The Democratic party is dead, Liberals are living in denial as well as the media

[OKTexas]

I would like to see a source for this. Plus, I didn't prove the OP and still hold my ground - Democrats are a center-right party, not liberal.

You do realize that I voted for Gary Johnson, not Obama. Why you keep on insisting that he is my dear leader is bizarre.

Here's a source:What Is 'Sequestration' and Whose Idea Was It?

Quote form Bob Woodward
In his book The Price of Politics, the reporter who gained fame from the Watergate scandal outlined that it was White House Office of Management Director Jack Lew and Legislative Affairs Director Rob Nabors who took the sequestration proposal to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. They also presented it to House Republicans.

If Maobama didn't know what the folks in the west wing are doing it would still be on him for his incompetence. Also if you think the commiecrat leadership is anywhere near the center, much less center right, your delusional.

No where in that post claimed that Obama agreed to $2.50 in cuts for every dollar in new revenue, now he wants $4.25 in new revenue for every dollar of cuts.

Perhaps you want to try again?

Just check out the proposal tiny Tim tax cheat Ghitner took to Boehner and do the math. I'm not going to be your research assistant.

 

[JRK]

When freedom dies, so do people.

Starting with the weakest, the most vulnerable.

When the will of the people, the House of representatives sends a bill to the senate that never gets put on the floor for debate, much less a vote
we have lost that freedom your speaking of
Ryan's budget 2010 and 2011 got exactly that

 

[JRK]

Here's a source:What Is 'Sequestration' and Whose Idea Was It?

Quote form Bob Woodward
In his book The Price of Politics, the reporter who gained fame from the Watergate scandal outlined that it was White House Office of Management Director Jack Lew and Legislative Affairs Director Rob Nabors who took the sequestration proposal to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. They also presented it to House Republicans.

If Maobama didn't know what the folks in the west wing are doing it would still be on him for his incompetence. Also if you think the commiecrat leadership is anywhere near the center, much less center right, your delusional.

No where in that post claimed that Obama agreed to $2.50 in cuts for every dollar in new revenue, now he wants $4.25 in new revenue for every dollar of cuts.

Perhaps you want to try again?

Just check out the proposal tiny Tim tax cheat Ghitner took to Boehner and do the math. I'm not going to be your research assistant.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...yIGoCQ&usg=AFQjCNEIsTWYmR00u87tucFJjYgAwzUzfQ
I will

 

[rdean]

It takes much longer to build a house than tear one down. Republicans have worked to tear down this country for the last 20 years.

 

[Valox]

Here's a source:What Is 'Sequestration' and Whose Idea Was It?

Quote form Bob Woodward
In his book The Price of Politics, the reporter who gained fame from the Watergate scandal outlined that it was White House Office of Management Director Jack Lew and Legislative Affairs Director Rob Nabors who took the sequestration proposal to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. They also presented it to House Republicans.

If Maobama didn't know what the folks in the west wing are doing it would still be on him for his incompetence. Also if you think the commiecrat leadership is anywhere near the center, much less center right, your delusional.

No where in that post claimed that Obama agreed to $2.50 in cuts for every dollar in new revenue, now he wants $4.25 in new revenue for every dollar of cuts.

Perhaps you want to try again?

Perhaps you should stop being politically correct Lemmings and start supporting your constitution.

WTF does this even mean? Does this mean that my vote for Gary Johnson was wasted while you vote for Mitt Romney was a practice in the Constitution?

Plus, Jefferson said that the Constitution should be revised every 19 years to prevent inter generational slavery

This idea that piece of paper who denied minorities and women rights should be upheld over rationality is pure and utter BS. The American revolution started with the Age of Enlightenment which placed rational thought before Divine Kings. The idea that we have to uphold the Constitution to some high regard is nonsense, but nonetheless I value it.

Therefore, I voted for Gary Johnson who was the most strict Constitutionalists on board during this election.

This idea that I am a political lemming is pure and utter BS. Go fuck yourself, comrade.

 

[Valox]

I don't mind getting negged, but at least show you face in the conversation.

