The new (2nd) Boehner House bill passes

[bripat9643]

they will take this bill and do what they will and send it back to the house, and we'll see whats what.

That is if harry allows it to be debated, which he didn't allow for the last plan.

they can, and I know that this is radical but, they can draft score and pass their own plan.

After the Dims butcher it up and send it back to the House, the Republicans should just say "dead on arrival" and then send the Cut, Cap and Balance bill up to the Senate again.

 

[bripat9643]

Nice self indulging post.

Yes the debt is an investment in our country. And its a ball and chain around ours. Even Clinton along with others have stated that the debt is a possible national security issue.

How is the debt an "investment?" That's like saying when your teenage son runs up the credit card partying that it's an "investment." Flushing money down the toilet isn't an investment.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Really? My house works perfectly on a balanced budget. I suppose you would rather just tax some more and spend some more.

Really. So you've budgeted X for the year and cannot spend anymore. One day it rains and the roof leaks. Funds have already been allocated for food, mortagage, gas, entertainment, etc. etc. Do you wait till the next fiscal year to add the funds to the new budget and use buckets?

On December 7, 1941 Japan attacks Pearl Harbor. We have no army, our fleet is on the bottom the bay and the West Coast is to be defended by civilians and police officers - FDR has no funds to respond.

Your talking out of your ass. There are provisions in the BBA to account for emergencies.

Try again?

I'd give up if I were you.

Truthfully all of us are talking out of our ass, no one knows what will happen next week. What I do know is the Republican Party has created this crisis and is holding the nation hostage as a means to overturn the New Deal.

Your example of your family budget being the same as the national budget is absurd and I suspect you're also full of shit. Most Americans carry debt, and most Americans pay their bills on time. If a homeowner has a crisis - a leaking roof - s/he will borrow the money to repair the roof not risk extensive damage.

The radical Republicans aren't like most Americans. They refuse to borrow money to repair an economy leaking jobs, and they have created a huge canard built on demagoguery and unproven hypothesises (wealthy create jobs, gov't can't create jobs, taxes kill jobs) and people like you believe them.

 

[bripat9643]

Default is bad, I edited my post to include the way. If the new iteration includes a constitutional amendement provision for a balance budget that's uber-bad.

How is a balanced budget amendment bad?

I'm dying to see your explanation.

 

[Richard-H]

For you it was, but lets pretend you understand civics. The you know the senate either agrees with the house bill amends it OR PAY ATTENTION CREATES THEIR OWN. and sends it back, in which a member of the same party introduces it.



How much more schooling would you like?

Where exactly in the Constitution does it say that?

Nowhere I am aware of. However those are the rules under which we operate. Which is allowed under the constitution. If you disagree post the SC decision.

Now back to the original thoughts. Post up skippy.

It got news for you. The Constitution clearly defines how the Government operates.

Show me where in the Constituion it says that the Senate originates these bills.

Can't? Doesn't surprise me.

The fact is that the Senate can propose a bill to the House of Representatives, but it is nothing but a proposal. Since the House has already made it clear that they won't pass the proposals that Reid & Obama have made, there is no reason why they shoud waste anybody's time trying to propose it to the House of Representatives.

Is that too hard to comprehend?

Onlt the Repugs seem to think that passing bills that have no chance of making it into law as some sort of impotent gesture is worth wasting everybody's time.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Default is bad, I edited my post to include the way. If the new iteration includes a constitutional amendement provision for a balance budget that's uber-bad.

How is a balanced budget amendment bad?

I'm dying to see your explanation.

If you're telling the truth and really dying, I will not explain. Upon your demise the average IQ of those remaining on this message board will go up several points and that should make it a more interesting place.

 

[Richard-H]

Nice self indulging post.

Yes the debt is an investment in our country. And its a ball and chain around ours. Even Clinton along with others have stated that the debt is a possible national security issue.

How is the debt an "investment?" That's like saying when your teenage son runs up the credit card partying that it's an "investment." Flushing money down the toilet isn't an investment.

