Two Words: Nuclear Option

[Meister]

WOW, so no one on the right is willing to condemn this poster for wishing death upon fellow Americans. How sad is that? Oh, well it's just more of the "end justifies the means" attitude from the right.

Unlike you, and your butt buddy edthecynic, people on this board can do enough thought process to figure out when one is joking. You on the other hand........

ok moron, I know you are slow but once again PLEASE do learn to follow along. It's obvious that it was a "joke" but I don't think it's funny to make "jokes" about millions of Americans being murdered. Whether it was a joke or not is not the point. The point is that it was in poor taste and sad that none of you alleged patriots would even dare comdemning one of your own for attempting to make a joke out of something like that.

BTW did you feel the same when obama made his "joke" about the special olympics or were you one of the many from the right who attacked him over his "joke?"

I never attacked obama when he mispoke about the special olympcs. I usually have bigger fish to fry then that with him.
As for the rest of your blather, smitty....who in the fuck really cares about your opinion on that? It was a joke, and even the left side saw it as such....except for you.

 

[drsmith1072]

It doesn't matter. The democrats didn't need one republican to get anything they wanted passed.

They could do this for longer than a year.

There is no excuse for them.

Actually YES they did NEED a republican vote. ONE republican vote could have brought about cloture and a vote could have been had. Unfortunately the right, as usual, tends to forget that dems alone don't have 60 votes and that they have to pander to 2 independents to get their votes. One of which has sided with the republicans since they were in power to present date on many issues. Since when is 58 equal to 60?

Furthermore, what do you mean by "they could do this for longer than a year."?

This is a non issue as both independents got on board early in the process in the Senate. They didn't need 1 republican vote. They just couldn't get the democrats on board with the boondoggle.

non-issue huh?? Then why did leiberman say as recently as dec 13 that he would vote against healthcare legislation in it's current form??

Published: December 13, 2009
WASHINGTON — In a surprise setback for Democratic leaders, Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, independent of Connecticut, said on Sunday that he would vote against the health care legislation in its current form.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/14/health/policy/14health.html

Oops, looks like meister is making shite up as he goes along. So what was that about how the independents got on board early??

 

[Meister]

Actually YES they did NEED a republican vote. ONE republican vote could have brought about cloture and a vote could have been had. Unfortunately the right, as usual, tends to forget that dems alone don't have 60 votes and that they have to pander to 2 independents to get their votes. One of which has sided with the republicans since they were in power to present date on many issues. Since when is 58 equal to 60?

Furthermore, what do you mean by "they could do this for longer than a year."?

This is a non issue as both independents got on board early in the process in the Senate. They didn't need 1 republican vote. They just couldn't get the democrats on board with the boondoggle.

non-issue huh?? Then why did leiberman say as recently as dec 13 that he would vote against healthcare legislation in it's current form??

Published: December 13, 2009
WASHINGTON — In a surprise setback for Democratic leaders, Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, independent of Connecticut, said on Sunday that he would vote against the health care legislation in its current form.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/14/health/policy/14health.html

Oops, looks like meister is making shite up as he goes along. So what was that about how the independents got on board early??

Your an ignorant one, aren't you, ya goofball. When the Senate vote came up he voted for the bill. Yes, an independent voted for it, in fact both independents voted for it, without a bribe like with Nelson (D). Geeze.

 

[drsmith1072]

Has anyone ever answered why when the Republicans hinted they may use the Nuclear option the left went BAT SHIT CRAZY and likened it to a criminal decision? Yet now some are talking of doing just that?

I asked a similar question concerning how republicans used to supoport the idea of the nuclear option but are now against it because it doesn't benefit them and I still haven't gotten any answers. LOL

I have already stated that my opinion on the nuclear option is still the same now as it was back then. How many of you righties can HONESTLY say the same??

perhaps you could provide a link citing the republicans use of the *nuclear option*?

surely there are dozens of examples, no?

Are you actually so dishonest that you are trying to claim that republicans were not proposing the "nuclear option" back when they were trying to railroad W's nominees through?? Or are you just too young to remember how it actually happened and are relying on the propaganda of others?? Or is that you are too lazy to learn for yourself and want me to waste my time to educate you on something you will ignore anyway because it doesn't fit into your spin??

