House GOP Backtracking On Promised 'Reforms' Before They Even Get Started

[Liability]

Don't you facking lie and even Charlie will back me up on that shat. The archived posts don't lie dumbass.

Idiot. Fight your own fucking battles and stop whining to your cousin.

Say another facking word and I'll post what you said, I don't need Bass to fight my battles unlike you whining to Gunny.

Oh nozies!

Fail-low fails again!

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Just like when obamaturd and all the other dimwit leaders lied and said that the health care bill would not raise premiums and costs, idiots. You probably supported them the last two years when they were taking over more of private business.

When you show me some facking evidence that the country had less government, lower taxes and virtually no debt and unemployment under Bush then talk to me maggot, otherwise shut the fack up. There was more government with Bush in office than with Obama.

Wrong, idiot. obamaturd is a socialist, just listen to him and see what he has done. Oh by the way, Californiagirl is not a racist, sounds like you are to me, idiot.

Wow .. yet another rocket scientist here to tell us that Obama is a socialist .. even though he's gone further to the right of George Bush's foreign policy.

Even though Wall Street poured money on him during the campaign .. because Wall Street likes to back socialists

Even though he's given away the bank to Wall Street and the banking industry .. because socialists like bankers

Even though he allowed the health insurance industry to write his health insurers bill .. because socialists are so fond of corporations

Even though he's a warmonger who engages in the same game of war-for-profit that all American presidents do .. because socialists love America's war machine

How would we ever find our way without these rocket scientists?

 

[California Girl]

Idiot. Fight your own fucking battles and stop whining to your cousin.

Say another facking word and I'll post what you said, I don't need Bass to fight my battles unlike you whining to Gunny.

Oh nozies!

Fail-low fails again!

I'm trying to work out what it is that he's threatening to post. Weird little fucker - wired wrong.

 

[Liability]

When you show me some facking evidence that the country had less government, lower taxes and virtually no debt and unemployment under Bush then talk to me maggot, otherwise shut the fack up. There was more government with Bush in office than with Obama.

Wrong, idiot. obamaturd is a socialist, just listen to him and see what he has done. Oh by the way, Californiagirl is not a racist, sounds like you are to me, idiot.

Wow .. yet another rocket scientist here to tell us that Obama is a socialist .. even though he's gone further to the right of George Bush's foreign policy.

Even though Wall Street poured money on him during the campaign .. because Wall Street likes to back socialists

Even though he's given away the bank to Wall Street and the banking industry .. because socialists like bankers

Even though he allowed the health insurance industry to write his health insurers bill .. because socialists are so fond of corporations

Even though he's a warmonger who engages in the same game of war-for-profit that all American presidents do .. because socialists love America's war machine

How would we ever find our way without these rocket scientists?

A. He has not gone to the right of President Bush's foreign policy.

B. Wall Street "poured" money exactly to the extent it found that course to be potentially helpful in preventing President Obama from later "hurting" them. That they would do that even for a guy with socialist inclination makes some sense since he would be perceived as -- in many ways -- a more urgent threat.

C. What does giving away the bank to to Wall Street and the banking industry even mean?

D. The health insurance industry did not write the Obamacare bill. They DID, certainly, have some input into some aspects of it. But so what? The whole tenor and tone of the Obamacare legislation is socialist even if the insurance industry found a lobby-effort way to get something out of it. WE are the ones who are gonna be screwed by it. That's the way it works with socialism.

E. There's nothing substantive behind your sophistry that President Obama is a "war monger." There's even less substance behind your EMPTY claim that it's 'war for profit' that he seeks. Your stale old rhetoric doesn't come close to qualifying as a fact.

But your post is still somewhat helpful: when we go looking for rocket scientists, we know not to include your name on the list of invited applicants.

 

[Liability]

Say another facking word and I'll post what you said, I don't need Bass to fight my battles unlike you whining to Gunny.

Oh nozies!

Fail-low fails again!

I'm trying to work out what it is that he's threatening to post. Weird little fucker - wired wrong.

Well you have written again (qualifying as more than "even one more word"). So, if he's true to his word, maybe we'll find out whatever he meant.

Also, isn't it interesting that he thinks he has some right to threaten you (if it's a threat, and it appears to have been intended as a "threat") to compel you to remain silent?

