with it in the first place. I campaigned hard against ACA then, and now. And, I'm not prepared to say "well, then, I guess it's OK that we get fucked, since you did."

    Funding (or not funding) the federal government is a job that starts with the House of Representatives. It's in the Constitution, you can look it up - Article I, Section 7. If you're googling it, look for the annotated version, where all of the Supreme's decisions are included. I'm really disappointed that they haven't passed a budget in fucking forever, it seems, but I'm much less pissed that they are refusing to continue the status quo.

    EVERY presidential election, we hear "not voting is the same as voting for X." Why doesn't that same logic apply to the people whose entire job is to vote for, or against, or present? The answer is because you don't agree with their lack of vote. Period. End of story. It's not a circumvention of the legislative process. It IS the legislative process, following rules that pre-date and preempt pretty much every other thing that has ever come out of that cesspool.
  7. OwlMatt is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Posts
    891

    Posted On:
    10/09/2013 10:07pm


     Style: aikido

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by hungryjoe View Post
    Because they may or may not lose.
    Every news outlet other than Fox News is pretty sure a clean resolution would pass.

    You've seen this sort of procedural maneuver played out on both sides. Remember, a good majority on both sides are lolyers (sorry Sam, Georgette, Erik and any others I forget about or know not).
    Yes I have, and I don't like it when either side does it.

    Remember, we have a debt ceiling issue due in what, eight days?
    Yes we do, but I'm not sure what your point is.
  8. hungryjoe is offline
    hungryjoe's Avatar

    Light Heavyweight

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    3,427

    Posted On:
    10/09/2013 10:30pm

    supporting member
     Style: judo hiatus

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    =OwlMatt;2801067]Every news outlet other than Fox News is pretty sure a clean resolution would pass.
    Yeah, and none of them are biased, including FNN.


    Yes I have, and I don't like it when either side does it.
    Like letter vs spirit of the law, it's all seen through the eye of the entity holding the power.

    Yes we do, but I'm not sure what your point is
    There has to be some give and take in the spending. The dems want Obama care and their current rate of spending. Truth be told, they'd not blink at increasing spending in the name of bettering the economy. We've heard it again and again. Repubs on the other hand, want less spending, limited government agency edicts and to do away with Obamacare among others.

    My belief is that both sides are choosing their battles. It'll probably play out bad for the republicans in the end as the majority of the country will put the large part of the blame at their feet. We saw it last time, helped in no small part by the media portrayal of the gamesmanship leading up to the sequester and past issues, real or not, of the economy, employment, women's reproductive rights, old people being thrown over the cliff, etc, etc, etc.
    Last edited by hungryjoe; 10/09/2013 10:35pm at .
  9. OwlMatt is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Posts
    891

    Posted On:
    10/09/2013 10:53pm


     Style: aikido

    1
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by submessenger View Post
    What happened with the union **** in your state was a travesty, I agree. I don't think we're on the same side of that issue, but I understand where you're coming from.

    The bare truth of the matter at the Federal level is, with ACA, they (Democrats) were going to pass the law no matter what objections were brought up. Deem and pass, though not executed, was a serious consideration. "... we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it..." Remember that gem? Reconciliation, all the little parliamentary "tricks?" Really, it's no different from the Dems hiding out in other states to prevent the vote.
    Pulling "tricks" to win votes (which has happened for every piece of contentious legislation ever passed) is not the same thing as trying to legislate without voting.

    You want to talk about crybaby obstructionism, there it is. Buying votes with favors, nobody really knowing what was in the bill, party-line voting. That's ACA. So, as much as you want to believe it's "law of the land," there's still a significant chunk - if not a majority - of people that don't want it, never wanted it. But, yeah, that's the legislative process.
    You use the word believe as if belief has any bearing on what is or is not law. The ACA is law, no matter what I believe, no matter who likes it, because it was passed in Congress.