Oh well here you go. I will give you something you have failed to give me everytime I have asked you for it.

Nuclear option - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I know it's wiki but look at the links at the bottom of the page

Media adopts false claim that "nuclear option" is a Democratic term | Media Matters for America

Republicans were the ones the created the term "nuclear option" Again I don't support it and never have, I just think it's hilarious how many on the right are attacking the mere idea of using it when the threat of using it worked for their own party only a few years back.

 

[drsmith1072]

Pelosi & Reid blew it. It really is that simple in the end. Kool-Aiders have to now accept this and move on. Time for both of them to go. Lets hope this happens soon.

If by "blew it" you mean they took the time to debate instead of just ramming it through as all of you are suggesting that they did, then you are correct.
If they had rammed it through and been as forceful as the right would have one believe then they would have surely gotten in done within the last 6 months which is the total time they had a super majority.

However, the fact remains that they did NOT force it down anyones throat (repubilican party talking point parroted ad nauseum by the gullible and easilly manipulated) because if they had it would have been done already.

They couldn't even get their own party on board with this boondoggle, hell, if they could have just rammed it down our thoats they would have. They had to bribe to get it to where it was last week. LOL

Thanks for the admission that they did need republican votes. According to you, If they couldn't do it on their own then they obviously needed help from the independents and the republicans. Unfortunately the republicans are only interested in saying no and engaging in obstruction. so the democrats as a whole were left with no other options.

Thanks again for the admission. LOL

 

[drsmith1072]

Pelosi & Reid blew it. It really is that simple in the end. Kool-Aiders have to now accept this and move on. Time for both of them to go. Lets hope this happens soon.

If by "blew it" you mean they took the time to debate instead of just ramming it through as all of you are suggesting that they did, then you are correct.
If they had rammed it through and been as forceful as the right would have one believe then they would have surely gotten in done within the last 6 months which is the total time they had a super majority.

However, the fact remains that they did NOT force it down anyones throat (repubilican party talking point parroted ad nauseum by the gullible and easilly manipulated) because if they had it would have been done already.

Calling the voter stupid and gullible. How did that work for Coakley? They even tried to force it down their own party's throats. You might want to take a few days and let this all sink in.

LOL Coming from a hack like you who consistently attacks those on the left (voters), you trying to take the high road as you try to spin my statement against me is beyond laughable. LOL Did coakley call the voter stupid and gullible?? Can you back that up with a valid source??

Oh and thank you for proving my point that the "ramming it down throats" propaganda has been parroted by the gullible and easilly manipulated. LOL

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

If by "blew it" you mean they took the time to debate instead of just ramming it through as all of you are suggesting that they did, then you are correct.

Debated it with themselves? Wow... that's reassuring.

What a joke... LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!

Face it, they screwed the pooch.. THANK GOD.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

It's all a done deal now.... They'll fuck around and beat their chests a bit, but it is effectively over. Time to get serious and quit inventing even more unfunded entitlements.

 

[CMike]

If by "blew it" you mean they took the time to debate instead of just ramming it through as all of you are suggesting that they did, then you are correct.
If they had rammed it through and been as forceful as the right would have one believe then they would have surely gotten in done within the last 6 months which is the total time they had a super majority.

However, the fact remains that they did NOT force it down anyones throat (repubilican party talking point parroted ad nauseum by the gullible and easilly manipulated) because if they had it would have been done already.

They couldn't even get their own party on board with this boondoggle, hell, if they could have just rammed it down our thoats they would have. They had to bribe to get it to where it was last week. LOL

Thanks for the admission that they did need republican votes. According to you, If they couldn't do it on their own then they obviously needed help from the independents and the republicans. Unfortunately the republicans are only interested in saying no and engaging in obstruction. so the democrats as a whole were left with no other options.

Thanks again for the admission. LOL

English not your first langauge? That's not what he said.

The democrat bribes were with their owns special interest groups. The bill was supposed that had to make bribes to get their own party members to vote for it.

That is REALLY REALLY REALLY bad.

They didn't need one republican vote to pass anything that they wanted too.

 

[drsmith1072]

By secrecy the right meant keeping critical intelligence away from Al Qaida terrorists.

