Will Republicans shut down the Government over Planned Parenthood?

[Spoonman]

History repeats itself.

Let's all hope so... The results of the last time this happened? Billy Clinton's surplus!

Don't you want a balanced budget, hack?

I want to be hearing all about "The Obama Surplus" in a couple of years, don't you?

Seem like all we hear about is obama's rising deficit

 

[Two Thumbs]

Will Republicans shut down the government over Planned Parenthood? - The Week

Another night of budget talks failed to produce a deal acceptable to President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), and House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio). Reid said that money isn't the holdup, but rather the GOP's "line in the sand" over its hundreds of policy amendments, especially those to defund Planned Parenthood and curb EPA enforcement. Such big policy issues "have no place on a budget bill," Reid said. Could the government really shut down over Planned Parenthood?

Are the dems really going to keep funding many of these useless programs?

Have they seen how large the debt is?

Planned parenthood is as important to the budget as porn is to mine.

It was the first thing to go.

 

[MaggieMae]

Every dime of taxpayer money that goes to PP is another dime they can reallocate from somewhere else to use for abortion purposes.

Immie

As you take money away from birth control services, you increase the need for abortions

Cutting off your nose to spite your face

Let PP get its own funding like the rest of the business world has to do. After all, abortion is a business. You simply want us to keep funding abortion with some kind of an emotional plea that if we don't fund abortions there will be more abortions.

What kind of left wing garbage is that?

Immie

OH yay!! Let's desubsidize oil companies, health insurers (Medicare ADVANTAGE plans), pharmaceutical companies, agriculture!! I wonder when THOSE debates will start in earnest?

 

[Midnight Marauder]

History repeats itself.

Let's all hope so... The results of the last time this happened? Billy Clinton's surplus!

Don't you want a balanced budget, hack?

I want to be hearing all about "The Obama Surplus" in a couple of years, don't you?

Seem like all we hear about is obama's rising deficit

He has a chance here to do exactly what Billy did, embrace the "end of big government" agenda and wind up with a surplus, but he's too much of a Marx acolyte to do it, too much of a ideologue.

 

[Modbert]

Funding gun control programs, for example, is an increase in spending. Cutting some subsidies is a decrease in spending. So I have no idea what your point is.

It's the money, stupid.

But keep the hyperbole about wars on women, hatred of old people, burning of puppies, etc. up. It's entertaining.

This debate has nothing to do with the budget and we both know it. Such a statement borders on dishonesty.

Senate Democrats offered up $10 billion in defense budget cuts. What did the GOP do? Reject it immediately. If the GOP was serious about having a real discussion about the budget, that wouldn't of happened.

 

[Immanuel]

As you take money away from birth control services, you increase the need for abortions

Cutting off your nose to spite your face

Let PP get its own funding like the rest of the business world has to do. After all, abortion is a business. You simply want us to keep funding abortion with some kind of an emotional plea that if we don't fund abortions there will be more abortions.

What kind of left wing garbage is that?

Immie

OH yay!! Let's desubsidize oil companies, health insurers (Medicare ADVANTAGE plans), pharmaceutical companies, agriculture!! I wonder when THOSE debates will start in earnest?

I am fine with that. Maybe the two of us together can solve this budget crisis ourselves, if they would just let us.

Immie

 

[Chris]

93% of the National Debt was caused by Reagan and the two Bushes lowering taxes for the rich.

Click on the link...

ReaganBushDebt.org

 

[Trajan]

Can anyone imagine the reaction on this board if the Democrats held up the budget in order to get cuts to end oil subsidies or to pay for programs that support gun control? It wouldn't be pretty. And yet to some people on this board it's alright if the GOP decides to hold up the entire budget because they want to push through their religious right agenda.

If the Democrats had a spine, I'd say just wait until the positions are reversed and you hear the same people on the board defending the GOP call the Dems traitors.

why yes, because 'oil subsidies' are a moral issue....

 

[Midnight Marauder]

93% of the National Debt was caused by Reagan and the two Bushes lowering taxes for the rich.

