• 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!

Republicans mount shock comeback, erase Democrats’ edge in eyes of Americans

NIMBY said:
I haven't checked by Iphone to politico as to whether Upton's upchuck is DOA..WHY?? And I just flipped the TV to my favorite Texican, Sam Houston and the Alamo..
Click to expand...

To quote Paul Brown, "I am serious about putting a stop to Obamacare, and this bill does nothing to address Obamacare in the long term." There you have it.

The other three republicans who voted against the bill said something like their concern was that the vote, which Republicans widely view as a messaging bill since Reid will probably table it could end up looking like an effort to fix the Affordable Care Act - not end it.
 
Misterveritis said:
LOL. Yeah, uh-huh. Democrats are no longer Socialists. Obamacare is unconstitutional. It is theft. If it and this regime stands then the nation falls.
Click to expand...
False. Congress passed it legally, the president signed it into law and SCOTUS ruled it constitutional.

Obama is a Marxist. He uses the tools available to him, in this case unconstitutional acts and crony capitalism. That does not lessen his reasons for hating Americans, liberty, and free markets.
Click to expand...
Obviously you're not going to listen to facts. You are stuck in your fantasyland. Bye.
 
Misterveritis said:
We have been diminished as individuals by this unconstitutional tyrannical act. People with their hands out are always grateful to politicians who will force their neighbors to pay for the things the takers want.

What we all should do, every one of us is cancel our insurance policies. We should arrange with doctors where we live to see us for a reasonable cash payment. No more insurance. No more government. No more crony capitalism.
Click to expand...

Why do you want to deny sick people insurance? It's not their fault they have pre-existing conditions. And, I have no qualms with helping pay for poor people who can't afford insurance. It's cheaper than paying Emergency Room care everytime they get sick. Why do want to pay more instead of less?
 
Perotista said:
To quote Paul Brown, "I am serious about putting a stop to Obamacare, and this bill does nothing to address Obamacare in the long term." There you have it.
Click to expand...
What a salty dog..He just wants to draw differences between him and the other two Congressman..You can move this one to "lean" Nunn..As well, you can move New Hampshire to toss-up with Brown challenging Shaheen..I still need to see a candidate emerge in NC, but that one is a toss-up also..
The other three republicans who voted against the bill said something like their concern was that the vote, which Republicans widely view as a messaging bill since Reid will probably table it could end up looking like an effort to fix the Affordable Care Act - not end it.
Click to expand...
Anything the Dems put up will be filibustered and we'll be back to square one..The party side trying to kill and just say no normally loses in our Nation..
 
NIMBY said:
And how much has the GOP House spent to vote it down??
Too bad Dems didn't do this with Medicare part D when Congress still worked together..


What bills have been put out by the GOP House??
Only corporate welfare for House of Representatives who farm..
Good one--tens of millions to eleven GOP farmers to not plant, off-set with cuts in food stamps to hungry children .
Click to expand...

Your question I quote:
How much has the GOP spent to meme meme make the ACA fail.

My answer:
Not as much as Obama paid to build the most expensive website in the world, that didn't even work. And guess what he's still spending millions, to try and fix it. All at the tax payers expense.

You don't like the answer, I can't help that. Obama is a stupid fool. What did you expect from a community organizer? You believed his lies and he got your vote, not me, my hands are clean.
 
Born Free said:
Obama is a stupid fool. What did you expect from a community organizer?
You believed his lies and he got your vote, not me, my hands are clean.
Click to expand...
Is he your President??
 
Misterveritis said:
And all of it is unconstitutional. Every bit of it. To pretend otherwise is simply denial of reality.
Click to expand...

Even if it IS all constitutional...it doesn't matter...

AT this point, if we somehow suddenly enforced your version of constitutionality, an amendment would go through within a month or so MAKING it constitutional. Because people are used to it now.

And reelections.
 
NIMBY said:
What a salty dog..He just wants to draw differences between him and the other two Congressman..You can move this one to "lean" Nunn..As well, you can move New Hampshire to toss-up with Brown challenging Shaheen..I still need to see a candidate emerge in NC, but that one is a toss-up also..
Anything the Dems put up will be filibustered and we'll be back to square one..The party side trying to kill and just say no normally loses in our Nation..
Click to expand...

I don't know. If the Upton bill actually came to the floor of the senate I think there would be no filibuster at all. A filibuster would make a mockery of everything the Republicans have been saying. Although I would expect some tea parties type to try.
 
You're up rather late tonight Pero..I tried to stay low-key today but am hopelessly addicted to blogging..
Perotista said:
I don't know. If the Upton bill actually came to the floor of the senate I think there would be no filibuster at all.
Click to expand...
I just don't know what happened today on the Senate floor..I can't imagine the Upton bill coming before a Democratic version like the Landrieu fix..
A filibuster would make a mockery of everything the Republicans have been saying. Although I would expect some tea parties type to try.
Click to expand...

Vitter is still placing a hold on anything happening in the Senate for now with an amendment that the GOP used to be against .
 
NIMBY said:
You're up rather late tonight Pero..I tried to stay low-key today but am hopelessly addicted to blogging..