We weren't referring to what was in Obama's health care plan and his back room crony deals.

Really?? Then why were republicans defending the bush administration for keeping the info from the behind closed door energy meetings a secret?? Why don't we know what went on in those meetings right now??

Sorry but your spin means NOTHING in the face of the fact that the bush administration and republicans did plenty of things behind closed doors and the right defended it. So it's funny to see all of the righties demanding transparency from obama when they refused to do the same where W was concerned.

obama shouldn't have campaigned for transparency.
bush never did

LOL obama can have transparency where the whitehouse and the executive are concerned. He can even REQUEST that the congress be more open but the executive has NO POWER OVER THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH. I assumed that even a dishonest hack like you would know that. I guess I assumed wrong.

BTW your failed spin does nothing to counter the fact that cmike was being dishonest in his claim concernign what the bush whitehouse was keeping secret and how the right was defending him.

 

[CMike]

Really?? Then why were republicans defending the bush administration for keeping the info from the behind closed door energy meetings a secret?? Why don't we know what went on in those meetings right now??

Sorry but your spin means NOTHING in the face of the fact that the bush administration and republicans did plenty of things behind closed doors and the right defended it. So it's funny to see all of the righties demanding transparency from obama when they refused to do the same where W was concerned.

obama shouldn't have campaigned for transparency.
bush never did

LOL obama can have transparency where the whitehouse and the executive are concerned. He can even REQUEST that the congress be more open but the executive has NO POWER OVER THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH. I assumed that even a dishonest hack like you would know that. I guess I assumed wrong.

BTW your failed spin does nothing to counter the fact that cmike was being dishonest in his claim concernign what the bush whitehouse was keeping secret and how the right was defending him.

Yes, he can. He is the democrat leader. All what he has to do is tell them to make the bill transparent.

 

[drsmith1072]

I'm say yeah, the screw ups and gaffs didn't have that big of an influence as you must suspect.
Message was that the majority of Independents, and 22% of democrats really didn't like the back door dealings, healthcare reform and the direction that obama was taking this country.
Brown should have lost by 20% in the state of Ma. That is a huge message being sent from that state. And your take on the victory for Brown is.....?

Please learn to keep up. The quote and question based on that quote referred to have NO AFFECT at all. If you are going to answer "yeah" to a question please try to comprehend what the question is asking so you don't make yourself look completely ridiculous. LOL

LOL that's the message that you take from it?? Got any proof of that or is this your lame attempt to spread the propaganda spewed out by foxnews?? LOL

As for my take, all politics is local. Isn't that what a lot of righties were saying about the election?? I think that was the message and that message is that they didn't like coakley because she seemed "out of touch" as she distanced herself from mere thought of campaigning to the "little people" with her "i am going to win anyway" and "let them eat cake" mentality. IMO they felt that she wouldn't represent them based on her inactions and her attitude where as brown campaigned well and gave them the message that he would. You wish to read into it a bigger message because that suits your partisan needs but I don't see it that way and I am willing to bet that anyone who said anything about how "all politics is local" would tend to agree with me.

You do have a right to your own opinion, smitty. But with the interviews of the democrats state a different one than your own. It was bigger than just a local election, you really do need to get up to speed, hell this is old news. lol

LOL WOW you are actually trying to base your entire argument on the FEW out of the MILLIONS in that state that foxnews picked to put on the air??? LOL OMG you really are desperate aren't you? LOL You ask me my opinion, so I give it to you and then you respond by telling me that I am wrong because foxnews and frank told you so. LOL
I also think it's hilarious that after screaming "all politics is local" for days that the right has abandoned that since it runs counter to their current spin that the election's message was bigger than a local election. LOL

Oh and nice attempt to dodge the FACT that the claim was that coakley's ineptitude had NO affect and how you tried to spin it to it had little affect even after you said "yeah" to the question that was asked. LOL

 

[CMike]

Really?? Then why were republicans defending the bush administration for keeping the info from the behind closed door energy meetings a secret?? Why don't we know what went on in those meetings right now??