People who buy U.S. government securities are investing in th eU.S. Governement...like buying stock in a company...

Is it bad for a company when people buy it's stock?

The fact is that since we are the world's currency reserve, we can print up as much money as we want, and if that's done gradually, use it to pay off a large portion of the debt.

That's the priviledge of the U.S. government.

You too can print up your own money and your own bonds...see if anyone accepts them....

Fact is that IF YOU were the most stable institution in the world people would and you could print up as much as you like....

Unfortunately for you, it's apparent that you wingnuts are all extremely unstable...in oh so many ways...

 

[Wry Catcher]

the BBA has a 2/3's majority override and emergency codicils.

So it's only a balanced budget in name, and can be unbalanced by a supermajority. And, what if the House is filled with radicals as it is today and refuse even in an emergency?
Stupid idea.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

the BBA has a 2/3's majority override and emergency codicils.

Link Please!

I already told you about this. It's common knowledge for those who have actually been paying attention. Find a link your damn self. You slacked on current events so you look it up.

 

[Richard-H]

the BBA has a 2/3's majority override and emergency codicils.

Link Please!

I already told you about this. It's common knowledge for those who have actually been paying attention. Find a link your damn self. You slacked on current events so you look it up.

Link up or Shut UP!

 

[Full-Auto]

Where exactly in the Constitution does it say that?

Nowhere I am aware of. However those are the rules under which we operate. Which is allowed under the constitution. If you disagree post the SC decision.

Now back to the original thoughts. Post up skippy.

It got news for you. The Constitution clearly defines how the Government operates.

Show me where in the Constituion it says that the Senate originates these bills.

Can't? Doesn't surprise me.

The fact is that the Senate can propose a bill to the House of Representatives, but it is nothing but a proposal. Since the House has already made it clear that they won't pass the proposals that Reid & Obama have made, there is no reason why they shoud waste anybody's time trying to propose it to the House of Representatives.

Is that too hard to comprehend?

Onlt the Repugs seem to think that passing bills that have no chance of making it into law as some sort of impotent gesture is worth wasting everybody's time.

Skippy the Senate just tabled Boehners plan and is doing exactly what I described. Now quit sidestepping the original confrontation and post up.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

How is a balanced budget amendment bad?

As I’ve noted before, the Constitution already has an amendment to balance the budget and address all other concerns of the people – the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That the people fail to utilize the Amendment doesn’t warrant anther one.

Further, a ‘balanced budget’ amendment is tainted partisan politics, a contrivance of the right to incorporate conservative dogma into the Constitution.

It’s normal and appropriate for the government to cycle between deficit and surplus; the issue isn’t the deficit per se but its size. It’s the responsibility of the people to compel Congress to address the deficit, not the Constitution’s.

And with regard to its ‘emergency override,’ there’s no way to compose the amendment in such a way as to anticipate all contingencies. And an ‘emergency override’ would undermine the purpose of the amendment making it pointless.

This is an issue the American people need to resolve, no matter how difficult – it’s not an issue to pollute the Constitution with.

 

[Richard-H]

Nowhere I am aware of. However those are the rules under which we operate. Which is allowed under the constitution. If you disagree post the SC decision.

Now back to the original thoughts. Post up skippy.

It got news for you. The Constitution clearly defines how the Government operates.

Show me where in the Constituion it says that the Senate originates these bills.

Can't? Doesn't surprise me.

The fact is that the Senate can propose a bill to the House of Representatives, but it is nothing but a proposal. Since the House has already made it clear that they won't pass the proposals that Reid & Obama have made, there is no reason why they shoud waste anybody's time trying to propose it to the House of Representatives.

Is that too hard to comprehend?

Onlt the Repugs seem to think that passing bills that have no chance of making it into law as some sort of impotent gesture is worth wasting everybody's time.

Skippy the Senate just tabled Boehners plan and is doing exactly what I described. Now quit sidestepping the original confrontation and post up.

