Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
They may very well be right. I heard both sides arguments last night. But I'm not some sheep that just falls in line with a party position. I have not decided exactly how I feel about it. Bottom line is it is an option to keep us going forward. Right or not will be determined by the outcome.
That's the most unremarkable attempt to pass the buck I've ever seen. What he's basically saying is "don't make me do hard stuff. Republicans can't do hard stuff".
and where in the Constitution does this 2/3rds clause come from?
As long as there are still checks in the check book we can spend as much as we feel like, right? The balance does not really matter???
If we run out of checks, we can just print up more? That is what you are arguing. If a Business spent that way, or you and I, we would soon be in Federal Prison.
Why should the Government be allowed to do what is a crime for the rest of us???
You seem to demonize any attempt to correct course, which seems silly considering that the proposals at best reduce the rate of Government Growth, and do little or nothing to pay off Interest or Principle. It seems more every effort does more to compound the problem and lead us closer to destruction, almost deliberate, the way I see it. What is the offense??? Liberty, Independence, Choice, Private Property, Individual Conscience, Witness and Voice, For which of these do you want to bring us all down with you?
And this is coming from the same guy, that a few short months ago, was complaining about his street not being plowed..
You are about as serious as the investigation that couldn't even spot plow trucks parked in front of donut shops and 7-Elevens, bet you were not to good on hide and seek huh, or Monopoly either. I live a block away from a Major NYC Hospital, on a road used every day by Emergency Vehicles. From Saturday till Early Wednesday we waited. No salt (which should be applied after the first 1 & 1/2" of snow), the worst response in a very long time. While Bloomberg's jet was parked in the Virgin Islands was it? The City suffered from a planned and coordinated effort by Sanitation to pressure him. Even the Investigation was a farce, being political. Ask your friends. The only thing there proven was the corruption of Sanitation, the Investigators, the Mayor's office, and the Press. Well done. Nobody can claim that you don't know how to work together.
Let me see now, paying for Snow Plowing Services through multiple taxes, surcharges, and fee's, does not allow me to have a complaint, when the service is denied or obstructed in your eyes. Government is not the source of creation Sallow, neither is it the end all. Playing Winston Smith with the truth may gain you the votes of gullible Idiot's, for now. Maybe Charter Schools will effect that by limiting your pool of the brain dead in the future to come.
They may very well be right. I heard both sides arguments last night. But I'm not some sheep that just falls in line with a party position. I have not decided exactly how I feel about it. Bottom line is it is an option to keep us going forward. Right or not will be determined by the outcome.
Except the Conservatives who are criticizing McConnell are not falling in line with party position. Party position according to the GOP Senate is that McConnell's plan is a swell idea. People on both sides of the political spectrum are rightly blasting this stupid plan of his.
I see it as ingenious.
It is allowing Obama to do what he wants and FORCING him to keep his promise to cut spending.
Let us not forget...Obama PROMISED to scheck each bill with a scapel and eliminate any unecessary spedning.
He broke that promise.
So McConnell is basically saying..."you lost our trust so we must deal with you so you cant lie to us again....you get what you want but you lose your career if you lie to us"
Ingenious.
Political?
Sure.
Exactly what legislator can you name that does not scheme for political expediency?
That's the most unremarkable attempt to pass the buck I've ever seen. What he's basically saying is "don't make me do hard stuff. Republicans can't do hard stuff".
and where in the Constitution does this 2/3rds clause come from?
I see it as ingenious.
It is allowing Obama to do what he wants and FORCING him to keep his promise to cut spending.
Let us not forget...Obama PROMISED to scheck each bill with a scapel and eliminate any unecessary spedning.
He broke that promise.
So McConnell is basically saying..."you lost our trust so we must deal with you so you cant lie to us again....you get what you want but you lose your career if you lie to us"
Ingenious.
Political?
Sure.
Exactly what legislator can you name that does not scheme for political expediency?
