House no longer to enable Imperial Presidency

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

If I were Boehner, I would be afraid to negotiate with our President too

Boehner first came in ready to accept the deal Obama had offered in 2011. Obama told him that he had already turned that one down and it was no longer on the table

Boehner next asked for $800 billion in tax cuts and Obama told him he already had that with or without Boehner

So Boehner ran away from the table and fell on his face with a hopeless Plan B

Can Boehner be embarassed any further?

Republicans wanted to protect 100% of us from tax increases.

After negotiation, they were able to protect 99.4% of us from tax increases.

It was a nice win for Republicans who were in a rather unwinnable position.

Now that the 'middle class' got theirs, (human nature being what it is) they will support the arguments to cut freeloading as long as they as it does not affect them.

Republicans are in a MUCH stronger minority position now. This was a defacto win.

Leftards and their complict media spin to the contrary, and conservative butthurt certainly plays right into their hands.

As long as we have a large group of Americans who believe they can
(1) simply get what they want from the Federal Government
(2) believe they don't have to a necessarily work for it, we are simply "entitled" to our share
(3) someone else must make the sacrifice as well as foot the bill

..... trying to find ANY spending cuts that a "give me" mentality feels they somehow deserves won't be significant enough to bring us back from the brink of economic disaster. No, our debt will continue to climb dispute all the added tax hikes.

 

[jillian]

It's the same way they speak about black people...as if the Democrat party OWNS them and they are proud of it

it's horrible how they see people

Its not that Democrats own black people as much as that black people hate Republicans

and for a very good reason

...... they don't believe in big Government dependency and redistribution?

no. they wouldn't vote for people who have run the southern strategy for decades. why would they?

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

First thing you brought up "unemployment still hovering around 8%"....that's a half truth that omits the fact that when Obama took office the economy was losing 750,000k jobs/month and that in the interim between then and today unemployment rose significantly and had dropped significantly.

No need to read anything further than that, Jizzhead....no doubt it's more of the same half truth laden bullshit. You are predictable like that.

Asshole...learn to read.

I made it clear that Obama did not market the stimulus as one that would result in unemployment hoveriung at 8% 4 years later...and fox news reported it as a program that would likely not allow unemployemnt to reach acceptable nuimbers for years...and they were called liars by the likes of you.

So I ask again, moron.....where did Fox News lie?

(FYI...my post was in response to someone knocking Fox News......this is not about "excuses" idiots like you fall for when things dont pan out as promised...it is about where Fox News lied.)

And you have yet to show me where.

Now be a good little moron and answer my question...or should I simply assume you are not just a moron and an idiot.,....but illiterate too?

Is that it?

"Learn to read"

I just got thru telling you I didn't bother reading your predictably half truth laden pile of shit beyond the first line. Because that's what you do..you lay half truth laden piles of shit.

You seem to think I'm interested in engaging you in some kind of debate.....you are sorely mistaken....time and time again I've seen you trot out bullshit upon bullshit and when the kitchen gets too hot you take your ball and go home.

Like a typical far right whack job you aren't an honest broker and don't deserve much beyond general mocking.

Don't worry jarhead, when they find themselves backed up to a corner and no longer capable of defending their point, liar or personal attacks are all you will get from some on the left.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Its not that Democrats own black people as much as that black people hate Republicans

and for a very good reason

...... they don't believe in big Government dependency and redistribution?

no. they wouldn't vote for people who have run the southern strategy for decades. why would they?

According to history it was the democrats who were against ending slavery and stood in the way of civil rights. I'm going to need to see some actual specifics behind your statement.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

I am still awaiting to reason why black people are so opposed to the GOP.

Anyone?

If I were a Republican, I would say it was because Republicans demand they be self reliant and don't give "free stuff"

I advise Republicans to go with that....their constituents eat that up

Let me ask you Rightwinger. Democrats do favor "helping" (supposedly) the poor, it's not about government dependency at all. So tell me, what statistic can you provide for me that shows the poor, through help of the Federal Government, were actually able to move beyond that way of life to actually make it on their own without any additional government assistance. Making it on their own, referring to their ability to sustain their own lifestyle by working and becoming productive members of society, with the ability to pay taxes back into the system that aided them. Can you provide me any percentages? Please tell me we aren't just placing these individuals into an expensive form of "assisted living" program, with nothing to disprove total government dependence for the entire duration of their lives? Any statistics at all to disprove their need for total complete dependence to just more "free stuff", like cell phones, on the taxpayers dime?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Typical

A thread about Boehner and the House is now about black vs white

 

[rightwinger]

I am still awaiting to reason why black people are so opposed to the GOP.