SOME libs seem entirely disinterested in the right of anybody but their side to "speak."

 

[California Girl]

Oh nozies!

Fail-low fails again!

I'm trying to work out what it is that he's threatening to post. Weird little fucker - wired wrong.

Well you have written again (qualifying as more than "even one more word"). So, if he's true to his word, maybe we'll find out whatever he meant.

Also, isn't it interesting that he thinks he has some right to threaten you (if it's a threat, and it appears to have been intended as a "threat") to compel you to remain silent?

SOME libs seem entirely disinterested in the right of anybody but their side to "speak."

Good point. I did respond. So I assume he will now carry out this 'threat'. Oh, what fun!! I suspect he is squirreling around, desperately trying to find 'evidence' to back up his whining.... no doubt taken out of context and achieving nothing other than to make himself look like a petty, sad, foolish little boy. Fun!

 

[Capitalist]

House GOP Backtracking on Promised 'Reforms' Before They Even Get Started

Anyone surprised? Not me.

Here comes the bull ___________...
(fill in the blank with appropriate wording)…..
I guess this means that things are going to get rough on Demorat Plantations... Detroit, New York, ect...
edit:
What time did they get sworn in? Must have been about 12 midnight to get on huff n puff that early.......

 

[Two Thumbs]

House GOP Backtracking on Promised 'Reforms' Before They Even Get Started

Anyone surprised? Not me.

Anyone surpised it's a huffpoop link that doesn't back up thier headline with facts?

Caught lying again

Or is that "still"?

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Wrong, idiot. obamaturd is a socialist, just listen to him and see what he has done. Oh by the way, Californiagirl is not a racist, sounds like you are to me, idiot.

Wow .. yet another rocket scientist here to tell us that Obama is a socialist .. even though he's gone further to the right of George Bush's foreign policy.

Even though Wall Street poured money on him during the campaign .. because Wall Street likes to back socialists

Even though he's given away the bank to Wall Street and the banking industry .. because socialists like bankers

Even though he allowed the health insurance industry to write his health insurers bill .. because socialists are so fond of corporations

Even though he's a warmonger who engages in the same game of war-for-profit that all American presidents do .. because socialists love America's war machine

How would we ever find our way without these rocket scientists?

A. He has not gone to the right of President Bush's foreign policy.

B. Wall Street "poured" money exactly to the extent it found that course to be potentially helpful in preventing President Obama from later "hurting" them. That they would do that even for a guy with socialist inclination makes some sense since he would be perceived as -- in many ways -- a more urgent threat.

C. What does giving away the bank to to Wall Street and the banking industry even mean?

D. The health insurance industry did not write the Obamacare bill. They DID, certainly, have some input into some aspects of it. But so what? The whole tenor and tone of the Obamacare legislation is socialist even if the insurance industry found a lobby-effort way to get something out of it. WE are the ones who are gonna be screwed by it. That's the way it works with socialism.

E. There's nothing substantive behind your sophistry that President Obama is a "war monger." There's even less substance behind your EMPTY claim that it's 'war for profit' that he seeks. Your stale old rhetoric doesn't come close to qualifying as a fact.

But your post is still somewhat helpful: when we go looking for rocket scientists, we know not to include your name on the list of invited applicants.

Not too bright, huh?

A. Why Obama Defaulted to Bush Foreign Policy Positions
Obama's Foreign Policy Similar to Bush's at End of 2009 - TIME

George H.W. Obama?
George H.W. Obama? | Foreign Policy

Ron Paul: Obama Foreign Policy Identical To Bush
Ron Paul: Obama Foreign Policy Identical To Bush

First 100 Days: Obama Foreign Policy Takes Pages from Bush Approach
First 100 Days: Obama Foreign Policy Takes Pages from Bush Approach - FoxNews.com

Obama's Foreign Policy Is Very Much A Continuation Of The Bush Policies
Obama's Foreign Policy Is Very Much A Continuation Of The Bush Policies - CBS News

Where is he to the right of Bush the unlearned mind asks ..

Obama, Bush, and the Judicious Use of Hellfire Missiles

When it comes to vaporizing Americans with Hellfire missiles, what's the difference between the Bush administration and the Obama administration? The Bush administration fretted about the legal implications.

