My Concise Take on the State of the Union Speech

[uscitizen]

Does being an asshole come naturally to you MM or do you have to take lessons to be that way?

do you have a tiny dick and a pit bull?

If being stupid comes naturally to you I wouldn't at all be surprised.

You would not be suprised that you have a tiny dick? I guess not you should have figured it out by now

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Does being an asshole come naturally to you MM or do you have to take lessons to be that way?

do you have a tiny dick and a pit bull?

If being stupid comes naturally to you I wouldn't at all be surprised.

You would not be suprised that you have a tiny dick? I guess not you should have figured it out by now

Your lack of creativity in flaming speaks volumes about your lack of intelligence.

Smegma Head.

 

[uscitizen]

Pecker neck.

Anyway, my momma told me not to poke fun of those less gifted than myself. So enough poking at you for now.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Pecker neck.

Anyway, my momma told me not to poke fun of those less gifted than myself. So enough poking at you for now.

Mom's always tell their special needs retard children they are gifted.

 

[uscitizen]

Pecker neck.

Anyway, my momma told me not to poke fun of those less gifted than myself. So enough poking at you for now.

Mom's always tell their special needs retard children they are gifted.

LMAO. Nope I will refrain from saying it.

Have a nice day.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

How can a freeze take place NOW when the FY 2010 budget is already in place?

It can't. All a "freeze" really does is keep Congress from cutting anything.

Obama also said he wants PAYGO reinstituted, which will also affect the FY 2011 budget (one can assume).

Ahh yes, the old standby. After years of wailing that "Booooosh killed paygo" they have now had three years with super-majority power, and haven't re-instituted it.

The House has a version with no teeth, and they've moved on to other items.

What about when Bush had CPMPLETE control? Why didn't BUSH, a "conservative", impliment paygo? Why didn't Bush implememnt ALL SORTS of GOOD conservative policies? I think you knoe why because he was too busy paying off the players that got him elected in the FIRST place. He spent the first four years engaged in Prid pro quo to the MILLIONAIRES and the HUGE industry (oil) that got him the highest seat in our gov't. So what are we going to do about this practice that happens on BOTH sides of the ailse?


CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM WITH REAL TEETH! I hate more money going out but I think that, AT LEAST, Senate and Presidential elections by publically funded with ZERO legal loopholes to put more money into campaign commercials. Say $10 millino for Senate and 50 million for Pres. Any funds held back can be donated to whatever non-profit the candidate wishes which may cause the candidate to be more frugal with the campaign funds.


OR we could let campaign finance go hog wild but DIVIDE the number of votes by the number of $s spent. So you spend $100 million and get 10 million votes. Cost per vote $10. The other candidate spends $90 and gets 10 million for a cost per vote of $9. The candidate with the lower cost per vote wins.


No matter WHAT we do we need to quit BUYING and SELLING our REPRESENTITIVE GOVERNMENT!

 

[MaggieMae]

How can a freeze take place NOW when the FY 2010 budget is already in place?

It can't. All a "freeze" really does is keep Congress from cutting anything.

Obama also said he wants PAYGO reinstituted, which will also affect the FY 2011 budget (one can assume).

Ahh yes, the old standby. After years of wailing that "Booooosh killed paygo" they have now had three years with super-majority power, and haven't re-instituted it.

The House has a version with no teeth, and they've moved on to other items.

3 years? How long did it take Franken to be seated?

Actually, PAYGO was reinstated, I believe as one of the first House rules starting in 2007, but then removed when the financial giants began crashing and it was evident the entire economy was soon to follow.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

How can a freeze take place NOW when the FY 2010 budget is already in place?

It can't. All a "freeze" really does is keep Congress from cutting anything.

Obama also said he wants PAYGO reinstituted, which will also affect the FY 2011 budget (one can assume).

Ahh yes, the old standby. After years of wailing that "Booooosh killed paygo" they have now had three years with super-majority power, and haven't re-instituted it.

The House has a version with no teeth, and they've moved on to other items.

What about when Bush had CPMPLETE control? Why didn't BUSH, a "conservative", impliment paygo?

The President cannot implement rules for the Congress, dumbass. He's not a King or a dictator.

Get back to why didn't the House do so, when they gained full control back in 2007, after three years of bitching.

And really, yelling BOOOOOOSH all the time was so yesterday.

