• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

You Ever Heard Of Someone Shooting Theirself In The Foot?

Seriously, whats the democrats excuse? The Republicans are obviously fractured internally and some people are using obamacare as a wedge issue to oppose democrats. Given the ignorance of the voters and bias of the media, that will look bad for them politically. So that covers the Republicans.

Now why are the democrats also doing nothing to stop the shutdown, pass a budget, spending bill, or even offer an alternative or compromise? WHats their excuse?
 
They will go to their graves fighting Obamacare. After all, they're STILL fighting Social Security and Medicare, aren't they?
 
Campbell said:
The modern (T)Republican party is the most perfect example of that I've ever heard of.......'course I'm just 79.

When these people will shut down the government over a law which they have tried to repeal 42 times, one which has been heard by the supreme court and found to be OK with the constitution and is ready to be completely enabled, one which the nation's first black president is responsible for being in existence and who was re-elected in the middle of the worst recession our country has ever experienced............what are they thinking?
Click to expand...

Ready to be completely enabled? Really.....you should probably review your facts on that one because that simply is not true.
 
JumpinJack said:
They will go to their graves fighting Obamacare. After all, they're STILL fighting Social Security and Medicare, aren't they?
Click to expand...

Why would anyone not fight against Social Security and Medicare? Do you enjoy being forced to pay for others? Sure, I get old people not fighting against them, but young people not fighting against them? That makes no sense.
 
jonny5 said:
Seriously, whats the democrats excuse? The Republicans are obviously fractured internally and some people are using obamacare as a wedge issue to oppose democrats. Given the ignorance of the voters and bias of the media, that will look bad for them politically. So that covers the Republicans.

Now why are the democrats also doing nothing to stop the shutdown, pass a budget, spending bill, or even offer an alternative or compromise? WHats their excuse?
Click to expand...

Sometimes just patiently waiting and letting the enemy get sucked into an ambush is the best strategy.

Have you practiced saying "Madame President" yet?
 
CRUE CAB said:
Obamacare is a joke and will cost the jobs of working people in this country.
Click to expand...

And we will shut down the government and default on the debt to ensure the job losses! See?, we told you so!
 
Campbell said:
I didn't ask about "You Guys" I asked about what's going on.

This time the (T) Republicans are asking ordinary Americans to believe a load of bull****.
Click to expand...

Those "ordinary Americans" aren't buying the Obamacare BS either. Here we have some republicans trying to honor their commitment to the people and getting grilled for it by the opposing party and their own party's weaker members. Actually they should have gone a different way. Instead of trying for an overturn or delay they should go to an end to ALL exemptions from the nightmare. That would quickly show this Obamacare for the con job it is.
 
Wiseone said:
So despite the facts, you're still convinced you're correct and there hasnt been 42 votes to repeal or otherwise gut Obamacare?

Well OK then
Click to expand...

Sorry but that was not my argument...they HAVE voted 42 times with regards to PPACA...AND 8 times these 'adjustments' were passed by the Senate AND signed by the President...

try again...
 
Campbell said:
Sometimes just patiently waiting and letting the enemy get sucked into an ambush is the best strategy.

Have you practiced saying "Madame President" yet?
Click to expand...

So you have no interest in having a debate then.
 
fmw said:
I like dysfunctional. The more dysfunctional they are the less of my money they can spend.
Click to expand...

You have a point.
 
clownboy said:
Those "ordinary Americans" aren't buying the Obamacare BS either. Here we have some republicans trying to honor their commitment to the people and getting grilled for it by the opposing party and their own party's weaker members. Actually they should have gone a different way. Instead of trying for an overturn or delay they should go to an end to ALL exemptions from the nightmare. That would quickly show this Obamacare for the con job it is.
Click to expand...

