How the Republican Government shutdown works

[Faun]

Kazzer. You said Republicans didn't have the votes to prevent Democrats from passing whatever they wanted during Obama's first two years in office.

The only way that statement is true is if Democrats held a super majority for Obama's first two years.

You have no honor; which is why you refuse to own up to your lies.

The GOP didn't have the votes to prevent the Democrats from passing the Affordable Care Act! If they couldn't stop THAT ( which they hated and the public overwhelmingly didn't want as well!) then how can you claim that the GOP had the votes to stop him from passing immigration reform or massive tax increases?

You moron -- that was during the 4 months Democrats had a super majority. You know, what you claimed they had for two years.

I've never claimed that the Democrats had super majorities for two years. What I said was that they had majorities in the House and Senate for two years and super majorities for enough time that if they'd wanted to they could have passed anything they desired and the Republicans couldn't have done a thing about it!

Stop lying. Yes, you said they had a super majority for Obama's first year (*my apologies, you said first year, not first two years)...

"IT DIDN'T MATTER WHAT THE GOP DID THAT FIRST YEAR...THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE VOTES TO STOP THE DEMOCRATS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

That's reality. Yet time after time after time...both this Administration and liberals everywhere blame the GOP for Barack Obama's inability to get things accomplished! My question...once again...is how could the GOP not stop ObamaCare (which they hated) yet they COULD stop the rest of Barry's agenda? That doesn't make a bit of sense.

Your question is retarded. You don't realize that because you're a conservative. The only reason the Republicans couldn't stop ObamaCare is because Democrats passed it while the Democrats had a super majority. If not for that, Republicans would have blocked that too.

The truth is...the far left wing of your party couldn't get moderate Democrats to vote for that agenda. It wasn't the GOP who stopped the Barry, Harry and Nancy Show...it was Blue Dog Democrats who flat out told those three idiots that raising taxes on anyone in the middle of a recession didn't make sense from an economics stand point because it would bring an already weak recovery to a screeching halt. Those same Blue Dogs also told the leaders of the Democratic Party that increasing the costs to US businesses by pushing Cap & Trade legislation was going to be a jobs killer and they wouldn't go along with that either.

Either you're too stupid to comprehend or too senile to remember. Against the wishes of his own party, Obama struck a deal with Republicans to keep the Bush tax cuts for an additional 2 years in exchange for Republican support to extend unemployment benefits. You really can't anything right, can you?

Bush Tax-Cut Deal With Jobless Aid Said to Be Near

You just accused me of lying...and then apologized for that not being the case in the same paragraph! Get your shit together! The person who lied was you when you accused me of saying the GOP had super majorities for the first two years of Barrack Obama's presidency. Now you've backed off that lie to make another one claiming that I said they had super majorities the entire first year of Obama's presidency which I didn't say either. All I did say was that the GOP couldn't stop Obama's agenda that first year because they didn't have the votes to do so when the Democrats DID have super majorities in place.

You did lie. You said Democrats had a super majority for Obama's first year. That doesn't become truthful because I mistakenly said 2 years instead of 1.

And you're still lying since the were capable of blocking any bill they wanted in the Senate during Obama's first 8 months in office.

 

[Oldstyle]

And if you read the article you cite from the New York Times it clearly states that all of the Republicans in the Senate voted against letting the Bush tax cuts expire along with five Democrats who also refused to go along with that despite a push from progressive leaders to do so. The reason that was given (also from your Times article) was that economists were warning about the danger of raising taxes during an economic slowdown. Obama only compromised when he couldn't sway those Blue Dog Democrats into going along with his plans to raise taxes on the wealthy. It wasn't the GOP that was preventing the progressive wing of the Democratic Party from getting what it wanted! It was Democrats in both the House and Senate that wouldn't go along with what they saw as unwise and potentially dangerous policies that were being pushed by their liberal colleagues.

 

[Oldstyle]

The GOP didn't have the votes to prevent the Democrats from passing the Affordable Care Act! If they couldn't stop THAT ( which they hated and the public overwhelmingly didn't want as well!) then how can you claim that the GOP had the votes to stop him from passing immigration reform or massive tax increases?