Anyone?

If I were a Republican, I would say it was because Republicans demand they be self reliant and don't give "free stuff"

I advise Republicans to go with that....their constituents eat that up

Let me ask you Rightwinger. Democrats do favor "helping" (supposedly) the poor, it's not about government dependency at all. So tell me, what statistic can you provide for me that shows the poor, through help of the Federal Government, were actually able to move beyond that way if life to actually make it on their own without any additional government assistance. Making it on their own, referring to their ability to sustain their own lifestyle by working and becoming productive members of society, with the ability to pay taxes back into the system that aided them. Can you provide me any percentages? Please tell me we aren't just placing these individuals into an expensive form of "assisted living" program, with nothing to disprove total government dependence for the entire duration of their lives? Any statistics at all to disprove their need for total complete dependence to just more "free stuff", like cell phones, on the taxpayers dime?

Are you really that lame as to propose that no government program has ever helped someone escape poverty?

Save it for your FoxNation buddies

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

If I were a Republican, I would say it was because Republicans demand they be self reliant and don't give "free stuff"

I advise Republicans to go with that....their constituents eat that up

Let me ask you Rightwinger. Democrats do favor "helping" (supposedly) the poor, it's not about government dependency at all. So tell me, what statistic can you provide for me that shows the poor, through help of the Federal Government, were actually able to move beyond that way if life to actually make it on their own without any additional government assistance. Making it on their own, referring to their ability to sustain their own lifestyle by working and becoming productive members of society, with the ability to pay taxes back into the system that aided them. Can you provide me any percentages? Please tell me we aren't just placing these individuals into an expensive form of "assisted living" program, with nothing to disprove total government dependence for the entire duration of their lives? Any statistics at all to disprove their need for total complete dependence to just more "free stuff", like cell phones, on the taxpayers dime?

Are you really that lame as to propose that no government program has ever helped someone escape poverty?

Save it for your FoxNation buddies

Why is it you can't formulate ANY statistics, not one, that shows how many of the poor moved beyond government assistance with the ability to work and pay their own taxes? Where is the benefit of them actually "making it" to a better life? I don't care that they receive assistance from the government, but where is the fruit ( the proof) government actually helped them beyond a lifestyle of just simply receiving assistance?

Please don't tell me you can't support your argument that Democrats help the poor, they are not simply enablers to those who are unfortunate and CHOOSE not to work for a better life for themselves. I expected you to at least make an attempt to defend your position better than this. All I ask is statistical proof to defend your point. Please don't disappoint me.

 

[rightwinger]

Let me ask you Rightwinger. Democrats do favor "helping" (supposedly) the poor, it's not about government dependency at all. So tell me, what statistic can you provide for me that shows the poor, through help of the Federal Government, were actually able to move beyond that way if life to actually make it on their own without any additional government assistance. Making it on their own, referring to their ability to sustain their own lifestyle by working and becoming productive members of society, with the ability to pay taxes back into the system that aided them. Can you provide me any percentages? Please tell me we aren't just placing these individuals into an expensive form of "assisted living" program, with nothing to disprove total government dependence for the entire duration of their lives? Any statistics at all to disprove their need for total complete dependence to just more "free stuff", like cell phones, on the taxpayers dime?

Are you really that lame as to propose that no government program has ever helped someone escape poverty?

Save it for your FoxNation buddies

Why is it you can't formulate ANY statistics, not one, that shows how many of the poor moved beyond government assistance with the ability to work and pay their own taxes? Where is the benefit of them actually "making it" to a better life? I don't care that they receive assistance from the government, but where is the fruit ( the proof) government actually helped them beyond a lifestyle of just simply receiving assistance?

Please don't tell me you can't support your argument that Democrats help the poor, they are enablers to those who are unfortunate and CHOOSE not to work for a better life for themselves. I expected you to at least make an attempt to defend your position better than this. Don't disappoint me.

I prefer to argue against your premise that NO government programs help people escape poverty

You sticking to it?

 

[Mac1958]

.

Of course the government has helped some people escape poverty.

Unfortunately, dependence on it has also condemned generations of some families to less of a life than they could have created on their own.

It's not an either/or situation, it's a matter of finding a balance that provides a safety net without creating a crippling dependence.