I just don't know what happened today on the Senate floor..I can't imagine the Upton bill coming before a Democratic version like the Landrieu fix..


Vitter is still placing a hold on anything happening in the Senate for now with an amendment that the GOP used to be against .
Click to expand...

Using the Landreu fix would make sense, there is quite a lot of stuff in flux. Yeah, it is about bed time, actually past bedtime. Waiting on the wife. Right now I really don't know what to think.
 
This weekend will be full of nothing but bitch and spin..
Maybe we can hear more from the five-time draft-dodger Cheney
trying to elect his daughter over a decent GOP Senator by lying about the President being a liar..
And you guys from the past wonder why I'm not going to calm down with GOP lying/treason .

Perotista said:
Using the Landreu fix would make sense, there is quite a lot of stuff in flux. Yeah, it is about bed time, actually past bedtime. Waiting on the wife. Right now I really don't know what to think.
Click to expand...
 
Green Man said:
Yes, social security checks would be one example of robbing Peter to pay Paul. As would medicare, and medicaid. Those are a few examples of what I'm talking about.
Click to expand...

So your suggestion for Social Security changes would be what?
 
American said:
Life long dependence is not solving problems.
Click to expand...

I agree that for the vast majority of people we certainly DO NOT want to create life long dependence. For some who are physically or mentally incapable - there may be no alternative. For most, temporary help is a sad necessity for a society like ours.
 
Misterveritis said:
Good point. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" has worked much better for the last one hundred years.


Why stop now. Marxism remains popular with many.
Click to expand...

Go for it then. Go to voters with your message of "screw the poor" and see where that gets you.
 
ernst barkmann said:
if Madison states the constitution was created to be mixed, the court, is without words, because Madison laid the foundation of the constitution, ....and a man knows his own creation.
Click to expand...

Except that is NOT the point of issue. The actual point is your own particular far right extremist interpretation of the powers of Congress.
 
ernst barkmann said:
where you fail is state governments are not prohibited from engaging in these actions, you show a zeal for.

however the federal government has no authority to engage is such activity because it is not a delegated power.
Click to expand...

Sorry EB. Congress after Congress after Congress does not agree with you.

Sorry EB. President after President after President does not agree with you.

Sorry EB but Supreme Court after Supreme Court after Supreme Court does not agree with you.

Your position seems to have you pretty much isolated way out there on the edge of a very long branch.
 
Misterveritis said:
Hay, it did not do you any good to read it. You just mischaracterized it. You will never admit it though. I get that. The Left read the Constitution in order to subvert it.
Click to expand...

Perhaps a famed Constitutional scholar like yourself can inform me as to what I am getting incorrectly?
 
ernst barkmann said:
I think its a good idea you never reference the constitution, you better stick with the court for your orders.
Click to expand...

Of course you feel that way because using the Constitution simply drives yet another nail in the coffin for your far right extremist arguments.
 
Misterveritis said:
This clearly shows you subvert the Constitution. Constitutionally limited governments tax in order to fulfil their written Constitutions. Americans never intended nor did they write a Constitution to allow a government to take one one citizen to give to another. We fought one civil war to end slavery. And yet here come the Left with the New Slavery.
Click to expand...

The Constitution says otherwise.
 
Misterveritis said:
And all of it is unconstitutional. Every bit of it. To pretend otherwise is simply denial of reality.
Click to expand...

But yet, you can cite no Supreme Court decision which agrees with your rather extreme interpretation. Why do you think that is?
 
Misterveritis said:
There is no part of the Constitution that allows the federal government to take my wealth to give it to another. None.
Click to expand...

So in your copy of the Constitution there is no power to tax?

This is why the Article V fight is so important to win. We have to undo the damage done by the Supremes. A tyranny by a small number is no less offensive than a tyranny by one.
Click to expand...

What is this "Article V fight" that is so important for the right to win? Please describe the battles and where they are being fought.
 
Green Man said:
Yes, social security checks would be one example of robbing Peter to pay Paul. As would medicare, and medicaid. Those are a few examples of what I'm talking about.
Click to expand...

Lumping SS/Medicare in with Medicaid ignores a key difference. SS/Medicare are designed to be funded by a separate, dedicated payroll tax imposed at a flat rate, applicable to every dollar of gross pay earned and the benefits are paid upon reaching retirement age (or total disability) regardless of "need". Medicaid is entirely funded by general revenue and is given to folks based only upon on determination of financial "need".
 
Misterveritis said:
And not a single one of those issues is a federal government responsibility.
Click to expand...

But yet national Presidents of both parties advocate for this and sign laws doing just that.

But yet Congresses made up of both parties advocate for this and pass laws doing just that.

And yet Supreme Courts both liberal and conservative approve of such laws and do not strike them down.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Taxation does not mean that no constitutional federal power is then required to spend that money.
Click to expand...

But yet Congress after Congress and President after President and Supreme Court after Supreme Court advocates or gives their blessing for taxation and the spending of that money that does many things that the right - at least the modern right - objects so vociferously to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom