GObP wonn't cooperate with The President of The United States

[CrusaderFrank]

Kagan got SCOTUS because Obama was her favorite Kenyan born student

 

[hortysir]

still no fucking proof of your claims cons?

gee Im so surprised

It is a matter of historical record that beginning in 2001, Senate Democrats dramatically changed the confirmation process. Throughout the Bush administration, Democrats actively sought to block numerous judicial nominees, forcing more than 30 cloture votes as Republicans tried to end persistent Democratic filibuster efforts. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), voted against cloture a record-setting 27 times. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), cast 26 votes to filibuster Bush nominees and, in 2003, defiantly declared: “Yes, we are blocking judges by filibuster. That is part of the hallowed process around here.”
Even Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who now claims to have been “respectful of President Bush’s appointments,” repeatedly joined with Democratic colleagues in attempting to filibuster judicial confirmations, including seven separate votes against cloture for the nomination of Miguel Estrada—one of the nation’s leading appellate lawyers—to the D.C. Circuit.



Democratic hypocrisy - The Hill's Congress Blog

 

[ItsjustmeIthink]

Also, the debt ceiling issues aren't nearly as simple as most of you are making them out to be. Every time someone made a proposal to raise the debt ceiling, that proposal was chalk full of all sorts of other shit (the deal they made, after all, gave the president almost unilateral control of where it goes, and that via a deal with way less pork and bullshit added than its predecessors). The idea that ONLY one side or ONLY the other side was holding the whole issue hostage to get other shit done is just ridiculous. This is politics as usual for -both- parties, not just republicans.

You're right, both sides have used it for their own gains. What I am saying is that this time it's different. Afterall, how many times in the past has the dispute over the debt ceiling caused Standard & Poor to downgrade America's credit rating.

 

[ItsjustmeIthink]

You couldn't piss anybody off. You are far too intellectually crippled.

You spell about as well as your lib hero, the always mindless TdM.

But, despite your educational handicap, at least the substance of what you post is ridiculous.

Blocking the President's legislative agenda is a wholly good thing to the extent that the his legislative agenda includes socialist-like shit such as ObamaCare.

The ONE is an utterly reckless FAIL as President. To thwart that imbecile at EVERY turn is the way to go.

And the whole bebacle with conservatives publicly saying, "We'll take it down" directly referring to the debt ceiling if the democrats didn't give in to their demands (its worth mentioning that these "demands" were really more of a 3rd set of demands that the Reps. made after they found out the Dems may actually play ball) that was good too?

So if the Dems didn't compromise and the debt ceiling wasn't raised, it would have been perfectly fine for America not be able to pay a cent to people on medicare or social securty only so long as Obama was made to look bad in the progress?


And are you an English teacher? Because I couldn't help but notice you were correcting my spelling mistakes, grammar mistakes, etc. I just wanted to let you know I appreciate it, but its not nessacary because, to a limited-degree, its just irrelevant.

What the fuck is a bebacle?

Your illiteracy is not just irrelevant.

It impedes your ability to communicate what passes for your "thoughts."

I would try to answer the "question" you attempted to pose in that first sentence/paragraph of your clusterfuck post, but logic dictates that if it doesn't mean enough to you to pose intelligibly, then it probably isn't worth the time and effort required to decipher it.

Instead, I'll just reiterate it: opposing the sub-moron "policies" of the Imbecile in Chief is a wholly good thing EXACTLY to the extent that his policies are damaging, dangerous and violative of the ideals of our Constitutionally bound Republic.

Dude, at this point I honestly don't care if you can understand or not. If you lack the common sense to figure out what word is with a few simple typos then you're just another smartass I want nothing to do with.

 

[Liability]

And the whole bebacle with conservatives publicly saying, "We'll take it down" directly referring to the debt ceiling if the democrats didn't give in to their demands (its worth mentioning that these "demands" were really more of a 3rd set of demands that the Reps. made after they found out the Dems may actually play ball) that was good too?

