Boehner to GOP: "Prepare For Shutdown!!!!"

[bodecea]

House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner on Monday told fellow Republicans to prepare for a government shutdown

Boehner tells Republicans to gird for shutdown - Yahoo! News

They could start with cutting their own salaries and government health care.

If it happens I wonder if this one will be more successful than Newt Gingrich's shut down? The electorate was wanting to string old Newt and the GOP up.

.

The first thing to go in a shutdown SHOULD be the pay and benefits of those causing it....all of Congress and the President and Cabinet.

 

[Si modo]

The Senate agreed to 33 billion in cuts. The problem is the Teabag nuts in the House won't settle for anything less than 61 billion. They seem to think that negotiation means getting 100% of what they want. That's not how it works. If there is a shutdown, Boehner's lack of leadership and the Teabags lack of negotiating skills will be to blame.

There are a lot of voters out there who remember the last shutdown. What two things will this shutdown (assuming it happens) and the last shutdown have in common? The House is in Republican control both times.

Who has their facts correct; you or the article in the OP? [Emphasis added]

Hmmmm.

Another con with reading comprehension issues.

From the OP article:

Republicans have floated a new plan that would push the deadline back by a week and impose another $12 billion in cuts, but Democrats have called it unacceptable.

So, like I said, the Senate has agreed to 33 billion; the House GOP wants more.

I guess you missed that one.....hmmmmmmmm

I suggest you actually comprehend what you read. The additional $12 billion are ONLY if they extend the continuing resolution another week.

That's FAR different than your claim that they will settle for NOTHING LESS than $61 bil.

 

[SgtMeowenstein]

Who has their facts correct; you or the article in the OP? [Emphasis added]

Hmmmm.

Another con with reading comprehension issues.

From the OP article:

Republicans have floated a new plan that would push the deadline back by a week and impose another $12 billion in cuts, but Democrats have called it unacceptable.

So, like I said, the Senate has agreed to 33 billion; the House GOP wants more.

I guess you missed that one.....hmmmmmmmm

I suggest you actually comprehend what you read. The additional $12 billion are ONLY if they extend the continuing resolution another week.

That's FAR different than your claim that they will settle for NOTHING LESS than $61 bil.

Right. Another 12 billion. And when you add that to 33 billion, you get 45 billion. Like I said, the Dems offered 33 billion, the Repubs want more. Is that hard to understand?

 

[Robert]

The Senate agreed to 33 billion in cuts. The problem is the Teabag nuts in the House won't settle for anything less than 61 billion. They seem to think that negotiation means getting 100% of what they want. That's not how it works. If there is a shutdown, Boehner's lack of leadership and the Teabags lack of negotiating skills will be to blame.

There are a lot of voters out there who remember the last shutdown. What two things will this shutdown (assuming it happens) and the last shutdown have in common? The House is in Republican control both times.

LMAO!!! Seriously you're crying about 33 billion over ten years? That's not even change found in the sofa compared to the 15 trillion in debt that we have. 33 billion run's our insane government what 3 days? LOL HOLY SHIT you're crying about 3 day's OMG our Nation is so screwed

Hey, ass-stain. I'm not crying. I'm rebutting Robert's claim that the Senate hasn't offered up any cuts. Read it again. Robert said the Senate hasn't offered any cuts; I said they have, but the GOP House won't negotiate. Reading comprehension isn't one of your strong suits, is it?

LMAO You may want to go back and rethink what you just posted idiot I am Robert and I made no such Claim.......so about that whole Failure thing.... ya comprehension is key.

 

[Skull Pilot]

All you sheep will see that the world won't end if we have a partial government shut down.

 

[SgtMeowenstein]

LMAO!!! Seriously you're crying about 33 billion over ten years? That's not even change found in the sofa compared to the 15 trillion in debt that we have. 33 billion run's our insane government what 3 days? LOL HOLY SHIT you're crying about 3 day's OMG our Nation is so screwed

Hey, ass-stain. I'm not crying. I'm rebutting Robert's claim that the Senate hasn't offered up any cuts. Read it again. Robert said the Senate hasn't offered any cuts; I said they have, but the GOP House won't negotiate. Reading comprehension isn't one of your strong suits, is it?

LMAO You may want to go back and rethink what you just posted idiot I am Robert and I made no such Claim.......so about that whole Failure thing.... ya comprehension is key.

Ok, so.....I rebutted your false claim. Do you want to talk about that, or my confusion as to who I was talking to? I'm guessing the latter, because I owned you on the former.

