• 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!

House GOP No. 2: Someone shot at my office

You mean you love the high unemployment, the government takeovers, the socialism being forced on us??

the foreclosures, the collapse of the housing market, the impact of said crash on employment, construction, sales, home improvement, realty, home furnishings, escrow, lumber, trades, the effect of such depression on consumer spending, life source of economic vitality...

the enervation of home values, its dire determination on retirements...

the fact that the HOME AFFORDABLE MODIFICATION PROGRAM was DEEMED (LOL!) by associated press, bloomberg and tarp's inspector general (LOL!) a DUD!

the fact that almost SIXTY PERCENT of the folks whose upside down mortgages we've all been forced to carry, while many of them lived the credit card consumerism of the rich and entitled, have RE-DEFAULTED on their original DEFAULT...

do you know how many of these people live in bigger and better homes THAN YOU DO?

they're almost all of em A LOT NEWER, that's for sure

LOL!

look around

and, on top of all, as always, merrily whistling his way to iowa in pursuit of his ridiculous white whale, president soupy pie-in-the-face is simply determined upon extending yet ANOTHER BAILOUT

pathetic

the entire adminstration is utterly clueless
 
Last edited:
health care is palpably only part of the reason REPUBLICANS lead in MICHIGAN by between FIFTEEN! and TWENTY TWO!!! points

the FORECLOSURE CRISIS certainly plays a profound part too

indisputably

cuz it's really, really bad

did you read the LINKS?
 
republicans leading IN MICHIGAN by between 15 and 22 points has nothing to do with health care...

LOL!

you got a LINK for THAT?

LOLOL!

I have explained this to you repeatedly. The fact you don't understand and assume that it has to be for the reason you think is a weakness in you. You have made no effort to link the two, and since the governor has zero control over legislation passed in Washington, it hardly seems likely that it would have a significant influence.

The real reasons for the republican lead, once again:

1) we alternate parties for our governor, and have since the 60's.

2) Economy is especially bad in Michigan, making people want to change

3) the republican candidates have pretty good name recognition here, the dems, not so much

4) it's freaking March, neither party has even picked a candidate yet...


Go ahead though and keep making you ignorant assumptions. It gives me something to laugh at.
 
I have explained this to you repeatedly. The fact you don't understand and assume that it has to be for the reason you think is a weakness in you. You have made no effort to link the two, and since the governor has zero control over legislation passed in Washington, it hardly seems likely that it would have a significant influence.

The real reasons for the republican lead, once again:

1) we alternate parties for our governor, and have since the 60's.

2) Economy is especially bad in Michigan, making people want to change

3) the republican candidates have pretty good name recognition here, the dems, not so much

4) it's freaking March, neither party has even picked a candidate yet...


Go ahead though and keep making you ignorant assumptions. It gives me something to laugh at.

you don't sound like a fella who's laughing

LOLOL!
 
Its really unfair for you to use facts in your arguments. You should be using your feelings :2wave:

The only fact he used was that polling has republican candidates for governor ahead of democratic candidates. He offered no comparison before and after health care passed, not any reasons being given by those polled for their selections. In other words, he guessed based on ignorance. Funny how you did not realize that...
 
ouch, those poor keys

the reason REPUBLICANS are leading in MICHIGAN by such HUGE margins is cuz wolverines CHANGE PARTIES EVERY 4 YEARS?

LOL!

do they always do so by 20 points?
 
1) we alternate parties for our governor, and have since the 60's.

2) Economy is especially bad in Michigan, making people want to change

3) the republican candidates have pretty good name recognition here, the dems, not so much

4) it's freaking March, neither party has even picked a candidate yet...

nothing about foreclosures?

LOL!
 
We need to have an armed SWAT team guarding every congressional office! Put a few snipers and CIA agents around the building too... :shock:
 
ouch, those poor keys

the reason REPUBLICANS are leading in MICHIGAN by such HUGE margins is cuz wolverines CHANGE PARTIES EVERY 4 YEARS?

LOL!

do they always do so by 20 points?
Did I say one term? We have alternated parties when we change governor since I was a kid. Last time we had 2 consecutive governors of the same parts was when Milikin followed Romney in the 60's. History, it's good to learn.
 
We need to have an armed SWAT team guarding every congressional office! Put a few snipers and CIA agents around the building too... :shock:
Nope, cut that budget and let them live with the political climate they created, on both sides.
 
The only fact he used was that polling has republican candidates for governor ahead of democratic candidates.

oh, no, pissy puss, it's a lot MORE than that

how could you FAIL TO SEE?

(all that anger, it clouds sound judgement)

(and it's so personal, it obscures perspective with pettiness)

no, pissy puss, it's the extremely high NUMBER OF STATES that exhibit this exciting phenomenon we're discussing

it's the HIGH PROPORTION of said commonwealths that are currently controlled by the corrupt party in power

it's THE NATURE, LOCATION AND PECULIARITIES of those particular bailiwicks, politically speaking

but, MOST UNMISTAKABLE (i woulda thought), it's THE SIZE of the leads

it has to do with a WHOLE LOT MORE than just amway, i'm afraid
 
You can of course show solid evidence of illegal bribery. Remember, dealing is not bribery.
You say tomato........



Again, evdidence that the law was broken in relation to coercion.
Rahm Emmanuel cornering politicians, Chicago style politics, etc.