You moron -- that was during the 4 months Democrats had a super majority. You know, what you claimed they had for two years.

I've never claimed that the Democrats had super majorities for two years. What I said was that they had majorities in the House and Senate for two years and super majorities for enough time that if they'd wanted to they could have passed anything they desired and the Republicans couldn't have done a thing about it!

Stop lying. Yes, you said they had a super majority for Obama's first year (*my apologies, you said first year, not first two years)...

"IT DIDN'T MATTER WHAT THE GOP DID THAT FIRST YEAR...THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE VOTES TO STOP THE DEMOCRATS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

That's reality. Yet time after time after time...both this Administration and liberals everywhere blame the GOP for Barack Obama's inability to get things accomplished! My question...once again...is how could the GOP not stop ObamaCare (which they hated) yet they COULD stop the rest of Barry's agenda? That doesn't make a bit of sense.

Your question is retarded. You don't realize that because you're a conservative. The only reason the Republicans couldn't stop ObamaCare is because Democrats passed it while the Democrats had a super majority. If not for that, Republicans would have blocked that too.

The truth is...the far left wing of your party couldn't get moderate Democrats to vote for that agenda. It wasn't the GOP who stopped the Barry, Harry and Nancy Show...it was Blue Dog Democrats who flat out told those three idiots that raising taxes on anyone in the middle of a recession didn't make sense from an economics stand point because it would bring an already weak recovery to a screeching halt. Those same Blue Dogs also told the leaders of the Democratic Party that increasing the costs to US businesses by pushing Cap & Trade legislation was going to be a jobs killer and they wouldn't go along with that either.

Either you're too stupid to comprehend or too senile to remember. Against the wishes of his own party, Obama struck a deal with Republicans to keep the Bush tax cuts for an additional 2 years in exchange for Republican support to extend unemployment benefits. You really can't anything right, can you?

Bush Tax-Cut Deal With Jobless Aid Said to Be Near

You just accused me of lying...and then apologized for that not being the case in the same paragraph! Get your shit together! The person who lied was you when you accused me of saying the GOP had super majorities for the first two years of Barrack Obama's presidency. Now you've backed off that lie to make another one claiming that I said they had super majorities the entire first year of Obama's presidency which I didn't say either. All I did say was that the GOP couldn't stop Obama's agenda that first year because they didn't have the votes to do so when the Democrats DID have super majorities in place.

You did lie. You said Democrats had a super majority for Obama's first year. That doesn't become truthful because I mistakenly said 2 years instead of 1.

And you're still lying since the were capable of blocking any bill they wanted in the Senate during Obama's first 8 months in office.

Show me where I said that the Democrats had a super majority for the first year. I simply said that the GOP wasn't able to stop the Democrats from passing their agenda in the first year because they didn't have the votes unless other Democrats voted with them...which was the case.

 

[Faun]

So they "focused" on healthcare...even though the number one concern of Americans back in 2009 wasn't healthcare but jobs and the economy? So at a time when the American people were begging for their elected officials to do something that would create jobs...Barry, Harry and Nancy decided that what THEY would focus on was seeing if they could get single payer healthcare passed something that was expected to COST jobs?

And then they wondered why they got their asses handed to them in the mid-terms...

Stop lying. They did focus on jobs. They passed ARRA a month into Obama's first term.

That wasn't a jobs bill for America. That was a liberal bailout for Public Sector employee unions...propping them up with Federal money so they didn't get laid off while the rest of American workers DID!

This is what you call, "the rest of American workers" getting laid off... spot the disconnect...

 

[Oldstyle]

Your claim that the Democrats were helpless against the GOP that first year is laughably false. Did they have to WAIT at times to pass legislation so that the GOP wasn't able to filibuster it? Yes they did. Did they still have plenty of time to pass that legislation once they did have filibuster proof majorities? Yes they did...IF THEY COULD GET THE BLUE DOG DEMOCRATS TO VOTE FOR IT!