If Bush was having Americans killed in Pakistan in 2008, then it's not surprising that President Barack Obama is ordering the CIA to kill American cleric and accused terrorist Anwar Al-Awlaki in Yemen in 2010, right? Not really—the cases are pretty different. From Woodward's account, it seems clear that the Bush administration was sincerely worried about the potential legal ramifications of killing Americans abroad—"the CIA would not reveal the particulars [of the attack] due to the implications under American law."

Much has changed since the Bush administration left office. Two years ago, the CIA was worrying about legal issues surrounding the killing of Americans at an alleged terrorist training camp in Pakistan. Now the Obama administration has apparently put American citizens on a "targeted killing" list.

The drone strikes described in Woodward's book aren't even the first example of the Bush administration worrying about the propriety of something the Obama administration seems comfortable with. Kamal Derwish (aka Ahmed Hijazi), a US citizen and alleged terrorist, was killed by a missile strike in Yemen in November 2002. At the time, US officials were quick to emphasize to reporters that Derwish was not the target of the attack.

By contrast, the Obama administration makes no bones about targeting Al-Awlaki or other US citizens. Dennis Blair, the former Director of National Intelligence, admitted that citizens are targeted for killing in a public congressional hearing in January. On Friday, the government responded to a lawsuit intended to obtain an injunction against killing Al-Awlaki without due process. The lawsuit, which was brought by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Constitutional Rights on behalf of Al-Awlaki's father, Nasser, has little chance of success.
Obama, Bush, and the Judicious Use of Hellfire Missiles | Mother Jones

Not too bright are ya'?

B. Too suggest that Wall Street would back a socialist is just straight ignorant. No further comment required.

C. It means the biggest beneficiaries of Obama's two years in office has been Wall Street and the banking industry by far .. and I suggest you go do some research on this first before I make you look stupid and ill-informed again.

D. Baucus Thanks Wellpoint VP Liz Fowler for Writing Health Care Bill
Baucus Thanks Wellpoint VP Liz Fowler for Writing Health Care Bill | FDL Action

Not only did health insurers write the fucking bill .. guess who Obama picked to administer it?

Obama Adm. Defends Hiring Of Ex-Health Insurance Exec To Oversee Reform
Obama Adm. Defends Hiring Of Ex-Health Insurance Exec To Oversee Reform

E. War for profit isn't just what Obama seeks .. it's what all US presidents seek. Our military is just glorified security guards for business.

Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan .. just business.

Perhaps video games might be closer to your level of comprehension.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

House GOP Backtracking on Promised 'Reforms' Before They Even Get Started

Anyone surprised? Not me.

Anyone surpised it's a huffpoop link that doesn't back up thier headline with facts?

Caught lying again

Or is that "still"?

Did the Wall Street Journal lie?

They published it.

How dumb does one have to be not to know that republicans are backtracking on a lot of shit .. already posted?

 

[California Girl]

House GOP Backtracking on Promised 'Reforms' Before They Even Get Started

Anyone surprised? Not me.

Anyone surpised it's a huffpoop link that doesn't back up thier headline with facts?

Caught lying again

Or is that "still"?

Did the Wall Street Journal lie?

They published it.

How dumb does one have to be not to know that republicans are backtracking on a lot of shit .. already posted?

The new congress hasn't started work yet. It's a tad silly to buy into shit about what they are doing.... before they've even taken their seats.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

blackcoal in case you missed this post

ANYONE surprised this article posted by Flaylo is from the Huffington POST?

I'm not.

Nor is it surprising that you didn't have the capacity to refute what was said.

If the Post is lying about what republicans said, surely an intelligent mind could easily refute it .. but that takes us back to the question of capacity.

Sure it's a lie pushed by the media, and the best way to find out if it's a lie is wait nd see if this is true.

Official: House GOP Will Vote on ObamaCare Repeal Next Week
Official: House GOP Will Vote on ObamaCare Repeal Next Week | The Blaze

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Anyone surpised it's a huffpoop link that doesn't back up thier headline with facts?

Caught lying again

Or is that "still"?

Did the Wall Street Journal lie?

They published it.