 

[DiamondDave]

How can a freeze take place NOW when the FY 2010 budget is already in place?

It can't. All a "freeze" really does is keep Congress from cutting anything.

Obama also said he wants PAYGO reinstituted, which will also affect the FY 2011 budget (one can assume).

Ahh yes, the old standby. After years of wailing that "Booooosh killed paygo" they have now had three years with super-majority power, and haven't re-instituted it.

The House has a version with no teeth, and they've moved on to other items.

What about when Bush had CPMPLETE control? Why didn't BUSH, a "conservative", impliment paygo? Why didn't Bush implememnt ALL SORTS of GOOD conservative policies? I think you knoe why because he was too busy paying off the players that got him elected in the FIRST place. He spent the first four years engaged in Prid pro quo to the MILLIONAIRES and the HUGE industry (oil) that got him the highest seat in our gov't. So what are we going to do about this practice that happens on BOTH sides of the ailse?


CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM WITH REAL TEETH! I hate more money going out but I think that, AT LEAST, Senate and Presidential elections by publically funded with ZERO legal loopholes to put more money into campaign commercials. Say $10 millino for Senate and 50 million for Pres. Any funds held back can be donated to whatever non-profit the candidate wishes which may cause the candidate to be more frugal with the campaign funds.


OR we could let campaign finance go hog wild but DIVIDE the number of votes by the number of $s spent. So you spend $100 million and get 10 million votes. Cost per vote $10. The other candidate spends $90 and gets 10 million for a cost per vote of $9. The candidate with the lower cost per vote wins.


No matter WHAT we do we need to quit BUYING and SELLING our REPRESENTITIVE GOVERNMENT!

Uhhh... Bush was a Republican.. not a Conservative... the 2 are not all inclusive of each other

 

[Midnight Marauder]

It can't. All a "freeze" really does is keep Congress from cutting anything.Ahh yes, the old standby. After years of wailing that "Booooosh killed paygo" they have now had three years with super-majority power, and haven't re-instituted it.

The House has a version with no teeth, and they've moved on to other items.

3 years? How long did it take Franken to be seated?

Actually, PAYGO was reinstated, I believe as one of the first House rules starting in 2007, but then removed when the financial giants began crashing and it was evident the entire economy was soon to follow.

That Paygo provision had no teeth whatsoever. As I said earlier. And it was removed very shortly after it was passed, not when any crashes began.:

TaxVox: the Tax Policy Center blog :: Pay Go, Pay Gone: AMT Drives Senate Dems to Blink

 

[MaggieMae]

He was STUPIDLY trying to say that until Franken was seated, they couldn't do paygo.

the correct term is ignorant, if in fact paygo does not require senate confirmation.

The correct term is stupid, because willful ignorance IS stupid, and you have all the information known to Mankind at your fingertips.

It's also stupid because they wouldn't need the 60-seat super majority in the Senate to pass paygo.

You've made your point. Enough already. Must you always thoroughly chew something up and keep spitting it out when ONCE is quite enough?

 

[uscitizen]

Floor Statement by Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND)
on Paygo Amendment to FY 2007 Senate GOP Budget Resolution
March 14, 2006
The amendment I have sent to the desk is the pay-go amendment. In many ways I
believe this is the most important amendment to be considered today. This amendment would
reestablish the budget discipline that worked so well in previous years, a rule that has been
allowed to lapse by our colleagues on the other side of the aisle.
Here is where we are. The debt of our country is skyrocketing.

http://budget.senate.gov/democratic/statements/2006/fs_budgetresolutionfloorpaygoamendstat031406.pdf

WAIT! Paygo is just the house right not the senate?

How about it MM?

 

[Midnight Marauder]

the correct term is ignorant, if in fact paygo does not require senate confirmation.

The correct term is stupid, because willful ignorance IS stupid, and you have all the information known to Mankind at your fingertips.

It's also stupid because they wouldn't need the 60-seat super majority in the Senate to pass paygo.

You've made your point. Enough already. Must you always thoroughly chew something up and keep spitting it out when ONCE is quite enough?

That's your business how?

 

[MaggieMae]

Pecker neck.

Anyway, my momma told me not to poke fun of those less gifted than myself. So enough poking at you for now.

Mom's always tell their special needs retard children they are gifted.

LMAO. Nope I will refrain from saying it.

Have a nice day.