 

[Faun]

You moron -- that was during the 4 months Democrats had a super majority. You know, what you claimed they had for two years.

I've never claimed that the Democrats had super majorities for two years. What I said was that they had majorities in the House and Senate for two years and super majorities for enough time that if they'd wanted to they could have passed anything they desired and the Republicans couldn't have done a thing about it!

Stop lying. Yes, you said they had a super majority for Obama's first year (*my apologies, you said first year, not first two years)...


"IT DIDN'T MATTER WHAT THE GOP DID THAT FIRST YEAR...THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE VOTES TO STOP THE DEMOCRATS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

That's reality. Yet time after time after time...both this Administration and liberals everywhere blame the GOP for Barack Obama's inability to get things accomplished! My question...once again...is how could the GOP not stop ObamaCare (which they hated) yet they COULD stop the rest of Barry's agenda? That doesn't make a bit of sense.

Your question is retarded. You don't realize that because you're a conservative. The only reason the Republicans couldn't stop ObamaCare is because Democrats passed it while the Democrats had a super majority. If not for that, Republicans would have blocked that too.

The truth is...the far left wing of your party couldn't get moderate Democrats to vote for that agenda. It wasn't the GOP who stopped the Barry, Harry and Nancy Show...it was Blue Dog Democrats who flat out told those three idiots that raising taxes on anyone in the middle of a recession didn't make sense from an economics stand point because it would bring an already weak recovery to a screeching halt. Those same Blue Dogs also told the leaders of the Democratic Party that increasing the costs to US businesses by pushing Cap & Trade legislation was going to be a jobs killer and they wouldn't go along with that either.

Either you're too stupid to comprehend or too senile to remember. Against the wishes of his own party, Obama struck a deal with Republicans to keep the Bush tax cuts for an additional 2 years in exchange for Republican support to extend unemployment benefits. You really can't anything right, can you?

Bush Tax-Cut Deal With Jobless Aid Said to Be Near

You just accused me of lying...and then apologized for that not being the case in the same paragraph! Get your shit together! The person who lied was you when you accused me of saying the GOP had super majorities for the first two years of Barrack Obama's presidency. Now you've backed off that lie to make another one claiming that I said they had super majorities the entire first year of Obama's presidency which I didn't say either. All I did say was that the GOP couldn't stop Obama's agenda that first year because they didn't have the votes to do so when the Democrats DID have super majorities in place.

You did lie. You said Democrats had a super majority for Obama's first year. That doesn't become truthful because I mistakenly said 2 years instead of 1.

And you're still lying since the were capable of blocking any bill they wanted in the Senate during Obama's first 8 months in office.

Show me where I said that the Democrats had a super majority for the first year. I simply said that the GOP wasn't able to stop the Democrats from passing their agenda in the first year because they didn't have the votes unless other Democrats voted with them...which was the case.

"IT DIDN'T MATTER WHAT THE GOP DID THAT FIRST YEAR...THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE VOTES TO STOP THE DEMOCRATS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

 

[Faun]

And if you read the article you cite from the New York Times it clearly states that all of the Republicans in the Senate voted against letting the Bush tax cuts expire along with five Democrats who also refused to go along with that despite a push from progressive leaders to do so. The reason that was given (also from your Times article) was that economists were warning about the danger of raising taxes during an economic slowdown. Obama only compromised when he couldn't sway those Blue Dog Democrats into going along with his plans to raise taxes on the wealthy. It wasn't the GOP that was preventing the progressive wing of the Democratic Party from getting what it wanted! It was Democrats in both the House and Senate that wouldn't go along with what they saw as unwise and potentially dangerous policies that were being pushed by their liberal colleagues.

Again, you demonstrate how retarded you are. Obama did not have to strike a deal with Republicans to extend the Bush tax cuts. If Obama truly didn't want them extended, as you claim, he would have let them expire.