How dumb does one have to be not to know that republicans are backtracking on a lot of shit .. already posted?

The new congress hasn't started work yet. It's a tad silly to buy into shit about what they are doing.... before they've even taken their seats.

Is it silly when REPUBLICANS tell you they've backtracked, flipflopped, and lied .. such as on earmarks?

Honest question sister.

 

[Two Thumbs]

House GOP Backtracking on Promised 'Reforms' Before They Even Get Started

Anyone surprised? Not me.

Anyone surpised it's a huffpoop link that doesn't back up thier headline with facts?

Caught lying again

Or is that "still"?

Did the Wall Street Journal lie?

They published it.

How dumb does one have to be not to know that republicans are backtracking on a lot of shit .. already posted?

hmm let me check my calender

The 112th was more or less "official" on 1/1/11, that was a Saturday, and a holiday. 1/2/11 was a Sunday, not many people work on Sunday, and I know government doesn't.

So that leave the 3rd, the 4th and this morning before 9 o'clock.

Anyone that buys into "true" statements that the GOP is backing down on everything already is either a fool or wants to be fooled.

Take your pick

 

[uscitizen]

ANYONE surprised this article posted by Flaylo is from the Huffington POST?

I'm not.

Nor is it surprising that you didn't have the capacity to refute what was said.

If the Post is lying about what republicans said, surely an intelligent mind could easily refute it .. but that takes us back to the question of capacity.

No one with an IQ over room temperature takes what the HuffPuff "reports" as anything more than partisan bullshit.

What's really funny... the OP is prone to hysteria over every sentence uttered by FNC... and yet apparently sees the HuffPuff as non-partisan. He's an intellectual lightweight. So are you if you accept this shit as fact.

Yeah I do rate Huffington Post and Fox on about the same level.
Just on different sides.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I'm forced to agree with CG (even writing that gave me a chill). Of course it's silly to argue about what the House my do in the next days and weeks. Better we speculate on the consequences if those newly elected members follow through on their campaign promises.

What if they are able to prevent the debt ceiling from being raised?
What if they are successful in overturning 'Obamacare'?
What if they are successful in ending all earmarks?

What are the consequences, both intended (and speculate on what might be the unintended consequence) of such actions?

 

[BlackAsCoal]

blackcoal in case you missed this post

Nor is it surprising that you didn't have the capacity to refute what was said.

If the Post is lying about what republicans said, surely an intelligent mind could easily refute it .. but that takes us back to the question of capacity.

Sure it's a lie pushed by the media, and the best way to find out if it's a lie is wait nd see if this is true.

Official: House GOP Will Vote on ObamaCare Repeal Next Week
Official: House GOP Will Vote on ObamaCare Repeal Next Week | The Blaze

Thank you brother .. but I didn't miss it.

Is this a backtrack/flip flop .. or did the Huffington Post just make this up?

Republicans Flip-Flop on Earmarks Issue

After realizing how difficult it will be to secure funding for projects such as fixing bridges and building water systems, Republicans in the House and Senate are having second thoughts about their votes in support of a blanket ban on earmarks.

Some are trying to redefine the term in order to give themselves wiggle room. GOP Rep. Jack Kingston said "we have gone one step further than we meant to go," while Rep. Michele Bachmann questioned how transportation gets funded without earmarks.

Meanwhile, left-leaning and libertarian commentators are having fun watching Republicans squirm as they "learn what the word ´Ban´ means," as Reason Magazine put it, while Outside the Beltway called the ban "purely symbolic and utterly pointless."

PolitiFact: Rubio, Nelson Flip Flop on Earmarks
PolitiFact: Rubio, Nelson Flip Flop on Earmarks | WUSF Public Media

Hypocrite of the Week: Michele Bachmann, Earmark Flip-Flopper

Bachmann, the founding member of the Congressional Tea Party Caucus, protested her own party’s push for an earmark ban after realizing she wouldn’t be able to bring home government funding for her own pet projects.

Hypocrite of the Week: Michele Bachmann, Earmark Flip-Flopper | DCCC

Here's the problem with Americans and why we don't deserve good government .. WE'RE A NATION OF MORONS.

Both democrats and republicans will see, hear, and speak no evil as long as it's their party doing it.

