• 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 Shut Out of Stimulus Conference Negotiations

Democrats "reaching out" to Republicans:

Nancy Pelosi: We won.
 
Recall it who it was that made the point about Obama being The One to change the tone in Washington, to usher in a new era of bipartisnaship, to sit down and listen to everone that had ideas -- because solving problems was more important than partisan politics.

"Change" didnt last 2 weeks.
That's because repubs flipped him the bird in the first 2 weeks. I know, you want democrats to roll over and do as they are told as if repubs were still in power. too bad, suck it up like democrats had to.
 
That's because repubs flipped him the bird in the first 2 weeks.
Specifically, how did they do this?

And even so -- didnt Obama say that he was The One to change the tone in Washington? To usher in a new era of bipartisnaship? To sit down and listen to everone that had ideas -- because solving problems was more important than partisan politics?

Did he lie?
 
I think it's the opposite here only because this will not work. Plain and simple. What will work is a major cut in income taxes, like 35%-45% for two years. Result? Money and not just a George Bush check for ice cream. This puts $$$ back in to everything in this economy on every level.
LOL... tax cuts, for who the rich? ... more of the same failed ideology. I say we have an 8 year moratorium on taxes for anyone making less than 200k and at the same time a 34-45% increase on the ****ers who got all the benefits of the last 8 years. How about that for a ****ing tax cut policy? :2wave:
 
Specifically, how did they do this?

And even so -- didnt Obama say that he was The One to change the tone in Washington? To usher in a new era of bipartisnaship? To sit down and listen to everone that had ideas -- because solving problems was more important than partisan politics?

Did he lie?
So you're saying he didn't sit down with repubs and try to be bipartisan? I mean he's got 3 repubs in his cabinet... you guys just have selective memories.
 
LOL... tax cuts, for who the rich? ... more of the same failed ideology. I say we have an 8 year moratorium on taxes for anyone making less than 200k and at the same time a 34-45% increase on the ****ers who got all the benefits of the last 8 years. How about that for a ****ing tax cut policy?
It sounds like you're very interested in ensuring that the recession gets worse, all so you can stick it to the 'haves' in an effort to win political favor from the 'have nots'.
 
So you're saying he didn't sit down with repubs and try to be bipartisan? I mean he's got 3 repubs in his cabinet... you guys just have selective memories.
Specifically, how did the GOP flip him the bird in the first 2 weeks?

And... did Obama lie, or not?
 
So you're saying he didn't sit down with repubs and try to be bipartisan? I mean he's got 3 repubs in his cabinet... you guys just have selective memories.

What's your definition of "bipartisan"?
 
Yeah, that's exactly what the republicans are saying, "Do it our way or else". They seem to forget that they lost big in the last 2 elections. Maybe... just maybe the majority of the country doesn't want it the republican way anymore.

If liberals/dems were interested in partisanship, they would be cutting out some of the pork.

Meet in the middle sort of thing.

They're not the least bit interested in partisanship, that is pretty clear. Even Pelosi has abandoned the idea (if she ever was on board with it in the first place).
 
Republicans are playing this pretty riskily.
If this bill is even remotely a success, then they are going to have a damn hard time finding their seats in a few years.

It is a risk very much worth taking for OBVIOUS reasons.
 
I agree that partisanship is in play, but that works both ways. While Bush was in power, it was a "my way or the highway" approach, and Democrats were constantly shut out of negotiations. Now that Democrats are in power, they don't see why they can't do the same thing.

Having said that, it doesn't make it right. In fact, it is wrong, whether done by Republicans or Democrats, and that is one of the problems with our political system.

There are no FACTS to support your bolded assertions; as a matter of fact, it is his BI-PARTISAN legislation people like you constantly RAIL against; The No Child Left Behind Act, the Medicare Drug Reform Act and the Joint Resolution on Iraq....all were part of the bi-partisan legislation of Bush's administration.

I know you prefer hyperbole to reality, but Bush was the bi-partisan king. Look what it got him, nothing but a bunch of back stabbing from the people who authored the legislation.

You don't believe me? Look it up dude instead of waxing ignorant about things you apparently know little about.

One other little tidbit; Bush was a hero in Africa for his efforts on Aids. But alas, in this country, those efforts remain hidden from public view from a media so bent on getting a Democrat elected they neglected to properly inform the American public.
 
Waaaaahhh...

When repubs are in control it's:
"shut up and sit down, we are in charge and you'll do as we decide"

When repubs are NOT in charge it's:
"they won't let us have our way those, nasty democrats"

When Obama became President he stuck his hand through the fence and said "let's work together ok? It's for the good of the country" and then repubs bit that hand. So, now that they've taken a chunk out of the Presidents hand they want to whine that they aren't included in the process and won't do ANYTHING unless they get their way?

I say **** the repubs since THEY have shown that there will be partisan games.

Now, is it reasonable to assume that because the democrats have been told to sit down and shut up for 10 of the last 12 years, including being held at gun point for the last 2 due to obstructionism due to slim majority, does it seem reasonable that democrats might be a little less inclined to put up with republican bull****?

The facts are not strong with this one. :roll:
 
There are no FACTS to support your bolded assertions; as a matter of fact, it is his BI-PARTISAN legislation people like you constantly RAIL against; The No Child Left Behind Act, the Medicare Drug Reform Act and the Joint Resolution on Iraq....all were part of the bi-partisan legislation of Bush's administration.
Dont forget the Patriot Act. Overwhelming bi-partisan support.
 
Last edited:
The Democrats consistently tried to reach out on the stimulus plan and the result was a whopping 2 senators voted for it and NO representatives did- after multiple revisions designed to make it more attractive across the aisle.

The Democrats tried, the Republicans weren't interested.

That's what you get when you wont play.

They reached and said we aren't going to try it your way anymore; at least that is what Obama called, the failed policies of the last eight years is how he framed it.

What I find curious about this debate is that Democrats don't need Republicans, so why all the angst about not getting any support for their poorly thought out legislation that will strap generations of Americans in debt?
 
That's because repubs flipped him the bird in the first 2 weeks. I know, you want democrats to roll over and do as they are told as if repubs were still in power. too bad, suck it up like democrats had to.

The facts and truth are not strong with this one. :roll:
 
They reached and said we aren't going to try it your way anymore; at least that is what Obama called, the failed policies of the last eight years is how he framed it.

What I find curious about this debate is that Democrats don't need Republicans, so why all the angst about not getting any support for their poorly thought out legislation that will strap generations of Americans in debt?

Spreading the risk.
 
If this bill is even remotely a success

You can't spend your way out of debt.

It appears to me that Republicans really want the stimulus package to fail.

It's not a stimulus package, it's a payoff plan, The dems are rewarding the people & companies that voted for them.

There's a few token "rebate" checks being thrown towards the poor and stupid to make it appear like the government is taking care of the little guy.

The rest of the pork is disguised. If there were true transparency in this administration of "change & hope", then each earmark would be itemized, with the sponsers name attached.

New administration, same old bull****.
 
New administration, same old bull****.

This time it is worse however; they are spending trillions they just don’t have which means they will also be printing the money to pay the obligations which means inflation combined with high unemployment.

But it doesn't end there; on top of all this nonsense is a constant fear mongering in order to rationalize/justify the porkulus. This is hardly encouraging, uplifting or likely to inspire confidence in the marketplace.

If this is the change OTHERS wanted, it certainly is going the WRONG direction.
 
Back
Top Bottom