 

[JRK]

It takes much longer to build a house than tear one down. Republicans have worked to tear down this country for the last 20 years.

you want to give us some examples?
the balanced budget in the 90s, GOP
the defict in 2007? 163 billion, the GOP with 2.7 trillion in spending, unlike the 3.5 in 2009 that the Dems added 500 billion to knowing the media would carry the water claiming that was GWB also
BTW the 163 billion came with IRAQ wide open in 2007
it was over by 2010 with a 1.5 trillion in defict
lost revenue of 600 billion
500 billion in spending added to the baseline
That is mostly the lefts (the job loss started under GWB, but was not his nor BHO fault)

Never let a crises go waste, and they did not
if do his failed stimulus, his use of tarp and his Omnibus should have fixed it, over 1 trillion dollars in spending

 

[Amelia]

JRK,

The stimulus failed since it was mostly paltry tax cuts and income supplements. It didn't properly investment into America.

... and since Obama didn't pay attention to make sure that it was going where it was supposed to go.

If Obama had payed attention to that instead of turning his attention to his project of increasing regulations on shell-shocked employers via the ACA, we might have had some more of that infrastructure he claims to value and the recovery might have gained traction.

Opportunity squandered.

I am not sure what you are rambling about, but essentially you claiming that cutting people's taxes did not do a whole hell of a lot in stimulating the economy.

It is amazing that Republicans will argue until the Earth dies that tax cuts are the key to all our problems, but then lambaste Obama when his tax laden stimulus plain failed.

I lambast Obama for strangling the U.S. with doubt and regulation at a fragile time.

If he had made sure that his stimulus and mortgage recovery programs were working as planned and had not instead added the extra burden of Obamacare (and the year of hell spent creating Obamacare) ... then we could have had a robust recovery.

 

[Valox]

... and since Obama didn't pay attention to make sure that it was going where it was supposed to go.

If Obama had payed attention to that instead of turning his attention to his project of increasing regulations on shell-shocked employers via the ACA, we might have had some more of that infrastructure he claims to value and the recovery might have gained traction.

Opportunity squandered.

I am not sure what you are rambling about, but essentially you claiming that cutting people's taxes did not do a whole hell of a lot in stimulating the economy.

It is amazing that Republicans will argue until the Earth dies that tax cuts are the key to all our problems, but then lambaste Obama when his tax laden stimulus plain failed.

I lambast Obama for strangling the U.S. with doubt and regulation at a fragile time.

If he had made sure that his stimulus and mortgage recovery programs were working as planned and had not instead added the extra burden of Obamacare (and the year of hell spent creating Obamacare) ... then we could have had a robust recovery.

Doubt and regulation have little to due with it, but you are correct in lambasting him for his piss poor mortgage relief program.

Plus, most of the stimulus were paltry tax cuts, not long term investment strategy and giving states the added money to maintain public employment.

Your angst is that Obama was not too liberal enough. That he didn't spend enough on investing into American and to keeping public employment strong, while not properly tackling our health care spending.

BTW: Your avatar freaks me out. Then again, it is a cat getting excited over a giant chicken.

 

[OKTexas]

... and since Obama didn't pay attention to make sure that it was going where it was supposed to go.

If Obama had payed attention to that instead of turning his attention to his project of increasing regulations on shell-shocked employers via the ACA, we might have had some more of that infrastructure he claims to value and the recovery might have gained traction.

Opportunity squandered.

I am not sure what you are rambling about, but essentially you claiming that cutting people's taxes did not do a whole hell of a lot in stimulating the economy.

It is amazing that Republicans will argue until the Earth dies that tax cuts are the key to all our problems, but then lambaste Obama when his tax laden stimulus plain failed.

I lambast Obama for strangling the U.S. with doubt and regulation at a fragile time.

If he had made sure that his stimulus and mortgage recovery programs were working as planned and had not instead added the extra burden of Obamacare (and the year of hell spent creating Obamacare) ... then we could have had a robust recovery.

Maobama is more concerned with the fundamental transformation of the country than trying to improve the country, it's all about ideology, nothing else. It's all about his perverted sense of "justice".

 

[Amelia]

I am not sure what you are rambling about, but essentially you claiming that cutting people's taxes did not do a whole hell of a lot in stimulating the economy.

It is amazing that Republicans will argue until the Earth dies that tax cuts are the key to all our problems, but then lambaste Obama when his tax laden stimulus plain failed.

I lambast Obama for strangling the U.S. with doubt and regulation at a fragile time.

If he had made sure that his stimulus and mortgage recovery programs were working as planned and had not instead added the extra burden of Obamacare (and the year of hell spent creating Obamacare) ... then we could have had a robust recovery.

Doubt and regulation have little to due with it, but you are correct in lambasting him for his piss poor mortgage relief program.

Plus, most of the stimulus were paltry tax cuts, not long term investment strategy and giving states the added money to maintain public employment.