We're not there yet, and we may be going in the wrong direction.

.

 

[Stephanie]

.

Of course the government has helped some people escape poverty.

Unfortunately, dependence on it has also condemned generations of some families to less of a life than they could have created on their own.

It's not an either/or situation, it's a matter of finding a balance that provides a safety net without creating a crippling dependence.

We're not there yet, and we may be going in the wrong direction.

.

good post

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Are you really that lame as to propose that no government program has ever helped someone escape poverty?

Save it for your FoxNation buddies

Why is it you can't formulate ANY statistics, not one, that shows how many of the poor moved beyond government assistance with the ability to work and pay their own taxes? Where is the benefit of them actually "making it" to a better life? I don't care that they receive assistance from the government, but where is the fruit ( the proof) government actually helped them beyond a lifestyle of just simply receiving assistance?

Please don't tell me you can't support your argument that Democrats help the poor, they are enablers to those who are unfortunate and CHOOSE not to work for a better life for themselves. I expected you to at least make an attempt to defend your position better than this. Don't disappoint me.

I prefer to argue against your premise that NO government programs help people escape poverty

You sticking to it?

So when faced with providing me evidence to support your argument that those in poverty aren't just receiving government checks, simply living off the government. Rightwinger chokes and can't validate his argument with any known facts.

 

[rightwinger]

Why is it you can't formulate ANY statistics, not one, that shows how many of the poor moved beyond government assistance with the ability to work and pay their own taxes? Where is the benefit of them actually "making it" to a better life? I don't care that they receive assistance from the government, but where is the fruit ( the proof) government actually helped them beyond a lifestyle of just simply receiving assistance?

Please don't tell me you can't support your argument that Democrats help the poor, they are enablers to those who are unfortunate and CHOOSE not to work for a better life for themselves. I expected you to at least make an attempt to defend your position better than this. Don't disappoint me.

I prefer to argue against your premise that NO government programs help people escape poverty

You sticking to it?

So when faced with providing me evidence to support your argument that those in poverty aren't just receiving government checks, simply living off the government. Rightwinger chokes and can't validate his argument with any known facts.

I'm not sure there are the magical statistics you are asking for. I don't see how they can be collected.
Do people in this country escape poverty? Of course they do
Does everyone receive some kind of government assistance? Of course they do. Some receive a little, some receive a lot

Can we put a concrete number on the degree which government assistance helps everyone? Probably not

Are you stil sticking to your ridiculous assertion that no government program helps people escape poverty? Of course you are. That is what we expect from conservative zealots

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

.

Of course the government has helped some people escape poverty.

Unfortunately, dependence on it has also condemned generations of some families to less of a life than they could have created on their own.

It's not an either/or situation, it's a matter of finding a balance that provides a safety net without creating a crippling dependence.

We're not there yet, and we may be going in the wrong direction.

.

There are those who live in unfortunate situations, however there are also those who choose to wander the streets instead of receiving free public education. Others choose to live a life selling drugs, developing an addiction to alcohol, that was their free choice to do so. Is the government obligated to support them financially, or by other means, for their own mistakes .... for the rest of their lives? Is it better to offer them help up to a point? When do these individuals become responsible for their own actions, and stop playing with society as the victim under the characteristics of an addict? Is not the Federal Government the biggest enabler to poverty? People are resilient and fully capable of working themselves out of any difficult circumstance, when the situation surrounding their life forces them to confront their OWN issues.


This was even foreseen by one of our Founders:

"I am for doing good to the poor, but...I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed...that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”

― Benjamin Franklin

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

I prefer to argue against your premise that NO government programs help people escape poverty

You sticking to it?

So when faced with providing me evidence to support your argument that those in poverty aren't just receiving government checks, simply living off the government. Rightwinger chokes and can't validate his argument with any known facts.

I'm not sure there are the magical statistics you are asking for. I don't see how they can be collected.
Do people in this country escape poverty? Of course they do
Does everyone receive some kind of government assistance? Of course they do. Some receive a little, some receive a lot

Can we put a concrete number on the degree which government assistance helps everyone? Probably not

Are you stil sticking to your ridiculous assertion that no government program helps people escape poverty? Of course you are. That is what we expect from conservative zealots

I think I made my point with your response, and my previous post concerning government as the enabler to poverty instead of forcing people to confront and face their OWN issues. Poverty through government assistance can, in itself, become an addiction just as much as any other. When government assistance becomes an excuse and a crutch to consistently always be there for them. where the ability to take a hard look in the mirror at their own choices is never forced upon them and dealt with. Why change, when a certain party only sees this as a golden opportunity to attain a block of committed voters to maintain their power in office? Take a long hard look at who's getting used here and taking advantage of another's misfortunes.