What they're not buying is a political party who shut down our government over spending they approved to begin with. They will ultimately pay for their reckless actions. Damn strange....none of us heard a peep from a Republican when they invaded a country which had not harmed America then ran up deficits by the trillion:

Total U S Debt


09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)

09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accomodate Tens of Trillions)

09/30/2007 $9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 $8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 $7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 $7,379,052,696,330.32

09/30/2003 $6,783,231,062,743.62(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)


09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)


09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86(Administration And Congress Arguing About How To Use Surplus)

09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43(First Surplus Generated...On Track To Pay Off Debt By 2012)

09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32

09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 Debt Quadrupled By Reagan/Bush41)

09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00
09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42
09/30/1985 $1,823,103,000,000.00
09/30/1984 $1,572,266,000,000.00
09/30/1983 $1,377,210,000,000.00

09/30/1982 $1,142,034,000,000.00(Total Debt Passes $1 Trillion)(Tax Rates Slashed To Depression Levels

09/30/1981 $997,855,000,000.00
 
Campbell said:
I don't quote Fox News and for the last five years their **** is what Republicans call facts. You know....like Dick Morris and Karl Rove saying Romney would win the election by a landslide.
Click to expand...

ok. enough about them
show us YOUR links to support YOUR posted contention
let's see who is lying and who bases their posts on facts
 
jonny5 said:
So you have no interest in having a debate then.
Click to expand...

Debate??

The Republicans have tried to repeal the president's health care program 42 times. They sent it to the supreme court and even the right wing court ruled it constitutional. With the beginning of the program scheduled to begin in 10 months the black president was re elected in the middle of the worst recession in decades. How many chances to stop something you just don't like and how many times should you be allowed to act like a playground bully?

The T Party will be the demise of the old GOP
 
justabubba said:
ok. enough about them
show us YOUR links to support YOUR posted contention
let's see who is lying and who bases their posts on facts
Click to expand...

If you're doubting the debt figures they are a matter of historical record at the bureau of the debt. If you're referring to the lies which ultimately caused the invasion of Iraq:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPJCPcYCupY&list=PLofd5uZxZtpiCnzRA6IqYF8SOW4lPhOKr

If you doubt that the Republicans had been looking for a way to make a case about Iraq look at the date on this letter and who signed it:

January 26, 1998



The Honorable William J. Clinton
President of the United States
Washington, DC


Dear Mr. President:

We are writing you because we are convinced that current American policy toward Iraq is not succeeding, and that we may soon face a threat in the Middle East more serious than any we have known since the end of the Cold War. In your upcoming State of the Union Address, you have an opportunity to chart a clear and determined course for meeting this threat. We urge you to seize that opportunity, and to enunciate a new strategy that would secure the interests of the U.S. and our friends and allies around the world. That strategy should aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power. We stand ready to offer our full support in this difficult but necessary endeavor.

The policy of “containment” of Saddam Hussein has been steadily eroding over the past several months. As recent events have demonstrated, we can no longer depend on our partners in the Gulf War coalition to continue to uphold the sanctions or to punish Saddam when he blocks or evades UN inspections. Our ability to ensure that Saddam Hussein is not producing weapons of mass destruction, therefore, has substantially diminished. Even if full inspections were eventually to resume, which now seems highly unlikely, experience has shown that it is difficult if not impossible to monitor Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons production. The lengthy period during which the inspectors will have been unable to enter many Iraqi facilities has made it even less likely that they will be able to uncover all of Saddam’s secrets. As a result, in the not-too-distant future we will be unable to determine with any reasonable level of confidence whether Iraq does or does not possess such weapons.


Such uncertainty will, by itself, have a seriously destabilizing effect on the entire Middle East. It hardly needs to be added that if Saddam does acquire the capability to deliver weapons of mass destruction, as he is almost certain to do if we continue along the present course, the safety of American troops in the region, of our friends and allies like Israel and the moderate Arab states, and a significant portion of the world’s supply of oil will all be put at hazard. As you have rightly declared, Mr. President, the security of the world in the first part of the 21st century will be determined largely by how we handle this threat.


Given the magnitude of the threat, the current policy, which depends for its success upon the steadfastness of our coalition partners and upon the cooperation of Saddam Hussein, is dangerously inadequate. The only acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility that Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction. In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake military action as diplomacy is clearly failing. In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. That now needs to become the aim of American foreign policy.