    The same goes for your example of the 18th Amendment. It was passed with "tricks" and most people never wanted it, but it was still the law until a group of people came along with enough votes to get rid of it. That's how it works.

    Now, you're presenting your state's union vote as some sort of peace offering, "yeah, we got fucked, too." I'm not inclined to accept that, because I had nothing to do with it in the first place. I campaigned hard against ACA then, and now. And, I'm not prepared to say "well, then, I guess it's OK that we get fucked, since you did."
    You didn't get fucked. You lost a vote. If losing a vote is getting fucked, then every piece of legislation ever passed without a unanimous vote is a fraud. I brought up the example from Wisconsin to show that my beef is with the method, not with the political ideology that method is intended to serve.

    Funding (or not funding) the federal government is a job that starts with the House of Representatives. It's in the Constitution, you can look it up - Article I, Section 7. If you're googling it, look for the annotated version, where all of the Supreme's decisions are included. I'm really disappointed that they haven't passed a budget in fucking forever, it seems, but I'm much less pissed that they are refusing to continue the status quo.
    You should be pissed. And the reason you should be pissed has nothing to do with Obamacare; it's that validating the use of the budget as a veto opens the door for abuse by Democrats as well as Republicans. We don't like this increase in military spending you just passed legitimately with a vote, so we're not going to let the government be funded until you take it back.

    EVERY presidential election, we hear "not voting is the same as voting for X." Why doesn't that same logic apply to the people whose entire job is to vote for, or against, or present?
    I think that's pretty fucked up logic, whatever you apply it to.

    The answer is because you don't agree with their lack of vote. Period. End of story.
    That is the answer. I have a problem with anyone in legislature deciding that what they want is so important that they shouldn't have to win a vote to get it.

    It's not a circumvention of the legislative process. It IS the legislative process, following rules that pre-date and preempt pretty much every other thing that has ever come out of that cesspool.
    I think there's a difference between saying "this is the way government is supposed to work" and saying "this doesn't break any of the rules". You're right, the Tea Partiers are within the rules, but that doesn't mean that what they're doing doesn't royally **** up the process those rules are designed to protect. I think it does, if it succeeds.
  10. OwlMatt is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Posts
    891

    Posted On:
    10/09/2013 11:31pm


     Style: aikido

    1
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by hungryjoe View Post
    Yeah, and none of them are biased, including FNN.
    Oh, they're all biased. But if they're all saying the same thing (at least in the case of something that is an objective matter of numbers), it's probably because it's true.

    There has to be some give and take in the spending. The dems want Obama care and their current rate of spending. Truth be told, they'd not blink at increasing spending in the name of bettering the economy. We've heard it again and again. Repubs on the other hand, want less spending, limited government agency edicts and to do away with Obamacare among others.
    The Dems don't just want Obamacare; they already passed it. There does have to be give-and-take in spending, especially in a split Congress, but if a group of Democrats was trying to use the budget to veto something the Republicans had already passed, I don't think Republicans would call that give-and-take; they'd call that an abuse of power.

    My belief is that both sides are choosing their battles. It'll probably play out bad for the republicans in the end as the majority of the country will put the large part of the blame at their feet. We saw it last time, helped in no small part by the media portrayal of the gamesmanship leading up to the sequester and past issues, real or not, of the economy, employment, women's reproductive rights, old people being thrown over the cliff, etc, etc, etc.
    Blaming the media is what losers do. This will play out badly for Republicans, because Americans have been watching them trying -- and failing -- to stop Obamacare every which way for years now. Their continued failure makes them look weak, and their persistence in the face of that failure makes them look desperate and obsessed.

    Of course, that all goes away if this works and they manage to defund or delay Obamacare, but I don't think that's going to happen. The Democrats in Congress seem to be solidly behind the President, and the President has no reason to back down: he's not running for reelection, the Republicans are getting worse press from this than he is, and the ACA is all he has left to hang his hat on.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.