Sorry but your spin means NOTHING in the face of the fact that the bush administration and republicans did plenty of things behind closed doors and the right defended it. So it's funny to see all of the righties demanding transparency from obama when they refused to do the same where W was concerned.

obama shouldn't have campaigned for transparency.
bush never did

LOL obama can have transparency where the whitehouse and the executive are concerned. He can even REQUEST that the congress be more open but the executive has NO POWER OVER THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH. I assumed that even a dishonest hack like you would know that. I guess I assumed wrong.

BTW your failed spin does nothing to counter the fact that cmike was being dishonest in his claim concernign what the bush whitehouse was keeping secret and how the right was defending him.

As far as your idiotic allegation who Pres. spoke to about energy. Who Pres. Bush speaks to is private. He doesn't have to make public who he talks to and what they say every day. there is nothing wrong with that.

NOT making public a bill that would take over the health care system along with its details is extremely dishonest, and is against what what Obama promised regarding transparency.

Does Obama make public who he speaks to and what they say? Why not?

 

[drsmith1072]

Obviously he hand picked democrats that voted for obama, and of those he hand picked those that voted for both Coakley, and Brown.....obviously.

So if you disagree that they hand picked them, then in your opinion how else did they pick them?? Do you honestly think that they would allow just anyone into their studios and on the air?? Or do you believe that they would interview them before hand to know who and what they are putting on the air??
I just thought it was interesting that of the ones he asked all gave the same word for word talking points the right was trying to spread.
You may choose to believe everything foxnews plasters on it's screens despite their past dishonesty but I am not that gullible.

Oh and thanks for not even trying to defend your false claim that luntz is a middle of the road person. LOL

McCain would not have liked the Luntz polls during the campaigning, and obama would have liked them. I don't know where your going but, feel free to stroke your ego as much as you like.
Don't let the actual facts get in the way of YOUR opinion. Why not try to give all of us a link to support your opinion? Hmmmm?

What are you babbling about?? Is there an answer to my question anywhere in there or would giving an actual response, instead of merely attacking the messenger, require a level of honesty that you lack??
As for your "facts getting in the way of opinion" spin goes, let me know when you provide some substantiated facts and then we can talk.

 

[drsmith1072]

Unlike you, and your butt buddy edthecynic, people on this board can do enough thought process to figure out when one is joking. You on the other hand........

ok moron, I know you are slow but once again PLEASE do learn to follow along. It's obvious that it was a "joke" but I don't think it's funny to make "jokes" about millions of Americans being murdered. Whether it was a joke or not is not the point. The point is that it was in poor taste and sad that none of you alleged patriots would even dare comdemning one of your own for attempting to make a joke out of something like that.

BTW did you feel the same when obama made his "joke" about the special olympics or were you one of the many from the right who attacked him over his "joke?"

I never attacked obama when he mispoke about the special olympcs. I usually have bigger fish to fry then that with him.
As for the rest of your blather, smitty....who in the fuck really cares about your opinion on that? It was a joke, and even the left side saw it as such....except for you.

LOL that's hilarious. You jump at every opportunity, no matter how small and ridiculous it actually is, to attack obama. So it's very hard for any honest poster to believe that you didn't follow the rest of the lemmings who blasted obama over his "joke"

Furthermore, as to who cares about my opinions, it's obvious that you do. If you didn't then you wouldn't have responded and tried to attack the messenger as you ran away from the message. LOL Why spend so much time trying to tear me down as you avoid any form of a debate if my opinions weren't important??

Furthermore, are you REALLY that moronic?? I said I knew it was a joke and I explained all of this in my previous post that you responded to so I see no reason in repeating it again. Please learn to read AND comprehend what you read. it will save everyone a lot of time wasted on trying to explain it to you, AGAIN.

 

[drsmith1072]

This is a non issue as both independents got on board early in the process in the Senate. They didn't need 1 republican vote. They just couldn't get the democrats on board with the boondoggle.

non-issue huh?? Then why did leiberman say as recently as dec 13 that he would vote against healthcare legislation in it's current form??

Published: December 13, 2009
WASHINGTON — In a surprise setback for Democratic leaders, Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, independent of Connecticut, said on Sunday that he would vote against the health care legislation in its current form.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/14/health/policy/14health.html

Oops, looks like meister is making shite up as he goes along. So what was that about how the independents got on board early??