We urge you to articulate this aim, and to turn your Administration's attention to implementing a strategy for removing Saddam's regime from power. This will require a full complement of diplomatic, political and military efforts. Although we are fully aware of the dangers and difficulties in implementing this policy, we believe the dangers of failing to do so are far greater. We believe the U.S. has the authority under existing UN resolutions to take the necessary steps, including military steps, to protect our vital interests in the Gulf. In any case, American policy cannot continue to be crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council.

We urge you to act decisively. If you act now to end the threat of weapons of mass destruction against the U.S. or its allies, you will be acting in the most fundamental national security interests of the country. If we accept a course of weakness and drift, we put our interests and our future at risk.

Sincerely,

Elliott Abrams Richard L. Armitage William J. Bennett

Jeffrey Bergner John Bolton Paula Dobriansky

Francis Fukuyama Robert Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad

William Kristol Richard Perle Peter W. Rodman

Donald Rumsfeld William Schneider, Jr. Vin Weber

Paul Wolfowitz R. James Woolsey Robert B. Zoellick
 
Last edited:
Campbell said:
Debate??

The Republicans have tried to repeal the president's health care program 42 times.
Click to expand...

That's because they're doing what THEIR CONSTITUENTS WANT THEM TO DO. Sorry Soupy, but the majority of citizens do not want this. Because this is more about a power grab, than health care, they held a gun to 52% of us and gave us the middle finger. YOU might embrace slavery, but we do not.

Go be your Master's slave somewhere else.
 
Velvet Elvis said:
That's because they're doing what THEIR CONSTITUENTS WANT THEM TO DO. Sorry Soupy, but the majority of citizens do not want this. Because this is more about a power grab, than health care, they held a gun to 52% of us and gave us the middle finger. YOU might embrace slavery, but we do not.

Go be your Master's slave somewhere else.
Click to expand...

You've been watching too much Fox News. Those bastards would climb a tree to yell out a lie rather than stand still and tell the truth. Get used to Obama's health care program because he had rather be spending the money at home rather than invading a country 10,000 miles away so companies like Halliburton, Boeing and General Dynamics can get it...not to mention thousands of young people killed and tens of thousands seriously wounded. When will you folks ever catch on? If the world wants a leader they are entitled to pick one themselves and who the **** do we think we are to stay there uninvited? We have troops in 170 countries and it's rapidly approaching a time when we can't afford it. If we had kept our asses at home there would have never been a 9/11 or wars in the middle east.

NO SOLDIER DIED WHEN BILL CLINTON LIED
 
Campbell said:
If you're doubting the debt figures they are a matter of historical record at the bureau of the debt. If you're referring to the lies which ultimately caused the invasion of Iraq:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPJCPcYCupY&list=PLofd5uZxZtpiCnzRA6IqYF8SOW4lPhOKr

If you doubt that the Republicans had been looking for a way to make a case about Iraq look at the date on this letter and who signed it:

January 26, 1998



The Honorable William J. Clinton
President of the United States
Washington, DC


Dear Mr. President:

We are writing you because we are convinced that current American policy toward Iraq is not succeeding, and that we may soon face a threat in the Middle East more serious than any we have known since the end of the Cold War. In your upcoming State of the Union Address, you have an opportunity to chart a clear and determined course for meeting this threat. We urge you to seize that opportunity, and to enunciate a new strategy that would secure the interests of the U.S. and our friends and allies around the world. That strategy should aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power. We stand ready to offer our full support in this difficult but necessary endeavor.

The policy of “containment” of Saddam Hussein has been steadily eroding over the past several months. As recent events have demonstrated, we can no longer depend on our partners in the Gulf War coalition to continue to uphold the sanctions or to punish Saddam when he blocks or evades UN inspections. Our ability to ensure that Saddam Hussein is not producing weapons of mass destruction, therefore, has substantially diminished. Even if full inspections were eventually to resume, which now seems highly unlikely, experience has shown that it is difficult if not impossible to monitor Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons production. The lengthy period during which the inspectors will have been unable to enter many Iraqi facilities has made it even less likely that they will be able to uncover all of Saddam’s secrets. As a result, in the not-too-distant future we will be unable to determine with any reasonable level of confidence whether Iraq does or does not possess such weapons.