 

[Oldstyle]

You can put up all the cute little graphs from MSNBC that you want, Faun...that won't change what the Obama Administration did with their stimulus. They gave billions to prop up the jobs of State and Local government employees so that THEY wouldn't get laid off while doing little to nothing to keep the same thing from taking place in the Private Sector. If you were a government worker in 2009 your job was relatively safe...if you were a Private Sector worker in 2009 your job was in dire peril or it was gone.

 

[Oldstyle]

I've never claimed that the Democrats had super majorities for two years. What I said was that they had majorities in the House and Senate for two years and super majorities for enough time that if they'd wanted to they could have passed anything they desired and the Republicans couldn't have done a thing about it!

Stop lying. Yes, you said they had a super majority for Obama's first year (*my apologies, you said first year, not first two years)...


"IT DIDN'T MATTER WHAT THE GOP DID THAT FIRST YEAR...THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE VOTES TO STOP THE DEMOCRATS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

That's reality. Yet time after time after time...both this Administration and liberals everywhere blame the GOP for Barack Obama's inability to get things accomplished! My question...once again...is how could the GOP not stop ObamaCare (which they hated) yet they COULD stop the rest of Barry's agenda? That doesn't make a bit of sense.

Your question is retarded. You don't realize that because you're a conservative. The only reason the Republicans couldn't stop ObamaCare is because Democrats passed it while the Democrats had a super majority. If not for that, Republicans would have blocked that too.

The truth is...the far left wing of your party couldn't get moderate Democrats to vote for that agenda. It wasn't the GOP who stopped the Barry, Harry and Nancy Show...it was Blue Dog Democrats who flat out told those three idiots that raising taxes on anyone in the middle of a recession didn't make sense from an economics stand point because it would bring an already weak recovery to a screeching halt. Those same Blue Dogs also told the leaders of the Democratic Party that increasing the costs to US businesses by pushing Cap & Trade legislation was going to be a jobs killer and they wouldn't go along with that either.

Either you're too stupid to comprehend or too senile to remember. Against the wishes of his own party, Obama struck a deal with Republicans to keep the Bush tax cuts for an additional 2 years in exchange for Republican support to extend unemployment benefits. You really can't anything right, can you?

Bush Tax-Cut Deal With Jobless Aid Said to Be Near

You just accused me of lying...and then apologized for that not being the case in the same paragraph! Get your shit together! The person who lied was you when you accused me of saying the GOP had super majorities for the first two years of Barrack Obama's presidency. Now you've backed off that lie to make another one claiming that I said they had super majorities the entire first year of Obama's presidency which I didn't say either. All I did say was that the GOP couldn't stop Obama's agenda that first year because they didn't have the votes to do so when the Democrats DID have super majorities in place.

You did lie. You said Democrats had a super majority for Obama's first year. That doesn't become truthful because I mistakenly said 2 years instead of 1.

And you're still lying since the were capable of blocking any bill they wanted in the Senate during Obama's first 8 months in office.

Show me where I said that the Democrats had a super majority for the first year. I simply said that the GOP wasn't able to stop the Democrats from passing their agenda in the first year because they didn't have the votes unless other Democrats voted with them...which was the case.

"IT DIDN'T MATTER WHAT THE GOP DID THAT FIRST YEAR...THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE VOTES TO STOP THE DEMOCRATS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

^^^ definition of a super majority ^^^

Only in your mind. Where does it say super majority in that sentence?

 

[Oldstyle]

And if you read the article you cite from the New York Times it clearly states that all of the Republicans in the Senate voted against letting the Bush tax cuts expire along with five Democrats who also refused to go along with that despite a push from progressive leaders to do so. The reason that was given (also from your Times article) was that economists were warning about the danger of raising taxes during an economic slowdown. Obama only compromised when he couldn't sway those Blue Dog Democrats into going along with his plans to raise taxes on the wealthy. It wasn't the GOP that was preventing the progressive wing of the Democratic Party from getting what it wanted! It was Democrats in both the House and Senate that wouldn't go along with what they saw as unwise and potentially dangerous policies that were being pushed by their liberal colleagues.

