Harry Guerrilla
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2008
- Messages
- 28,951
- Reaction score
- 12,422
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
I guess if you didn't watch Congress in action over those two years you may not think they were the party of no. They could aptly be called the filibuster party as well. Tell me that they didn't filibuster more than any other Congress in memory. I thought you had a United States going on there. It seems like you have the right and left or the Republicans and Democrats but you have zero unity in your Congress. They are a global joke and not just one side. One politician is pretty much like the next. They talk a different talk until they hit the doors then they all turn out the same. Look at the jokes that are running for President this time sorry they are Republicans but on either side they would be laughed out of politics just 30 or 40 years ago. Yes your Congress is a do nothing just say no Congress. Not one of them. They are an insult to intelligence. I do not defend either side. They are all a joke and the electorate that continues to put them in office are the biggest joke of all. Talk about a nation wallowing at the shallow end of the gene pool.
To the bolded: umm, no, they, didn't. That was Cantor's idea, and it was to score cheap political points.
You overlooked a couple.
Congress does not exist to be unified.
The parties are not supposed to agree.
They have not filibustered more than any other Congress.
The "party of no" line is just an emotional talking point.
Check Article 2, Section 2, Clause 1 to see how the Constitution authorizes Cabinet departments. Final details are then left up to Congress and the President about what the actual departments will be.
For the Federal Reserve, look at the same clause that Alexander Hamilton used to defend the constitutionality of the Bank of the United States, and that is Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution.
What makes the Departments of Treasury, State, and Defense (previously War) constitutional?
If you believe the two departments you mentioned are unconstitutional, then all departments are unconstitutional. By that logic the United States has not followed the Constitution before even the Bill of Rights were added to it.
Congress does not exist to be unified.
The parties are not supposed to agree.
They have not filibustered more than any other Congress.
The "party of no" line is just an emotional talking point.
Then the House is breaking the law.
QUOTE cpwill
I was asked for those who had cut spending to reduce the debt.
However, I notice that your chart conveniently ends in 2008?
You overlooked a couple.
Then the House is breaking the law.
:lol: @ that chart stopping at 2008. I guess the screen resolution wouldn't fit the next few years....
You overlooked a couple.
How long before this excuse runs out?What it shows me is that Obama inherited a ****ed up economy that he is trying to fix.
The debt ceiling is a limit on the amount the government may borrow. It is not a limit on paying debts or servicing the debt. You are arguing that congress is legally obligated to INCUR debt because the 14th says that debts must be honored. Your argument is stupid and without merit.
What is needed is for the Dems to face reality. The AARP has acknowledged that Social Security cannot continue as it is currently structured. Medicare is a bigger problem. The welfare state is going to destroy us if we do not make changes.
Obama is wasting time arguing for tax hikes he could not get from congress when his own party was in control of it. How does he expect to get them from the GOP? He does not. The American people do not wish to raise taxes. Obama KNOWS that he is not going to get a tax hike. He is hoping to use this opportunity to score political points and win over some idiots that have no grasp of the issues. He is the one playing a political game of chicken.
Continuing to increase our debt is not a good idea when the rest of the world is becoming more concerned about our ability to meet our debts. Our creditors are not idiots and they are well aware that our welfare programs are unsustainable and VERY difficult to change politically.
What it shows me is that Obama inherited a ****ed up economy that he is trying to fix. Which is par for the course for any Dem President taking over after eight years of typical republican incompetence.
Kinda like a baseball team throwing in mop up pitchers to clean up a game that is pretty well lost. Doin the best you can, with what you got. In this case, what you got is, No-chin in the house” (“The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president”, a cryin drunk in the senate, pushin a poison a pill for granny and gramps proposed by Eddie Munster.
If the economy doesn’t tank they can kiss their jobs goodbye, if it tanks we can more than likely kiss our Democracy goodbye. My2C:2wave:
Failing to raise the debt ceiling does not in any way necessarily mean we cannot cover our debt service, as we bring in far more revenue than what we pay in interest.But it DOES require us to honor ALL debt that we have incurred. If Congress violates that provision, then the president has a good case to do it himself. Call it the Executive branch acting on a national emergency.
Again, 1012 billion 2008.... according to your map
Where are we today? oh yeah at 14464 billion today......
Ugly facts are ugly.
Your excuse making fails, miserably.
What was it on inaugural day?
What was it on inaugural day?
Debt and deficits are two different issues. Obama has had 4 trillion dollars in deficits in 2 1/2 years. His 2010 budget had a 1.4 trillion dollar deficit, the 2011 deficit is projected at 1.6 trillion, and his 2009 stimulus, 350 billion TARP spending, and 100 billion dollar Afghanistan supplemental puts his deficits at 4 trillion dollars. None of that can be blamed on Bush yet liberals try.
Meaningless, given the amount of entitlement spending, and the growth of same.what do you think of obama calling for a 5 year freeze on discretionary spending?
of course it can........any war supplementals belong to bush. additionally, non discretionary spending is just that, non discretionary. obama did not create it. also, bush created (at the time) record debt, which has to be serviced, and thus adds to the deficit. it's shameful for you to pretend OUR crisis belongs solely to obama.
what do you think of obama calling for a 5 year freeze on discretionary spending?
Facts never run out.
That's what I figured you'd say.Facts never run out.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?