Click on the link...

ReaganBushDebt.org

 

[Si modo]

Funding gun control programs, for example, is an increase in spending. Cutting some subsidies is a decrease in spending. So I have no idea what your point is.

It's the money, stupid.

But keep the hyperbole about wars on women, hatred of old people, burning of puppies, etc. up. It's entertaining.

This debate has nothing to do with the budget and we both know it. ....

Then the Dems can sign it if it's not about money.

Can you shoot yourself in the foot some more? Or, has your trademark dancing prevented that injury so far.

 

[xsited1]

The ball is in the Dems' court: Republicans have done their part to keep government open, says John McCormack in The Weekly Standard. But Obama and Reid won't allow another one-week extension, which only contains two "riders" — neither of which deals with Planned Parenthood or the EPA. In fact, "it's quite amazing" that Democrats are "now insisting that taxpayer-funding of abortion" is more important than funding the troops and keeping "budget negotiations going."

Crazy.

What part of the federal government doesn't fund abortions anyway are clowns like John McCormack and you not getting? By cutting Planned Parenthood, ironically, they'll be cutting PREGNANCY PREVENTION for low-income women. You want more babies born to women who can't care for them or don't want them and then have even MORE chidren on welfare to continue the cycle?

This is a fucking no-brainer.

So Planned Parenthood is the only entity to help low-income women avoid getting pregnant?

 

[Oddball]

93% of the National Debt was caused by Reagan and the two Bushes lowering taxes for the rich.

Click on the link...

ReaganBushDebt.org

RAAAAK!

 

[Trajan]

Funding gun control programs, for example, is an increase in spending. Cutting some subsidies is a decrease in spending. So I have no idea what your point is.

It's the money, stupid.

But keep the hyperbole about wars on women, hatred of old people, burning of puppies, etc. up. It's entertaining.

This debate has nothing to do with the budget and we both know it. Such a statement borders on dishonesty.

Senate Democrats offered up $10 billion in defense budget cuts. What did the GOP do? Reject it immediately. If the GOP was serious about having a real discussion about the budget, that wouldn't of happened.

If I didn't miss it, if I have please forgive me but, I don't recall any hue and cry from you, Modbert when 'social issues' ala DADT was included in the lame duck budget manoeuvrings...

 

[Modbert]

Let PP get its own funding like the rest of the business world has to do. After all, abortion is a business. You simply want us to keep funding abortion with some kind of an emotional plea that if we don't fund abortions there will be more abortions.

What kind of left wing garbage is that?

Immie

PP doesn't fund abortions with government money. But moving on from that point. Your analogy would make sense if Planned Parenthood was a for-profit business that was out to make as much money as possible for their owners.

Planned Parenthood - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In the 2007–08 Annual Report, clinic income totalled $374.7 million and miscellaneous operating revenues $68.9 million.[33] Approximately two-thirds of the revenue is put towards the provision of health services, while non-medical services such as sex education and public policy work make up another 16%; management expenses, fundraising, and international family planning programs account for most of the rest.

 

[xsited1]

Funding gun control programs, for example, is an increase in spending. Cutting some subsidies is a decrease in spending. So I have no idea what your point is.

It's the money, stupid.

But keep the hyperbole about wars on women, hatred of old people, burning of puppies, etc. up. It's entertaining.

This debate has nothing to do with the budget and we both know it. Such a statement borders on dishonesty.

Senate Democrats offered up $10 billion in defense budget cuts. What did the GOP do? Reject it immediately. If the GOP was serious about having a real discussion about the budget, that wouldn't of happened.

If I didn't miss it, if I have please forgive me but, I don't recall any hue and cry from you, Modbert when 'social issues' ala DADT was included in the lame duck budget manoeuvrings...

You didn't miss it. Modbert is just being the board troll as usual. He's a pretty good troll. Almost lifelike.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Planned Parenthood should not be funded by the Government. Let George Soros and Michael Mooron fund them. Planned Parenthood has been notorious for promoting Abortion. Our Government shouldn't be involved with them anymore. They're no different than ACORN. Their time is now up. WTG Republicans.