Both parties lie and play their constituents like a stable of two-dollar whores .. and their constituents keep begging for more.

"Use me daddy"

Do whatever you want to me, this nation, and my family. Lie to my face .. piss on my head and tell me its raining .. I'll believe whatever the fuck you tell me.

American politics in a nutshell.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

blackcoal in case you missed this post

Sure it's a lie pushed by the media, and the best way to find out if it's a lie is wait nd see if this is true.

Official: House GOP Will Vote on ObamaCare Repeal Next Week
Official: House GOP Will Vote on ObamaCare Repeal Next Week | The Blaze

Thank you brother .. but I didn't miss it.

Is this a backtrack/flip flop .. or did the Huffington Post just make this up?

Republicans Flip-Flop on Earmarks Issue

After realizing how difficult it will be to secure funding for projects such as fixing bridges and building water systems, Republicans in the House and Senate are having second thoughts about their votes in support of a blanket ban on earmarks.

Some are trying to redefine the term in order to give themselves wiggle room. GOP Rep. Jack Kingston said "we have gone one step further than we meant to go," while Rep. Michele Bachmann questioned how transportation gets funded without earmarks.

Meanwhile, left-leaning and libertarian commentators are having fun watching Republicans squirm as they "learn what the word ´Ban´ means," as Reason Magazine put it, while Outside the Beltway called the ban "purely symbolic and utterly pointless."

PolitiFact: Rubio, Nelson Flip Flop on Earmarks
PolitiFact: Rubio, Nelson Flip Flop on Earmarks | WUSF Public Media

Hypocrite of the Week: Michele Bachmann, Earmark Flip-Flopper

Bachmann, the founding member of the Congressional Tea Party Caucus, protested her own party’s push for an earmark ban after realizing she wouldn’t be able to bring home government funding for her own pet projects.

Hypocrite of the Week: Michele Bachmann, Earmark Flip-Flopper | DCCC

Here's the problem with Americans and why we don't deserve good government .. WE'RE A NATION OF MORONS.

Both democrats and republicans will see, hear, and speak no evil as long as it's their party doing it.

Both parties lie and play their constituents like a stable of two-dollar whores .. and their constituents keep begging for more.

"Use me daddy"

Do whatever you want to me, this nation, and my family. Lie to my face .. piss on my head and tell me its raining .. I'll believe whatever the fuck you tell me.

American politics in a nutshell.

OK let's put it to a test when funding comes up for a vote lets see how that goes. Until then it's just wait and see wat happens.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Anyone surpised it's a huffpoop link that doesn't back up thier headline with facts?

Caught lying again

Or is that "still"?

Did the Wall Street Journal lie?

They published it.

How dumb does one have to be not to know that republicans are backtracking on a lot of shit .. already posted?

hmm let me check my calender

The 112th was more or less "official" on 1/1/11, that was a Saturday, and a holiday. 1/2/11 was a Sunday, not many people work on Sunday, and I know government doesn't.

So that leave the 3rd, the 4th and this morning before 9 o'clock.

Anyone that buys into "true" statements that the GOP is backing down on everything already is either a fool or wants to be fooled.

Take your pick

Anyone who defends politicians lying to their face is a whore .. a two-dollar whore.

You mean their words have no meaning .. even when it comes right out of their mouths?

 

[Two Thumbs]

I'm forced to agree with CG (even writing that gave me a chill). Alternate cold then heat for serious cramping. Of course it's silly to argue about what the House my do in the next days and weeks. Better we speculate on the consequences if those newly elected members follow through on their campaign promises.

What if they are able to prevent the debt ceiling from being raised? We can use that as a starting point to lower the debt.
What if they are successful in overturning 'Obamacare'? People will scream, people will cheer. And maybe it can be re-done in a fashion that lowers my premium instead of raising it greatly, like what happend this year.
What if they are successful in ending all earmarks? Then we will have politicians that have to be politicians instead of master bribers.

What are the consequences, both intended (and speculate on what might be the unintended consequence) of such actions?

If it works, we all win. If it doesn't, we will need to fix what went wrong before it gets worse.

The big issue is; Can the House alone do that much? It's a single branch.

realistically my hopes are not that high.