 

[Si modo]

LMAO!!! Seriously you're crying about 33 billion over ten years? That's not even change found in the sofa compared to the 15 trillion in debt that we have. 33 billion run's our insane government what 3 days? LOL HOLY SHIT you're crying about 3 day's OMG our Nation is so screwed

Hey, ass-stain. I'm not crying. I'm rebutting Robert's claim that the Senate hasn't offered up any cuts. Read it again. Robert said the Senate hasn't offered any cuts; I said they have, but the GOP House won't negotiate. Reading comprehension isn't one of your strong suits, is it?

LMAO You may want to go back and rethink what you just posted idiot I am Robert and I made no such Claim.......so about that whole Failure thing.... ya comprehension is key.

The Sarge of Pussies is batting 1000 in that area.

 

[SgtMeowenstein]

Hey, ass-stain. I'm not crying. I'm rebutting Robert's claim that the Senate hasn't offered up any cuts. Read it again. Robert said the Senate hasn't offered any cuts; I said they have, but the GOP House won't negotiate. Reading comprehension isn't one of your strong suits, is it?

LMAO You may want to go back and rethink what you just posted idiot I am Robert and I made no such Claim.......so about that whole Failure thing.... ya comprehension is key.

The Sarge of Pussies is batting 1000 in that area.

Yeah, I just owned your ***** ass. Is that all you have?

 

[Si modo]

Another con with reading comprehension issues.

From the OP article:



So, like I said, the Senate has agreed to 33 billion; the House GOP wants more.

I guess you missed that one.....hmmmmmmmm

I suggest you actually comprehend what you read. The additional $12 billion are ONLY if they extend the continuing resolution another week.

That's FAR different than your claim that they will settle for NOTHING LESS than $61 bil.

Right. Another 12 billion. And when you add that to 33 billion, you get 45 billion. Like I said, the Dems offered 33 billion, the Repubs want more. Is that hard to understand?

LMFAO!!!!! No, the House has said they will get $12 billion more IF (small word, big meaning but often leaves several clueless) they extend the continuing resolution another week. The fact that you cannot seem to grasp the difference between what the House is saying and what you claim about their accepting nothing less than $61 billion is on display, though. And I am relishing in continuing to point that out.

 

[Robert]

Hey, ass-stain. I'm not crying. I'm rebutting Robert's claim that the Senate hasn't offered up any cuts. Read it again. Robert said the Senate hasn't offered any cuts; I said they have, but the GOP House won't negotiate. Reading comprehension isn't one of your strong suits, is it?

LMAO You may want to go back and rethink what you just posted idiot I am Robert and I made no such Claim.......so about that whole Failure thing.... ya comprehension is key.

Ok, so.....I rebutted your false claim. Do you want to talk about that, or my confusion as to who I was talking to? I'm guessing the latter, because I owned you on the former.

LOL!!! So not only did you fail at comprehending what you were reading but now your claiming you "owned" someone to whom you we're not even talking too OMG it does get any better then that.... FAILURE Get back to me when you pull your head out of your ass this is just to entertaining.

 

[SgtMeowenstein]

I suggest you actually comprehend what you read. The additional $12 billion are ONLY if they extend the continuing resolution another week.

That's FAR different than your claim that they will settle for NOTHING LESS than $61 bil.

Right. Another 12 billion. And when you add that to 33 billion, you get 45 billion. Like I said, the Dems offered 33 billion, the Repubs want more. Is that hard to understand?

LMFAO!!!!! No, the House has said they will get $12 billion more IF (small word, big meaning but often leaves several clueless) they extend the continuing resolution another week. The fact that you cannot seem to grasp the difference between what the House is saying and what you claim about their accepting nothing less than $61 billion is on display, though. And I am relishing in continuing to point that out.

Ok, so I should have chosen my words more carefully. The House GOP won't accept 33 billion. They want more. Maybe they'll settle for 45 billion, or 52 billion. The point is that Senate Dems have offered 33 billion - more than half of what the House Teabag GOP wants, and the exact amount that House GOP leadership originally floated - but the House Teabags won't accept it. Robert made the claim that the Senate hasn't played ball. As I pointed out, that's not true. Do want to argue that, or just pick at my words while ignoring the main point of the argument?

 

[Si modo]

Right. Another 12 billion. And when you add that to 33 billion, you get 45 billion. Like I said, the Dems offered 33 billion, the Repubs want more. Is that hard to understand?

LMFAO!!!!! No, the House has said they will get $12 billion more IF (small word, big meaning but often leaves several clueless) they extend the continuing resolution another week. The fact that you cannot seem to grasp the difference between what the House is saying and what you claim about their accepting nothing less than $61 billion is on display, though. And I am relishing in continuing to point that out.

Ok, so I should have chosen my words more carefully. The House GOP won't accept 33 billion. ....

Well, that's not what the House actually said. That is the amount of cuts on the table to prevent a shutdown on Friday.