Again, you demonstrate how retarded you are. Obama did not have to strike a deal with Republicans to extend the Bush tax cuts. If Obama truly didn't want them extended, as you claim, he would have let them expire.

Obama didn't want them extended for Americans making over $200,000 a year. That was what the progressive wing of the Democratic Party and the Obama Administration were calling for that first year. He couldn't get the Blue Dog Democrats to go along with that because they rightly saw that it was AWFUL fiscal policy. It wasn't from a lack of trying though. And he couldn't let them expire because that would have been seen as a tax increase on everyone which even the far left progressives didn't want!

 

[Faun]

Your claim that the Democrats were helpless against the GOP that first year is laughably false. Did they have to WAIT at times to pass legislation so that the GOP wasn't able to filibuster it? Yes they did. Did they still have plenty of time to pass that legislation once they did have filibuster proof majorities? Yes they did...IF THEY COULD GET THE BLUE DOG DEMOCRATS TO VOTE FOR IT!

Again, for the mentally challenged ... without a filibuster proof Senate, Republicans could block any bill they chose. And get this ... they didn't need support from any Democrats to do that.

 

[Oldstyle]

Your claim that the Democrats were helpless against the GOP that first year is laughably false. Did they have to WAIT at times to pass legislation so that the GOP wasn't able to filibuster it? Yes they did. Did they still have plenty of time to pass that legislation once they did have filibuster proof majorities? Yes they did...IF THEY COULD GET THE BLUE DOG DEMOCRATS TO VOTE FOR IT!

Again, for the mentally challenged ... without a filibuster proof Senate, Republicans could block any bill they chose. And get this ... they didn't need support from any Democrats to do that.

But there were long stretches of time that first year when the Republicans didn't have the votes to filibuster in the Senate...did they? Long stretches of time when the only way that they COULD block bills was to get support from Democrats! You keep desperately trying to come up with excuses why this Administration wasn't able to pass legislation by blaming the GOP when in reality it came down to them not being able to convince members of their own Party to vote with them.

 

[Oldstyle]

And I note that you can't show where I lied. Did you want to apologize now for making that claim?

 

[Faun]

Stop lying. Yes, you said they had a super majority for Obama's first year (*my apologies, you said first year, not first two years)...


"IT DIDN'T MATTER WHAT THE GOP DID THAT FIRST YEAR...THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE VOTES TO STOP THE DEMOCRATS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Your question is retarded. You don't realize that because you're a conservative. The only reason the Republicans couldn't stop ObamaCare is because Democrats passed it while the Democrats had a super majority. If not for that, Republicans would have blocked that too.

Either you're too stupid to comprehend or too senile to remember. Against the wishes of his own party, Obama struck a deal with Republicans to keep the Bush tax cuts for an additional 2 years in exchange for Republican support to extend unemployment benefits. You really can't anything right, can you?

Bush Tax-Cut Deal With Jobless Aid Said to Be Near

You just accused me of lying...and then apologized for that not being the case in the same paragraph! Get your shit together! The person who lied was you when you accused me of saying the GOP had super majorities for the first two years of Barrack Obama's presidency. Now you've backed off that lie to make another one claiming that I said they had super majorities the entire first year of Obama's presidency which I didn't say either. All I did say was that the GOP couldn't stop Obama's agenda that first year because they didn't have the votes to do so when the Democrats DID have super majorities in place.

You did lie. You said Democrats had a super majority for Obama's first year. That doesn't become truthful because I mistakenly said 2 years instead of 1.

And you're still lying since the were capable of blocking any bill they wanted in the Senate during Obama's first 8 months in office.

Show me where I said that the Democrats had a super majority for the first year. I simply said that the GOP wasn't able to stop the Democrats from passing their agenda in the first year because they didn't have the votes unless other Democrats voted with them...which was the case.

"IT DIDN'T MATTER WHAT THE GOP DID THAT FIRST YEAR...THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE VOTES TO STOP THE DEMOCRATS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

^^^ definition of a super majority ^^^

Only in your mind. Where does it say super majority in that sentence?