So if the Dems didn't compromise and the debt ceiling wasn't raised, it would have been perfectly fine for America not be able to pay a cent to people on medicare or social securty only so long as Obama was made to look bad in the progress?


And are you an English teacher? Because I couldn't help but notice you were correcting my spelling mistakes, grammar mistakes, etc. I just wanted to let you know I appreciate it, but its not nessacary because, to a limited-degree, its just irrelevant.

What the fuck is a bebacle?

Your illiteracy is not just irrelevant.

It impedes your ability to communicate what passes for your "thoughts."

I would try to answer the "question" you attempted to pose in that first sentence/paragraph of your clusterfuck post, but logic dictates that if it doesn't mean enough to you to pose intelligibly, then it probably isn't worth the time and effort required to decipher it.

Instead, I'll just reiterate it: opposing the sub-moron "policies" of the Imbecile in Chief is a wholly good thing EXACTLY to the extent that his policies are damaging, dangerous and violative of the ideals of our Constitutionally bound Republic.

Dude, at this point I honestly don't care if you can understand or not. If you lack the common sense to figure out what word is with a few simple typos then you're just another smartass I want nothing to do with.

Oh nozies. The smartass illiterate with the superiority attitude got all upsetty wetty!

Imagine my horror.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Also, the debt ceiling issues aren't nearly as simple as most of you are making them out to be. Every time someone made a proposal to raise the debt ceiling, that proposal was chalk full of all sorts of other shit (the deal they made, after all, gave the president almost unilateral control of where it goes, and that via a deal with way less pork and bullshit added than its predecessors). The idea that ONLY one side or ONLY the other side was holding the whole issue hostage to get other shit done is just ridiculous. This is politics as usual for -both- parties, not just republicans.

You're right, both sides have used it for their own gains. What I am saying is that this time it's different. Afterall, how many times in the past has the dispute over the debt ceiling caused Standard & Poor to downgrade America's credit rating.

In my lifetime, neither party was willing, or actually working for the ruin of our country JUST TO MAKE A FUCKING POINT.

NO excuse for that. NO way anyone can build their position on that.

"Liability" - like most of the other rw's. Just insults and hoping to look kewl or intelligent. Now is not the time for that silly and very childish crap. Boehner is hoping we will ALL just follow people like Liability. Throw some insults around and vote for mittens.

People are smarter than that. Or, so I hope.

 

[Liability]

Also, the debt ceiling issues aren't nearly as simple as most of you are making them out to be. Every time someone made a proposal to raise the debt ceiling, that proposal was chalk full of all sorts of other shit (the deal they made, after all, gave the president almost unilateral control of where it goes, and that via a deal with way less pork and bullshit added than its predecessors). The idea that ONLY one side or ONLY the other side was holding the whole issue hostage to get other shit done is just ridiculous. This is politics as usual for -both- parties, not just republicans.

You're right, both sides have used it for their own gains. What I am saying is that this time it's different. Afterall, how many times in the past has the dispute over the debt ceiling caused Standard & Poor to downgrade America's credit rating.

In my lifetime, neither party was willing, or actually working for the ruin of our country JUST TO MAKE A FUCKING POINT.

NO excuse for that. NO way anyone can build their position on that.

"Liability" - like most of the other rw's. Just insults and hoping to look kewl or intelligent. Now is not the time for that silly and very childish crap. Boehner is hoping we will ALL just follow people like Liability. Throw some insults around and vote for mittens.

People are smarter than that. Or, so I hope.

No stupid. I point out your arrogance and dishonesty not to mention your hypocrisy.

And what I said (correctly) still stands -- fully unrebutted in any intelligent fashion by you or your kindred dolts.

It is not the job of the GOP to "cooperate" with the Imbecile in Chief. HIS policies are dangerously misguided and -- more simply -- wrong. Cooperating with that is therefore itself wrong.

Morons like you can't see it or refuse to.

Either way, the PEOPLE are indeed MUCH much smarter than you imagine you are.