I see q-bert was left at a loss and completely ignored my response after telling me to read and address his op rather than play party politics. I give you a straight forward analysis of what you posted and what do you say?
Nothing
Your too busy playing party politics in other threads. The very thing you told me to stop doing in your thread.
Ironic
Or maybe, just maybe, I didn't see your post. You're exhibiting what most would call a high amount of arrogance. Your straight forward analysis is nothing but trying to defend the GOP from when people within your own party are criticizing this move.
You make me laugh if you want my honest opinion. In my almost three years here, I've never backed down from an argument and someone like yourself isn't going to change that. I was here long before you and I'll likely be here long after you burn yourself out of this site due to trying to keep up your perpetual anger up.
I see it as ingenious.
It is allowing Obama to do what he wants and FORCING him to keep his promise to cut spending.
Let us not forget...Obama PROMISED to scheck each bill with a scapel and eliminate any unecessary spedning.
He broke that promise.
So McConnell is basically saying..."you lost our trust so we must deal with you so you cant lie to us again....you get what you want but you lose your career if you lie to us"
Ingenious.
Political?
Sure.
Exactly what legislator can you name that does not scheme for political expediency?
You could have just summed up your post as:
"I think it's great McConnell is doing this, but if it were Harry Reid I'd would surely criticize it. I have no problem with the GOP weaseling it's way out of the crisis it helped created. I also have no problem with McConnell and Cantor playing politics while the Democrats have put entitlements on the table."
Would have been a lot less to read.
I believe many would agree that I will attack a GOPer as often as I would a DEM.
did you see mine 2 pages back, both of them addressing you?
Collective Bargaining is NOT a Constitutionally protected right dumb ass.
Yeah..it is.
It's protected under the first amendment.
Do Federal Workers exercise in collective bargaining?
Are employees at the Capital Building even allowed to Unionize?
Yeah..it is.
It's protected under the first amendment.
Do Federal Workers exercise in collective bargaining?
Are employees at the Capital Building even allowed to Unionize?
No.
And if they pushed it they would probably have Constitution grounds to reverse rules keeping them from Unionizing.
did you see mine 2 pages back, both of them addressing you?
Nope. Quote them again and I'll reply to them.
uhm ...no. they are on page 8.
I believe many would agree that I will attack a GOPer as often as I would a DEM.
I really don't care if your friends would. I'm going by your talk in this thread. McConnell is trying to weasel his way out of dealing with the debt ceiling crisis he helped to create because he rather play politics rather than solve this country's deficit problem.
What has McConnell put on the table to be cut that the GOP usually favor? Name one thing.
I see q-bert was left at a loss and completely ignored my response after telling me to read and address his op rather than play party politics. I give you a straight forward analysis of what you posted and what do you say?
Nothing
Your too busy playing party politics in other threads. The very thing you told me to stop doing in your thread.
Ironic
Or maybe, just maybe, I didn't see your post. You're exhibiting what most would call a high amount of arrogance. Your straight forward analysis is nothing but trying to defend the GOP from when people within your own party are criticizing this move.
You make me laugh if you want my honest opinion. In my almost three years here, I've never backed down from an argument and someone like yourself isn't going to change that. I was here long before you and I'll likely be here long after you burn yourself out of this site due to trying to keep up your perpetual anger up.
Do Federal Workers exercise in collective bargaining?
Are employees at the Capital Building even allowed to Unionize?
No.
And if they pushed it they would probably have Constitution grounds to reverse rules keeping them from Unionizing.
They did, they lost. Which is another reason liberals should be against government takeovers of industry, but no one ever said liberals were capable of thinking about consequences.
Supreme Court and labor law
did the dems who did not create a 2010 budget, who were spending money via creating and funding baselines and new bills know they would need a debt increase in 2010?
did the dems who did not create a 2010 budget, who were spending money via creating and funding baselines and new bills know they would need a debt increase in 2010?
Both parties are to blame for not getting this done sooner. It should have never gotten to this point.