Such uncertainty will, by itself, have a seriously destabilizing effect on the entire Middle East. It hardly needs to be added that if Saddam does acquire the capability to deliver weapons of mass destruction, as he is almost certain to do if we continue along the present course, the safety of American troops in the region, of our friends and allies like Israel and the moderate Arab states, and a significant portion of the world’s supply of oil will all be put at hazard. As you have rightly declared, Mr. President, the security of the world in the first part of the 21st century will be determined largely by how we handle this threat.


Given the magnitude of the threat, the current policy, which depends for its success upon the steadfastness of our coalition partners and upon the cooperation of Saddam Hussein, is dangerously inadequate. The only acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility that Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction. In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake military action as diplomacy is clearly failing. In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. That now needs to become the aim of American foreign policy.

We urge you to articulate this aim, and to turn your Administration's attention to implementing a strategy for removing Saddam's regime from power. This will require a full complement of diplomatic, political and military efforts. Although we are fully aware of the dangers and difficulties in implementing this policy, we believe the dangers of failing to do so are far greater. We believe the U.S. has the authority under existing UN resolutions to take the necessary steps, including military steps, to protect our vital interests in the Gulf. In any case, American policy cannot continue to be crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council.

We urge you to act decisively. If you act now to end the threat of weapons of mass destruction against the U.S. or its allies, you will be acting in the most fundamental national security interests of the country. If we accept a course of weakness and drift, we put our interests and our future at risk.

Sincerely,

Elliott Abrams Richard L. Armitage William J. Bennett

Jeffrey Bergner John Bolton Paula Dobriansky

Francis Fukuyama Robert Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad

William Kristol Richard Perle Peter W. Rodman

Donald Rumsfeld William Schneider, Jr. Vin Weber

Paul Wolfowitz R. James Woolsey Robert B. Zoellick
Click to expand...


no. post your evidence proving that
The Republicans have tried to repeal the president's health care program 42 times.
Click to expand...

show us this was true as another forum member insists you are lying with that assertion

Dickieboy said:
The bolded above is patently false (as usual). Eight of the 42 bills passed the House, Senate AND were SIGNED by the president (like the 1099 reporting). Many of these 42 were NOT attempts to repeal. You really shouldn't believe all you hear on MSNBC...
Click to expand...

so, let's compare links and see which forum member is lying about this: campbell or dickieboy
post your links and do not run away from the challenge
 
justabubba said:
so, let's compare links and see which forum member is lying about this: campbell or dickieboy
post your links and do not run away from the challenge
Click to expand...

Health Care - GOP.gov

Specifics and links to legislation are provided towards the bottom of the page...Campbell, your turn...?
 
sawdust said:
The latest CR from the House wants the government to treat people the same way they are already treating corporations. It also takes the generous subsidy that Federal workers get so they don't feel the financial pain the rest of us feel.

Reid and Obama refuse to speak to House Republicans. That if anything is a lack of leadership. This government and this administration is so dysfunctional it will take decades to repair the damage they are causing to America. Shutting down the government is an improvement.
Click to expand...
So the House sends over a Budget Bill that contains provisions not related to the Budget and it's Reid and Obama that show lack of leadership?
Read HJRes59.
Bill Text - 113th Congress (2013-2014) - THOMAS (Library of Congress)
 
uncleray said:
So the House sends over a Budget Bill that contains provisions not related to the Budget and it's Reid and Obama that show lack of leadership?
Read HJRes59.
Bill Text - 113th Congress (2013-2014) - THOMAS (Library of Congress)
Click to expand...

With respect to your 'not related to the Budget' assertion this is part of the amendments Reid sent back to the House:

Sec. 135. Notwithstanding any other provision of this joint resolution, there is appropriated for payment to Bonnie Englebardt Lautenberg, widow of Frank R. Lautenberg, late a Senator from New Jersey, $174,000.
Click to expand...
Your link: Bill Text - 113th Congress (2013-2014) - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

What does this have to do with the budget? By YOUR metric doesn't this question Reid's (and Obama's by your extension) leadership? Further what is the Constitutional basis for this 'payment'?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom