Democrats Move Towards Violent Confrontation

[Ray From Cleveland]

But never a question of how are the bills going to get paid?

Oops, youre confused again. It's the republicans who increase spending while decreasing tax revenue. The democrats try to pay for things.

And they did a pretty good job during DumBama, huh?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Yes, it could get ugly. My feeling is, though that it could play out this way. Mitch McConnell tables impeachment as he did the Merrick Garland confirmation. The pink pussycat-hat brigade descends on Washington once again, setting up a confrontation with the Trump supporters - a possible recipe for a left-right showdown in the streets.

It would be foolish for McConnell to do that. First off because nothing will happen to Trump. Secondly, it would force representatives to vote yes or no. Then the voters can weed out their garbage come election time.

I think that they are called Senators in McConnel's chamber. But yes the voters will weed out the garbage, Those who chose defending a fraud and a criminal over the rule of law.

Well if your representatives shared your prediction, why aren't they starting the impeachment process immediately?

Errr They are Slick


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

And they did a pretty good job during DumBama, huh?

Yes, they did. And they ran smack dab into an obstructionist, debt loving republican congress. Least new spending on record by any president in decades...all attempts to pay for SS and Medicare stonewalled by republican morons....

Dude, you really need to spend more than a few seconds thinking through your posts. You are really stumbling lately.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No.

Well, sorry bro, the data is what it is. Most poor people live in rural areas and small towns. It's just a fact. No amount of telling yourself that the hot garbage you made up on the spot is true is going to change this fact.

Well here's a map of our city. See all those dark areas? Those are in Cleveland. See all those lighter or white areas? Those are the suburbs outside of Cleveland.

And they did a pretty good job during DumBama, huh?

Yes, they did. And they ran smack dab into an obstructionist, debt loving republican congress. Least new spending on record by any president in decades...all attempts to pay for SS and Medicare stonewalled by republican morons....

Dude, you really need to spend more than a few seconds thinking through your posts. You are really stumbling lately.

So who did the spending, DumBama or the Republicans? You can't have it both ways.

 

[JoeB131]

The country would be more liberal due to deperndency and the popuplations of inner cities. I don't disagree with that. That doesn't preclude the fact that people in non-urban areas, with a different set of problems, needs representation too.

No, they really don't... Frankly, I'm getting tired of subsiding the Red State inbreds in JesusLand.

I agree we should be spending less. That is true for both parties, however, cutting taxes ACROSS THE BOARD is the way to organically stimulate the economy. Raising taxes is an inorganic short term fix which will ultimately result in less tax revenue. Social Security should be funded, but it isn't due to payouts to people that have never paid in or get back far more than they every put in. Democrats and Republicans raiding the fund doesn't help either.

Two problems with this Supply Side "Voodoo Economics". The first is that tax cuts for the rich stimulate the economy, when there is no correlation. Tax cuts didn't get us out of the 1980's recession, massive military spending did.

Bill Clinton raised taxes in the 1990's on rich people. He had balanced budgets by 1999 and economic prosperity.. Blows the whole Voodoo Economic Argument right out of the water.

Wealth inequality is a thing, so is loafing. When you Democrats work on the latter, we can work on the former. The ironic thing is that legislating against wealth inequality creates more loafers.

No, what creates more dependency is that the wealth is concentrated at the top.

The thing you guys don't address is that most people on what you like to call "Welfare" are often working jobs that don't pay enough to put a roof over their heads or food on the table.... If the wealth were evenly distributed, if the CEO made as much as the Fry Cook, you wouldn't need SNAP, TANF, Section 8, Medicaid or any of the other programs you whine about.

Of course, what you don't whine about is "White People Welfare" like Social Security, Medicare and Unemployment Insurance. Entitlements that white folks get. You don't run on cutting those, or you'd be done.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

So who did the spending, DumBama or the Republicans?

The debt spending? Yes, republicans. Theynsupported two police actions, but refused to pay for them. Consistently. Seeing a pattern, yet?

 

[Thinker101]

And you're thinking China got some kinda favorable treatment out of those trademarks?

Yet another embarrassingly stupid response. Goddamn, do you ever think past the first thought that fizzles into your brain? What matters is that China thought they were currying favor with the mentally ill president ahead of working on a trade deal.

The word eluding your trump cult dictionary here is "bribery".

For Christ sake, who the hell cares what China thought they were going to get. They already got their favorable treatment when Obama/Biden were in there...fricken idiot.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So who did the spending, DumBama or the Republicans?

The debt spending? Yes, republicans. Theynsupported two police actions, but refused to pay for them. Consistently. Seeing a pattern, yet?

I think you mean deficit spending. And yes, I do see a pattern:

The Republicans held the House from early 1990's until 2006. Democrats took leadership in 2007 and kept that leadership until 2010. In 2011, the Republicans took leadership of Congress until 2018.

 

[Faun]

So who did the spending, DumBama or the Republicans?

The debt spending? Yes, republicans. Theynsupported two police actions, but refused to pay for them. Consistently. Seeing a pattern, yet?

I think you mean deficit spending. And yes, I do see a pattern:

View attachment 282337

The Republicans held the House from early 1990's until 2006. Democrats took leadership in 2007 and kept that leadership until 2010. In 2011, the Republicans took leadership of Congress until 2018.

LOL

2009 was the biggest deficit dud to Bush's Great Recession. They could only get smaller after that.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So who did the spending, DumBama or the Republicans?

The debt spending? Yes, republicans. Theynsupported two police actions, but refused to pay for them. Consistently. Seeing a pattern, yet?

I think you mean deficit spending. And yes, I do see a pattern:

View attachment 282337

The Republicans held the House from early 1990's until 2006. Democrats took leadership in 2007 and kept that leadership until 2010. In 2011, the Republicans took leadership of Congress until 2018.

LOL

2009 was the biggest deficit dud to Bush's Great Recession. They could only get smaller after that.

Really? So why did it take four years???

 

[Denizen]

This will move the impeachometer further toward impeachment.

It's nearly off-scale already.

 

[Faun]

So who did the spending, DumBama or the Republicans?

The debt spending? Yes, republicans. Theynsupported two police actions, but refused to pay for them. Consistently. Seeing a pattern, yet?

I think you mean deficit spending. And yes, I do see a pattern:

View attachment 282337

The Republicans held the House from early 1990's until 2006. Democrats took leadership in 2007 and kept that leadership until 2010. In 2011, the Republicans took leadership of Congress until 2018.

LOL

2009 was the biggest deficit dud to Bush's Great Recession. They could only get smaller after that.

Really? So why did it take four years???

Why lie? 2010 was smaller than 2009. That was one year, not 4.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

For Christ sake, who the hell cares what China thought they were going to get

Um...anyone with a functioning brain cell wondering if it was bribery?

Goddamn dude, are you really this much of a moron?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I think you mean deficit spending. And yes, I do see a pattern:

Yes, because you are a shallow, cacklng fool and look at a chart instead of looking at when and how the spending was mandated, and when attempts to pay for things were blocked.

I expected no less.

 

[Thinker101]

For Christ sake, who the hell cares what China thought they were going to get

Um...anyone with a functioning brain cell wondering if it was bribery?

Goddamn dude, are you really this much of a moron?

Wow, another one that likes to modify/crop comments. End of conversation ass hole.

 

[Agit8r]

People think I am kidding. We are on the brink. Based on the responses from most conservatives on this site, it probably reflects how most think.

We will deserve what we get. It's going to be bad.

With all due respect, this forum is not reflective of the overall mood of the country.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Wow, another one that likes to modify/crop comments. End of conversation ass hole.

My crop had no effect on the meaning if the statement. You know that. So go ahead and tuck tail and go, ya fraud.

 

[Thinker101]

Wow, another one that likes to modify/crop comments. End of conversation ass hole.

My crop had no effect on the meaning if the statement. You know that. So go ahead and tuck tail and go, ya fraud.

Look idiot, I really don't care how you fricken want to spin it. As far as "rules" go, not altering means not altering. Now if that means something else to your tiny brain, great, take it up with someone else.

 

[SmokeALib]

Wow, another one that likes to modify/crop comments. End of conversation ass hole.

My crop had no effect on the meaning if the statement. You know that. So go ahead and tuck tail and go, ya fraud.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Look idiot, I really don't care how you fricken want to spin it

I know. You want to tuck tail and slither away, and this is your bullshit reason. I get it.