 

[rightwinger]

So when faced with providing me evidence to support your argument that those in poverty aren't just receiving government checks, simply living off the government. Rightwinger chokes and can't validate his argument with any known facts.

I'm not sure there are the magical statistics you are asking for. I don't see how they can be collected.
Do people in this country escape poverty? Of course they do
Does everyone receive some kind of government assistance? Of course they do. Some receive a little, some receive a lot

Can we put a concrete number on the degree which government assistance helps everyone? Probably not

Are you stil sticking to your ridiculous assertion that no government program helps people escape poverty? Of course you are. That is what we expect from conservative zealots

I think I made my point with your response, and my previous post concerning government as the enabler to poverty instead of forcing people to confront and face their OWN issues. Poverty through government assistance can, in itself, become an addiction just as much as any other, when government assistance becomes an excuse and a crutch to consistently to always be there for them. where the ability to take a hard look in the mirror at their own choices is never forced upon them. Why change, when a certain party only sees this as a golden opportunity to attain a block of committed voters to maintain their power in office? Take a long hard look at who's getting used here and taking advantage of another's misfortunes.

Actually, as usual, you fail

You look at government assistance as a crutch. For some people, it very well may be. But your assertion that because it is a crutch for some, it is a crutch for all is ludicrous.

GI Bill, Government Tuition Assistance, Jobs training programs, Government jobs programs, Medicaid, Social Security.....all Government programs....all have helped people escape poverty

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

I think I made my point with your response, and my previous post concerning government as the enabler to poverty instead of forcing people to confront and face their OWN issues. Poverty through government assistance can, in itself, become an addiction just as much as any other, when government assistance becomes an excuse and a crutch to consistently to always be there for them. where the ability to take a hard look in the mirror at their own choices is never forced upon them. Why change, when a certain party only sees this as a golden opportunity to attain a block of committed voters to maintain their power in office? Take a long hard look at who's getting used here and taking advantage of another's misfortunes.

Actually, as usual, you fail

You look at government assistance as a crutch. For some people, it very well may be. But your assertion that because it is a crutch for some, it is a crutch for all is ludicrous.

GI Bill, Government Tuition Assistance, Jobs training programs, Government jobs programs, Medicaid, Social Security.....all Government programs....all have helped people escape poverty

Ah, Rightwinger ...... My argument has always been about government assistance helping an individual work their way out of poverty ...... verses the government providing long term sustainability and becoming an enabler to poverty. You are looking rather foolish if you don't know the difference between short term assistance and long term sustainability. Take some time away from the computer and get yourself some sleep. Come back to me when your head is clear enough and you are capable of telling the difference between the two.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Require schooling, work in a specific trade or some other type of empowering education for govt assistance. Teach them something of value that they can sell in return for their aid. Then put strict limits on the aid.

The solutions are relatively easy. The choice to make those decisions is the hard part.

 

[Cammmpbell]

...... they don't believe in big Government dependency and redistribution?

no. they wouldn't vote for people who have run the southern strategy for decades. why would they?

According to history it was the democrats who were against ending slavery and stood in the way of civil rights. I'm going to need to see some actual specifics behind your statement.

LMAO!!! It's a helluva note when somebody has to resort to pre civil war to make a point.

 

[kiwiman127]

If I were Boehner, I would be afraid to negotiate with our President too

Boehner first came in ready to accept the deal Obama had offered in 2011. Obama told him that he had already turned that one down and it was no longer on the table

Boehner next asked for $800 billion in tax cuts and Obama told him he already had that with or without Boehner

So Boehner ran away from the table and fell on his face with a hopeless Plan B

Can Boehner be embarassed any further?

Republicans wanted to protect 100% of us from tax increases.

After negotiation, they were able to protect 99.4% of us from tax increases.

It was a nice win for Republicans who were in a rather unwinnable position.

Now that the 'middle class' got theirs, (human nature being what it is) they will support the arguments to cut freeloading as long as they as it does not affect them.

Republicans are in a MUCH stronger minority position now. This was a defacto win.

Leftards and their complict media spin to the contrary, and conservative butthurt certainly plays right into their hands.

The above post is a perfect example of what sniffing glue can do to people.