Here's a post for ya:

The United States Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

If that ain't good enough, please move to another country!

 

[Full-Auto]

It got news for you. The Constitution clearly defines how the Government operates.

Show me where in the Constituion it says that the Senate originates these bills.

Can't? Doesn't surprise me.

The fact is that the Senate can propose a bill to the House of Representatives, but it is nothing but a proposal. Since the House has already made it clear that they won't pass the proposals that Reid & Obama have made, there is no reason why they shoud waste anybody's time trying to propose it to the House of Representatives.

Is that too hard to comprehend?

Onlt the Repugs seem to think that passing bills that have no chance of making it into law as some sort of impotent gesture is worth wasting everybody's time.

Skippy the Senate just tabled Boehners plan and is doing exactly what I described. Now quit sidestepping the original confrontation and post up.

Here's a post for ya:

The United States Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

If that ain't good enough, please move to another country!

Just admit you can not specify what you were complaining about and we can move on.

 

[Richard-H]

How is a balanced budget amendment bad?

As I’ve noted before, the Constitution already has an amendment to balance the budget and address all other concerns of the people – the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That the people fail to utilize the Amendment doesn’t warrant anther one.

Further, a ‘balanced budget’ amendment is tainted partisan politics, a contrivance of the right to incorporate conservative dogma into the Constitution.

It’s normal and appropriate for the government to cycle between deficit and surplus; the issue isn’t the deficit per se but its size. It’s the responsibility of the people to compel Congress to address the deficit, not the Constitution’s.

And with regard to its ‘emergency override,’ there’s no way to compose the amendment in such a way as to anticipate all contingencies. And an ‘emergency override’ would undermine the purpose of the amendment making it pointless.

This is an issue the American people need to resolve, no matter how difficult – it’s not an issue to pollute the Constitution with.

It shoulds also be pointed out that this country was concieved in debt:

Article VI
1: All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

So apparently, the founding fathers did not believe that Governement debt was a bad thing, but did believe that not paying off investors was a VERY VERY bad thing.

 

[Richard-H]

Skippy the Senate just tabled Boehners plan and is doing exactly what I described. Now quit sidestepping the original confrontation and post up.

Here's a post for ya:

The United States Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

If that ain't good enough, please move to another country!

Just admit you can not specify what you were complaining about and we can move on.

Maybe I've lost track of what you were originally asking, but as far as I know I've more than answered. What was I 'Complaining' about?

 

[SFC Ollie]

Does Richard understand that we cannot just arbitrarily print up money?

Does Richard understand that the more we print the less it is worth?

I don't think he does.............................

 

[Full-Auto]

Here's a post for ya:

The United States Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

If that ain't good enough, please move to another country!

Just admit you can not specify what you were complaining about and we can move on.

Maybe I've lost track of what you were originally asking, but as far as I know I've more than answered. What was I 'Complaining' about?

You did so much side tracking , go back and look in the thread. Because I still stand ready to debate the issue.

I am not surprised youve forgotten.

 

[Richard-H]

Just admit you can not specify what you were complaining about and we can move on.

Maybe I've lost track of what you were originally asking, but as far as I know I've more than answered. What was I 'Complaining' about?

You did so much side tracking , go back and look in the thread. Because I still stand ready to debate the issue.

I am not surprised youve forgotten.

In other words, you've forgotten.

Otherwise just tell me. I'm not digging thru pages of posts just to find out that I already proved my point many times over.

Please state your case.

 

[Full-Auto]

Maybe I've lost track of what you were originally asking, but as far as I know I've more than answered. What was I 'Complaining' about?

You did so much side tracking , go back and look in the thread. Because I still stand ready to debate the issue.

I am not surprised youve forgotten.

In other words, you've forgotten.

Otherwise just tell me. I'm not digging thru pages of posts just to find out that I already proved my point many times over.

Please state your case.

No I havent But youve been such a dick, I am going to leave it on you.