You truly are dumb enough to believe that if you describe something, your description isn't what you're describing.

The words, "super majority, " don't have to appear there. What you described IS a super majority. I don't have to use the words "lunar module" to describe how we landed on the moon, but if I describe how we did, I would clearly be talking about the lunar module.

That's precisely what you did -- you described a super majority and now you're crying like a little bitch that you didn't use the words, "super majority."

 

[Oldstyle]

You just accused me of lying...and then apologized for that not being the case in the same paragraph! Get your shit together! The person who lied was you when you accused me of saying the GOP had super majorities for the first two years of Barrack Obama's presidency. Now you've backed off that lie to make another one claiming that I said they had super majorities the entire first year of Obama's presidency which I didn't say either. All I did say was that the GOP couldn't stop Obama's agenda that first year because they didn't have the votes to do so when the Democrats DID have super majorities in place.

You did lie. You said Democrats had a super majority for Obama's first year. That doesn't become truthful because I mistakenly said 2 years instead of 1.

And you're still lying since the were capable of blocking any bill they wanted in the Senate during Obama's first 8 months in office.

Show me where I said that the Democrats had a super majority for the first year. I simply said that the GOP wasn't able to stop the Democrats from passing their agenda in the first year because they didn't have the votes unless other Democrats voted with them...which was the case.

"IT DIDN'T MATTER WHAT THE GOP DID THAT FIRST YEAR...THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE VOTES TO STOP THE DEMOCRATS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

^^^ definition of a super majority ^^^

Only in your mind. Where does it say super majority in that sentence?

You truly are dumb enough to believe that if you describe something, your description isn't what you're describing.

The words, "super majority, " don't have to appear there. What you described IS a super majority. I don't have to use the words "lunar module" to describe how we landed on the moon, but if I describe how we did, I would clearly be talking about the lunar module.

That's precisely what you did -- you described a super majority and now you're crying like a little bitch that you didn't use the words, "super majority."

So you claim that I said the Democrats had super majorities for the first two years...then backed off that claim because I never said that...then you backed off the claim that I said they had super majorities for the first year because I never said that either...and now you're claiming that I "described" a super majority and in your mind that's the same thing as SAYING super majority?

Can't bring yourself to admit that I didn't lie...can you?

 

[Faun]

Your claim that the Democrats were helpless against the GOP that first year is laughably false. Did they have to WAIT at times to pass legislation so that the GOP wasn't able to filibuster it? Yes they did. Did they still have plenty of time to pass that legislation once they did have filibuster proof majorities? Yes they did...IF THEY COULD GET THE BLUE DOG DEMOCRATS TO VOTE FOR IT!

Again, for the mentally challenged ... without a filibuster proof Senate, Republicans could block any bill they chose. And get this ... they didn't need support from any Democrats to do that.

But there were long stretches of time that first year when the Republicans didn't have the votes to filibuster in the Senate...did they? Long stretches of time when the only way that they COULD block bills was to get support from Democrats! You keep desperately trying to come up with excuses why this Administration wasn't able to pass legislation by blaming the GOP when in reality it came down to them not being able to convince members of their own Party to vote with them.

What you're calling a "long stretch," was in fact, the period from 9.24.2009 until 2.4.2010; during which period, the Senate was in session for 72 days.

 

[Faun]

You can put up all the cute little graphs from MSNBC that you want, Faun...that won't change what the Obama Administration did with their stimulus. They gave billions to prop up the jobs of State and Local government employees so that THEY wouldn't get laid off while doing little to nothing to keep the same thing from taking place in the Private Sector. If you were a government worker in 2009 your job was relatively safe...if you were a Private Sector worker in 2009 your job was in dire peril or it was gone.

You remain a fucking moron. The data in that graph comes from the BLS.

You may not like that graph since it shows the hemorrhaging of jobs began coming to an end soon after ARRA was passed, but you can't dismiss it no matter who presents the data.

 

[Faun]

You did lie. You said Democrats had a super majority for Obama's first year. That doesn't become truthful because I mistakenly said 2 years instead of 1.