He likes to goad people into non sequitur arguments. Best to learn that early on. We all make the same mistake, though.

 

[uscitizen]

February 26, 2009
Obama's PAYGO Law Would Not Slow Spending or Budget Deficits
by Brian M. Riedl
WebMemo #2312
A week after muscling through possibly the most expensive spending bill in America history, President Obama has called on Congress to support fiscal discipline. Specifically, he has proposed a Pay-as-You-Go (PAYGO) statute requiring that tax cuts and entitlement expansions be collectively deficit neutral.

Since 2007, Congress has had a PAYGO rule mandating that each new tax and entitlement bill be deficit neutral. Because it is merely a congressional rule, lawmakers can (and do) waive it easily. By contrast, a PAYGO statute--which existed from 1991 until 2002--would operate differently. Instead of requiring that each tax and entitlement bill be deficit neutral, this law would keep a running scorecard of all enacted bills (allowing one bill to offset another). If, at the end of the year, the net effect of all tax and entitlement legislation was to increase the budget deficit over the next decade, an automatic series of entitlement spending cuts ("sequestrations") would be triggered to offset those costs.

PAYGO has proven to be more of a talking point than an actual tool for budget discipline. During the 1991-2002 round of statutory PAYGO, Congress and the President still added more than $700 billion to the budget deficit and simply cancelled every single sequestration.[1] Since the 2007 creation of the PAYGO rule, Congress has waived it numerous times and added $600 billion to the deficit.


Obama's PAYGO Law Would Not Slow Spending or Budget Deficits

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Floor Statement by Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND)
on Paygo Amendment to FY 2007 Senate GOP Budget Resolution
March 14, 2006
The amendment I have sent to the desk is the pay-go amendment. In many ways I
believe this is the most important amendment to be considered today. This amendment would
reestablish the budget discipline that worked so well in previous years, a rule that has been
allowed to lapse by our colleagues on the other side of the aisle.
Here is where we are. The debt of our country is skyrocketing.

http://budget.senate.gov/democratic/statements/2006/fs_budgetresolutionfloorpaygoamendstat031406.pdf

WAIT! Paygo is just the house right not the senate?

How about it MM?

Original Paygo was part of the budget finance laws and applied to both houses. The House passed their toothless "rules" version, but the Senate did not act. Neither of these were laws. They were loose "rules."

As was also explained earlier, the Senate never needed 60 votes in order to pass a paygo rule.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Mom's always tell their special needs retard children they are gifted.

LMAO. Nope I will refrain from saying it.

Have a nice day.

He likes to goad people into non sequitur arguments. Best to learn that early on. We all make the same mistake, though.

Actually I just enjoy pointing out stupidity.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

It can't. All a "freeze" really does is keep Congress from cutting anything.Ahh yes, the old standby. After years of wailing that "Booooosh killed paygo" they have now had three years with super-majority power, and haven't re-instituted it.

The House has a version with no teeth, and they've moved on to other items.

What about when Bush had CPMPLETE control? Why didn't BUSH, a "conservative", impliment paygo?

The President cannot implement rules for the Congress, dumbass. He's not a King or a dictator.

Get back to why didn't the House do so, when they gained full control back in 2007, after three years of bitching.

And really, yelling BOOOOOOSH all the time was so yesterday.

So Bush did NOTHING to try to get it implimented!! He may not be a KING but he SHOULD be able to convince he OWN party to act like, ohhhh wait for it , CONSERVATIVE. But Bush was too busy clearing BRUSH to get ANYTHING done when he had ALL THE POWER he needed. So WHY didn't he do ANYTHING that a half way decent Republican (not even conservative) would try to get done? HE had ALL that power and he PISSED IT AWAY and THAT'S why you NEVER want to talk about Bush.

 

[MaggieMae]

The correct term is stupid, because willful ignorance IS stupid, and you have all the information known to Mankind at your fingertips.

It's also stupid because they wouldn't need the 60-seat super majority in the Senate to pass paygo.

You've made your point. Enough already. Must you always thoroughly chew something up and keep spitting it out when ONCE is quite enough?

That's your business how?

Because when people need to wade through two pages taken up by a personal back and forth it's a ******* waste of time. You try this trick on me all the time, and I've come to ignore you (usually) because you can be such a persistent, nasty, bastard. Bye bye.

 

[Misty]

There hasn't been a good presidential speech since Reagan.