Your an ignorant one, aren't you, ya goofball. When the Senate vote came up he voted for the bill. Yes, an independent voted for it, in fact both independents voted for it, without a bribe like with Nelson (D). Geeze.

LOL funny how I prove your claim that "both independents got on board early in the process in the Senate" was completely FALSE and the best response you have is to call me names. LOL

The fact that the independents EVENTUALLY voted in favor of the bill is not proof that they both "got on board early."

 

[drsmith1072]

If by "blew it" you mean they took the time to debate instead of just ramming it through as all of you are suggesting that they did, then you are correct.

Debated it with themselves? Wow... that's reassuring.

What a joke... LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!

Face it, they screwed the pooch.. THANK GOD.

In your rush to expose yourself as a partisan hack did you forget the FACT that the put the bill on the senate floor to open up debate to the WHOLE senate and for all to see?

 

[drsmith1072]

They couldn't even get their own party on board with this boondoggle, hell, if they could have just rammed it down our thoats they would have. They had to bribe to get it to where it was last week. LOL

Thanks for the admission that they did need republican votes. According to you, If they couldn't do it on their own then they obviously needed help from the independents and the republicans. Unfortunately the republicans are only interested in saying no and engaging in obstruction. so the democrats as a whole were left with no other options.

Thanks again for the admission. LOL

English not your first langauge? That's not what he said.

The democrat bribes were with their owns special interest groups. The bill was supposed that had to make bribes to get their own party members to vote for it.

That is REALLY REALLY REALLY bad.

They didn't need one republican vote to pass anything that they wanted too.

LOL If the democrats couldn't do it on their own, which is what mesiter said then the next logical conclusion is that they needed votes from republicans and independents to end debate and pass it. That is merely a logical conclusion based on what meister tried to spin. LOL

Funny thing is that you attack me asking "english not your first language?" and then follow that up with this incoherent babble.

The bill was supposed that had to make bribes to get their own party members to vote for it.

What is that supposed to mean? LOL

 

[Meister]

ok moron, I know you are slow but once again PLEASE do learn to follow along. It's obvious that it was a "joke" but I don't think it's funny to make "jokes" about millions of Americans being murdered. Whether it was a joke or not is not the point. The point is that it was in poor taste and sad that none of you alleged patriots would even dare comdemning one of your own for attempting to make a joke out of something like that.

BTW did you feel the same when obama made his "joke" about the special olympics or were you one of the many from the right who attacked him over his "joke?"

I never attacked obama when he mispoke about the special olympcs. I usually have bigger fish to fry then that with him.
As for the rest of your blather, smitty....who in the fuck really cares about your opinion on that? It was a joke, and even the left side saw it as such....except for you.

LOL that's hilarious. You jump at every opportunity, no matter how small and ridiculous it actually is, to attack obama. So it's very hard for any honest poster to believe that you didn't follow the rest of the lemmings who blasted obama over his "joke"

Furthermore, as to who cares about my opinions, it's obvious that you do. If you didn't then you wouldn't have responded and tried to attack the messenger as you ran away from the message. LOL Why spend so much time trying to tear me down as you avoid any form of a debate if my opinions weren't important??

Furthermore, are you REALLY that moronic?? I said I knew it was a joke and I explained all of this in my previous post that you responded to so I see no reason in repeating it again. Please learn to read AND comprehend what you read. it will save everyone a lot of time wasted on trying to explain it to you, AGAIN.

you can't help proving that your a moron, smitty.

 

[drsmith1072]

obama shouldn't have campaigned for transparency.
bush never did

LOL obama can have transparency where the whitehouse and the executive are concerned. He can even REQUEST that the congress be more open but the executive has NO POWER OVER THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH. I assumed that even a dishonest hack like you would know that. I guess I assumed wrong.

BTW your failed spin does nothing to counter the fact that cmike was being dishonest in his claim concernign what the bush whitehouse was keeping secret and how the right was defending him.

Yes, he can. He is the democrat leader. All what he has to do is tell them to make the bill transparent.

HUH?? Could you please show where in the constitution it gives the president power over the legislative branch?

Fact is that obama can tell them all he wants to but he has NO POWER to make them. Why is that concept so difficult for you righties to understand?
Is it because you are used to your party following lockstep without question and doing what you are told like good little lemmings??