 

[SgtMeowenstein]

LMAO You may want to go back and rethink what you just posted idiot I am Robert and I made no such Claim.......so about that whole Failure thing.... ya comprehension is key.

Ok, so.....I rebutted your false claim. Do you want to talk about that, or my confusion as to who I was talking to? I'm guessing the latter, because I owned you on the former.

LOL!!! So not only did you fail at comprehending what you were reading but now your claiming you "owned" someone to whom you we're not even talking too OMG it does get any better then that.... FAILURE Get back to me when you pull your head out of your ass this is just to entertaining.

Like I predicted, you don't actually want to talk about the fact that - contrary to what you claimed - Senate Dems have indeed made offers. You made the claim, I proved you wrong. But you want to focus instead on a post of mine where I got confused as to who I was talking to (which has absolutely nothing to do with the argument, and which doesn't prove me wrong). You know your priorities. Get back to me when you can actually argue the facts instead of picking on a mistake I made in a post. Dumb ass.

 

[Robert]

Right. Another 12 billion. And when you add that to 33 billion, you get 45 billion. Like I said, the Dems offered 33 billion, the Repubs want more. Is that hard to understand?

LMFAO!!!!! No, the House has said they will get $12 billion more IF (small word, big meaning but often leaves several clueless) they extend the continuing resolution another week. The fact that you cannot seem to grasp the difference between what the House is saying and what you claim about their accepting nothing less than $61 billion is on display, though. And I am relishing in continuing to point that out.

Ok, so I should have chosen my words more carefully. The House GOP won't accept 33 billion. They want more. Maybe they'll settle for 45 billion, or 52 billion. The point is that Senate Dems have offered 33 billion - more than half of what the House Teabag GOP wants, and the exact amount that House GOP leadership originally floated - but the House Teabags won't accept it. Robert made the claim that the Senate hasn't played ball. As I pointed out, that's not true. Do want to argue that, or just pick at my words while ignoring the main point of the argument?

ROFLMAO!! OMG reading comprehension truly isn't your strong suit is it. Robert made no such claim Robert pointed out the Left is crying about 33 billion in cut's which amount's to 3 day's of operating time for our Insane Government. And yes I fully support the Tea Party in the demand for more in cut's even 66 billion is absolutely nothing.

I have a thought for you idiot take a deep breath before you reply and figure who it is that you are talking to.

 

[Robert]

Ok, so.....I rebutted your false claim. Do you want to talk about that, or my confusion as to who I was talking to? I'm guessing the latter, because I owned you on the former.

LOL!!! So not only did you fail at comprehending what you were reading but now your claiming you "owned" someone to whom you we're not even talking too OMG it does get any better then that.... FAILURE Get back to me when you pull your head out of your ass this is just to entertaining.

Like I predicted, you don't actually want to talk about the fact that, despite what you said, Senate Dems have indeed made offers. You made the claim, I proved you wrong. But you want to focus instead on a post of mine where I got confused as to who I was talking to (which has absolutely nothing to do with the argument, and which doesn't prove me wrong). You know your priorities. Get back to me when you can actually argue the facts instead of picking on a mistake I made in a post. Dumb ass.

And yet you persist in making the same mistake LOL Dude pull your head out of your ass and figure out who you are talking to.

 

[DaGoose]

Well isn't it funny the leftist tools love Death on Demand for children while they do everything they can to protect a person convicted of a crime heinous enough to warrant the death penalty. Simply amazing. and you ask a question like that LOL.... Alrighty then.

And isn't it funny that Neo-Cons support the death penalty even when it's a fact that many innocent people have been executed. I guess they just consider that collateral damage.

.

I'm a Neocon. I am against the death penalty as is Krauthammer, one of the founders of Neocon philosophy. I suggest you get to know your political philosophies before commenting on them.

Care to back up that:

A) Krauthammer is one of the FOUNDERS and,

B) That the Neoconservative philosophy OPPOSES the death penalty?

Let's see how well versed you are in your chosen philosophy.

Good luck!!

.

 

[Si modo]

And isn't it funny that Neo-Cons support the death penalty even when it's a fact that many innocent people have been executed. I guess they just consider that collateral damage.

.

I'm a Neocon. I am against the death penalty as is Krauthammer, one of the founders of Neocon philosophy. I suggest you get to know your political philosophies before commenting on them.

Care to back up that:

A) Krauthammer is one of the FOUNDERS and,

B) That the Neoconservative philosophy OPPOSES the death penalty?

Let's see how well versed you are in your chosen philosophy.

Good luck!!

.

Well, not a founder of original neoconservatism because he would have to be pretty old (but I suspect you knew that but want to get literal), but certainly the quintessential modern Neoconservative.