Your angst is that Obama was not too liberal enough. That he didn't spend enough on investing into American and to keeping public employment strong, while not properly tackling our health care spending.

BTW: Your avatar freaks me out. Then again, it is a cat getting excited over a giant chicken.

Your answer about my angst is right and it's wrong.

I would have had angst about Obama anyway. I would have much preferred he not go the route he did. But having gone the route he did, I wanted him to do it right.

Elections have consequences, yada, yada. So I didn't get my first choice. But I still hoped that what we got would be good. And it wasn't.

 

[Valox]

Honestly, I have no idea what you saying.

 

[Amelia]

Honestly, I have no idea what you saying.

My angst is not that he wasn't liberal enough. But that he wasn't effective at what he chose to do.

Since he won the election, I had to accept that he was going to do things I wouldn't have chosen.

So then I hoped that he would do those things well. And he didn't. He pissed away an opportunity. He added a lot to the debt for little return.

 

[The Professor]

The Democratic party is dead ????

I generally vote Republican and I am not a liberal by any stretch of the imagination, but it appears to me that it is the Republican party that is on life support.

 

[Valox]

Honestly, I have no idea what you saying.

My angst is not that he wasn't liberal enough. But that he wasn't effective at what he chose to do.

Since he won the election, I had to accept that he was going to do things I wouldn't have chosen.

So then I hoped that he would do those things well. And he didn't. He pissed away an opportunity. He added a lot to the debt for little return.

Liberals agree, but what did you want him to do? Make sure states had enough teachers, that we have enough green industry, and transportation?

 

[S.J.]

The Democratic party is dead ????

I generally vote Republican and I am not a liberal by any stretch of the imagination, but it appears to me that it is the Republican party that is on life support.

You misunderstood the comment. It means the Democratic Party has been taken over by the communists. It remains the "Democratic Party" in name only.

 

[Valox]

The Democratic party is dead ????

I generally vote Republican and I am not a liberal by any stretch of the imagination, but it appears to me that it is the Republican party that is on life support.

You misunderstood the comment. It means the Democratic Party has been taken over by the communists. It remains the "Democratic Party" in name only.

Only a fucking idiot thinks the modern day Democratic Party is filled with communists.

Plus, didn't Reagan defeat the Communists back in the 80's?

Stop being stupid.

 

[S.J.]

The Democratic party is dead ????

I generally vote Republican and I am not a liberal by any stretch of the imagination, but it appears to me that it is the Republican party that is on life support.

You misunderstood the comment. It means the Democratic Party has been taken over by the communists. It remains the "Democratic Party" in name only.

Only a fucking idiot thinks the modern day Democratic Party is filled with communists.

Plus, didn't Reagan defeat the Communists back in the 80's?

Stop being stupid.

Only an idiot would believe Obama is anything BUT a communist. Get your head out of your ass.

 

[regent]

The Democratic party is dead ????

I generally vote Republican and I am not a liberal by any stretch of the imagination, but it appears to me that it is the Republican party that is on life support.

America has to have at least two political parties including a conservative party. The Democratic party traces its heritage back to Jefferson and the antifederalists. The Republican party back to 1854, Before that the conservative party was the Whig party, before that the Federalists. Three major conservative parties and one liberal party in our history. Is Limbaugh right, are the Republicans are not conservative enough, or are they too conservative? Has their old battle cries, now almost 80 years old of socialism and communism lost their scare value?

 

[Amelia]

Honestly, I have no idea what you saying.

My angst is not that he wasn't liberal enough. But that he wasn't effective at what he chose to do.

Since he won the election, I had to accept that he was going to do things I wouldn't have chosen.

So then I hoped that he would do those things well. And he didn't. He pissed away an opportunity. He added a lot to the debt for little return.

Liberals agree, but what did you want him to do? Make sure states had enough teachers, that we have enough green industry, and transportation?

I was mostly thinking about bridges and highways. Tangible, semi-permanent things. "Infrastructure". If the green was part of eco-conscious upgrades to crumbling structures, thus providing clients for the green energies he supported, that would have been cool. He did pay for a lot of teachers ... for one or two years ... and the boost that gave soon evaporated since he couldn't keep paying for them forever and states such as mine weren't in a position to keep up that expenditure.

When the first signs showed up that those supposedly shovel ready jobs weren't actually shovel ready, I wanted him to get on top of it and help them get ready sooner rather than later. Help cut the red tape if needed, or expedite inspections, or find skilled people to help the neediest states get their project proposals together.