And you're still lying since the were capable of blocking any bill they wanted in the Senate during Obama's first 8 months in office.

Show me where I said that the Democrats had a super majority for the first year. I simply said that the GOP wasn't able to stop the Democrats from passing their agenda in the first year because they didn't have the votes unless other Democrats voted with them...which was the case.

"IT DIDN'T MATTER WHAT THE GOP DID THAT FIRST YEAR...THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE VOTES TO STOP THE DEMOCRATS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

^^^ definition of a super majority ^^^

Only in your mind. Where does it say super majority in that sentence?

You truly are dumb enough to believe that if you describe something, your description isn't what you're describing.

The words, "super majority, " don't have to appear there. What you described IS a super majority. I don't have to use the words "lunar module" to describe how we landed on the moon, but if I describe how we did, I would clearly be talking about the lunar module.

That's precisely what you did -- you described a super majority and now you're crying like a little bitch that you didn't use the words, "super majority."

So you claim that I said the Democrats had super majorities for the first two years...then backed off that claim because I never said that...then you backed off the claim that I said they had super majorities for the first year because I never said that either...and now you're claiming that I "described" a super majority and in your mind that's the same thing as SAYING super majority?

Can't bring yourself to admit that I didn't lie...can you?

Why would I say you didn't lie when you did?

 

[Oldstyle]

You can put up all the cute little graphs from MSNBC that you want, Faun...that won't change what the Obama Administration did with their stimulus. They gave billions to prop up the jobs of State and Local government employees so that THEY wouldn't get laid off while doing little to nothing to keep the same thing from taking place in the Private Sector. If you were a government worker in 2009 your job was relatively safe...if you were a Private Sector worker in 2009 your job was in dire peril or it was gone.

You remain a fucking moron. The data in that graph comes from the BLS.

You may not like that graph since it shows the hemorrhaging of jobs began coming to an end soon after ARRA was passed, but you can't dismiss it no matter who presents the data.

What that graph doesn't show is that as the hemorrhaging of Private Sector jobs was coming to an end...a hemorrhaging of Public Sector jobs was beginning as the Obama Stimulus money going to States and local governments ran out and they had to start laying off Public Sector employees. That's why the overall unemployment rate didn't dip substantially.

 

[Oldstyle]

Your claim that the Democrats were helpless against the GOP that first year is laughably false. Did they have to WAIT at times to pass legislation so that the GOP wasn't able to filibuster it? Yes they did. Did they still have plenty of time to pass that legislation once they did have filibuster proof majorities? Yes they did...IF THEY COULD GET THE BLUE DOG DEMOCRATS TO VOTE FOR IT!

Again, for the mentally challenged ... without a filibuster proof Senate, Republicans could block any bill they chose. And get this ... they didn't need support from any Democrats to do that.

But there were long stretches of time that first year when the Republicans didn't have the votes to filibuster in the Senate...did they? Long stretches of time when the only way that they COULD block bills was to get support from Democrats! You keep desperately trying to come up with excuses why this Administration wasn't able to pass legislation by blaming the GOP when in reality it came down to them not being able to convince members of their own Party to vote with them.

What you're calling a "long stretch," was in fact, the period from 9.24.2009 until 2.4.2010; during which period, the Senate was in session for 72 days.

If you've got legislation drawn up and you're waiting for the opportunity to pass it...a week would be enough time to get that done. You on the left keep trying to pretend that the only reason Obama didn't pass other things is that he didn't have enough time and that's a false narrative. He had time to pass the ACA. He could have passed immigration reform but he didn't have the stones to take that issue on. He could have passed Cap & Trade but couldn't get the realists in the Democratic Party to go along with that. He could have passed tax increases for the rich as well but smarter minds than his finally made him see that doing so would be terrible fiscal policy in the midst of an economic downturn as severe as they were in.

Bottom line...the narrative that the GOP "obstructed" Obama is laughably false. His own agenda obstructed Barack Obama because he couldn't get moderates in his own party to vote for much of it.