And, I'd link to wikipedia, but I bet you can find it. Krauthammer opposes the death penalty, as do most Neocons - not what the left thinks a Neocon is.

....

Krauthammer is a supporter of legalized abortion;[31][32][33] an opponent of the death penalty;[34][35][36][37] an intelligent design critic and an advocate for the scientific consensus on evolution, calling the religion-science controversy a "false conflict;"[38][39] a supporter of embryonic stem cell research using embryos discarded by fertility clinics with restrictions in its applications;[40][41][42] and a longtime advocate of radically higher energy taxes to induce conservation.[43][44][45][46] ....

Religious views are irrelevant in neoconservative philosophy. One can conflate social conservatism to Neoconservatsim, but that does not mean they are correct.

 

[BenNatuf]

House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner on Monday told fellow Republicans to prepare for a government shutdown

Boehner tells Republicans to gird for shutdown - Yahoo! News

They could start with cutting their own salaries and government health care.

If it happens I wonder if this one will be more successful than Newt Gingrich's shut down? The electorate was wanting to string old Newt and the GOP up.

.

1. The house passed a bill to do just that. It too is stuck in the Senate.

2. Newt didn't have any shutdown, the congress passed essentially the same budget three times which Clinton vetoed (shutting down the government and blaming on the GOP) twice befor taking credit for it the third time.

 

[DaGoose]

I'm a Neocon. I am against the death penalty as is Krauthammer, one of the founders of Neocon philosophy. I suggest you get to know your political philosophies before commenting on them.

Care to back up that:

A) Krauthammer is one of the FOUNDERS and,

B) That the Neoconservative philosophy OPPOSES the death penalty?

Let's see how well versed you are in your chosen philosophy.

Good luck!!

.

Well, not a founder of original neoconservatism because he would have to be pretty old (but I suspect you knew that but want to get literal), but certainly the quintessential modern Neoconservative.

And, I'd link to wikipedia, but I bet you can find it. Krauthammer opposes the death penalty, as do most Neocons - not what the left thinks a Neocon is.

....

Krauthammer is a supporter of legalized abortion;[31][32][33] an opponent of the death penalty;[34][35][36][37] an intelligent design critic and an advocate for the scientific consensus on evolution, calling the religion-science controversy a "false conflict;"[38][39] a supporter of embryonic stem cell research using embryos discarded by fertility clinics with restrictions in its applications;[40][41][42] and a longtime advocate of radically higher energy taxes to induce conservation.[43][44][45][46] ....

Religious views are irrelevant in neoconservative philosophy. One can conflate social conservatism to Neoconservatsim, but that does not mean they are correct.

I'm glad you see the difference between the original Neoconservatives and the new version.

You are correct about Krauthammer's political views on abortion and the death penalty. But that doesn't mean that the majority of the Neoconservative movement is in agreement with him. That would be like saying the GOP is pro-choice because their one time front runner Rudy Giuliani is and Mitt Romney used to be.

.

 

[Si modo]

Care to back up that:

A) Krauthammer is one of the FOUNDERS and,

B) That the Neoconservative philosophy OPPOSES the death penalty?

Let's see how well versed you are in your chosen philosophy.

Good luck!!

.

Well, not a founder of original neoconservatism because he would have to be pretty old (but I suspect you knew that but want to get literal), but certainly the quintessential modern Neoconservative.

And, I'd link to wikipedia, but I bet you can find it. Krauthammer opposes the death penalty, as do most Neocons - not what the left thinks a Neocon is.

....

Krauthammer is a supporter of legalized abortion;[31][32][33] an opponent of the death penalty;[34][35][36][37] an intelligent design critic and an advocate for the scientific consensus on evolution, calling the religion-science controversy a "false conflict;"[38][39] a supporter of embryonic stem cell research using embryos discarded by fertility clinics with restrictions in its applications;[40][41][42] and a longtime advocate of radically higher energy taxes to induce conservation.[43][44][45][46] ....

Religious views are irrelevant in neoconservative philosophy. One can conflate social conservatism to Neoconservatsim, but that does not mean they are correct.

I'm glad you see the difference between the original Neoconservatives and the new version.

You are correct about Krauthammer's political views on abortion and the death penalty. But that doesn't mean that the majority of the Neoconservative movement is in agreement with him. That would be like saying the GOP is pro-choice because their one time front runner Rudy Giuliani is and Mitt Romney used to be.

.

But I am not saying the majority of the neoconservatives are anti- or pro-death penalty. That would be foolish of me since the neocon moniker is so often poorly and inaccurately used. I am saying the Neoconservative philosophy is not pro death penalty. And, I have also said that what the left considers a neocon (one following the Neoconservative philosophy) and one who actually does follow the Neoconservative philosophy are not quite the same, in fact often very opposite.