 

[Si modo]

As you take money away from birth control services, you increase the need for abortions

Cutting off your nose to spite your face

Let PP get its own funding like the rest of the business world has to do. After all, abortion is a business. You simply want us to keep funding abortion with some kind of an emotional plea that if we don't fund abortions there will be more abortions.

What kind of left wing garbage is that?

Immie

OH yay!! Let's desubsidize oil companies, health insurers (Medicare ADVANTAGE plans), pharmaceutical companies, agriculture!! I wonder when THOSE debates will start in earnest?

Great plan when unemployment is 9%.

 

[Chris]

I've always admired David Stockman, a rare Republican who seems to have principles.

My memory - without benefit of Wikipedia, okay? - is that he resigned as Reagan's director of the Office of Management and Budget when it became clear to him that Reagan was only too happy to cut taxes, as Stockman wanted, but would use none of his political capital to restrain spending. I even bought a (used) copy of Stockman's book - that's how impressed I was at the time.

So when I opened my NY Times this morning and found an amazing op-ed piece by Mr Stockman, I read it immediately. (The article may be behind a paywall - I don't know, because I have paid my dues, unlike free-lunch Republicans.)

Stockman believes that there have been "four great deformations of the national economy" since the 1940s, and that "modern Republicans have turned a blind eye to each one." Here's an example:

The second unhappy change in the American economy has been the extraordinary growth of our public debt. In 1970 it was just 40 percent of gross domestic product, or about $425 billion. When it reaches $18 trillion, it will be 40 times greater than in 1970. This debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party’s embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don’t matter if they result from tax cuts.


How my G.O.P. destroyed the U.S. Economy | BlueNC

 

[Modbert]

I have been in the accounting field for decades. Any entry level bookkeeper can tell you that is how things work especially one who has worked for a non-profit entity such as I have.

And as someone who has been in the accounting field for decades, you would know that what your saying makes absolutely no sense. PP is willing to risk all of their money from the government in order to use what? 2% of it towards Abortions? Instead of trying allocating 2% of that money from their donors and then using the 2% from the government towards other services, they're going to risk it all by doing such a bone-headed thing.

Does that make any sense to you whatsoever? Honestly? For someone who made a remark about emotional pleas earlier, you're resorting to not accounting but emotional arguments here.

 

[Trajan]

The real onus for this is of course on the demonRats. they didn't do a budget AT ALL, they should have but they didn't and purely for political reasons they chose not to do a budget and now it's come back to bite them in their hairy little ratty asses..

Didn't do a budget? Of course they did. But Republicans and Democrats can't agree to the smallest items in said budget, so the process gets drawn out long beyond the deadline. Note the process for passing an annual budget. Every single one of these committee hearings wound up in vote along party lines, period, and the Senate did not have the majority needed to pass the budget.

Appropriations/Budget – The WashingtonWatch.com Blog

The nice thing is that there is a bipartisan failure shaping up. The Republican House will almost certainly not produce a budget on time. The Democratic Senate will almost certainly not produce its budget on time. Thus, Americans of all perspectives can unite in criticism of our Congress.

Just as there was a bipartisan failure for the 2011 budget.

I am sorry that bi-partisan failure doesn't hold water, other than nancys 'deem and pass', of a trillion dollar budget res. in the HOUSE, please link me to the senate budget vote for fiscal year 2011, because according to say one of a hundred links I can provide;

Dems won’t pass budget in 2010
By Jared Allen - 06/22/10 12:01 AM ET

House Democrats will not pass a budget blueprint in 2010, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) will confirm in a speech on Tuesday.

But Hoyer will vow to crack down on government spending, saying Democrats will enforce spending limits that are lower than what President Barack Obama has called for.

snip-
The House has never failed to pass an annual budget resolution since the current budget rules were put into place in 1974. Hoyer this spring noted that the GOP-led Congress didn’t pass a final resolution in 1998, 2004 and 2006.

Dems won