And you can of course show that there is any chance of a successful challenge based on these.
If they are found to be beyond acceptable ethics, then of course there is a chance.




Judgment call at best. If it is not allowed under the rules, you can of course prove it. If it is, you are just whining.
I'm not whining, I hate the bill, but hey, I can sell insurance, and the bill will increase premiums. Even though Americana ****ed ourselves royally by voting in this particular adm. and congress into power and they in turn ****ed the entire American political spectrum I can make more money. I'm just asking people to be honest about what happened here. Best yet, I take no blame in any of it, the people I voted for tried to do things the right way.




Threats are not legal, so I am sure you can point to where law enforcement is investigating these allegations.
Be honest Redress, the whole process is rife with stories of wide scale abuses.



The courts will determine whether this was constitutional. For the rest, you are making alot of unsupported allegations of illegal acts, none of which you are backing up. What it really looks like is some one who cannot accept that you did not get your way politically. I am sorry, Bush and the republican congress is gone, you had your chance. Now it's our turn. The people legally elected who they wanted to represent them in congress, and those people did what they said they would do. Don't like it, well boo hoo. Your crying is getting uninteresting.
Correct, if the thing is not repealed the court will be the judge eventually. As to unsupported allegations.....there is plenty of evidence that something fishy took place, but hey, the congress or a special prosecutor would have to look at the case, and it is at the discretion of a majority congress that just voted for the bill......so......I'm not expecting anything to come out in particular.
 
Moderator's Warning:
OK, I've doled out a couple of infractions. Let's stop the personal attacks and get back to the topic.
 
Last time we had 2 consecutive governors of the same parts was when Milikin followed Romney in the 60's

did george win by TWENTY points?

cuz TWENTY is a LOT of points

in MICHIGAN

indeed, it represents a THIRTY FOUR point swing MY WAY just since president pieface became president pieface

thanks!
 
Foreclosures are not covered by "bad economy"?

covered?

LOL!

well, it sure is bad

the economy, i mean

really, really bad

voters tend to hold responsible the party in power

that'd be the dems

thanks!

except you don't seem to be laughing anymore

LOL!
 
again, have you been following the catastrophic collapse of the housing market under president pie-in-the-face?

foreclosures have exceeded 300,000 a month for 11 straight months with no basement in sight

Foreclosures exceed 300,000 for 11th straight month | The Money Times

4.5 million foreclosure filings are expected in 2010

Housing market's recovery appears at risk - Boston.com

home sales have hit an ALL TIME low

Sales of New U.S. Homes Dropped in February to Lowest on Record - Bloomberg.com

according to ap, "THE OBAMA ADMINSTRATION'S PROGRAM TO PREVENT FORECLOSURES HAS BEEN A DUD"

and MORE THAN HALF OF BORROWERS WHO RECEIVED MORTGAGE MODIFICATIONS HAVE RE-DEFAULTED WITHIN 9 MONTHS

Half of U.S. Home Loan Modifications Default Again (Update1) - Bloomberg.com

ouch!

poor president pieface

people are gonna hold him responsible
 
Last edited:
What you fail to understand is some toothless rednecks are actually too stupid to read -- they see "Congressman" and just start shootin'...
It doesn't get more ignorant this this.
 
The only fact he used was that polling has republican candidates for governor ahead of democratic candidates. He offered no comparison before and after health care passed, not any reasons being given by those polled for their selections. In other words, he guessed based on ignorance. Funny how you did not realize that...

Exactly how in your mind do you compute no impact from a bill that changes 1/6th of the economy and is in the minority for support not influence an election in any state right now?

Explain that to us. Then explain how Massachusetts got a republican senator :2wave:

And while you are doing that...

Sixty-two percent (62%) are angry at the current policies of the federal government, with 42% who are very angry. While this is a sizable number, it’s slightly lower than the findings nationally.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...ions/michigan/election_2010_michigan_governor

Since health care has been the dominant topic this entire year, its in these numbers.
 
Last edited:
Well, yes and no. The point is that everyone is trying to say that the popularity of this bill was misrepresented like it actually matters in the long run, the fact is it's not. And no I didn't vote for Obama, I barely voted for McCain and not willingly, I didn't want a rubber stamp administration and well, my side lost.

Everyone? Everyone is trying to say that the popularity of the bill was misrepresented? In what respect?

The fact that you didn't vote for Obama is significant. Those who did, knew the reasons they were doing so, health care reform was chief among them. I spent several weekends knocking on doors for Obama and it was very prominent in the literature I was given in order to answer any questions I encountered.

Further, based on what I've seen posted here, many members who voted against Obama, must have done so from a broader ideological difference rather than the details of his platform. Perhaps they were focused on specific issues of greater interest to them?

It's surprising to me that conservatives can say that health care didn't seem important during the election. It was always going to be at the forefront of issues Obama intended to confront upon his entry into the White House.
 
Everyone? Everyone is trying to say that the popularity of the bill was misrepresented? In what respect?

The fact that you didn't vote for Obama is significant. Those who did, knew the reasons they were doing so, health care reform was chief among them. I spent several weekends knocking on doors for Obama and it was very prominent in the literature I was given in order to answer any questions I encountered.

Further, based on what I've seen posted here, many members who voted against Obama, must have done so from a broader ideological difference rather than the details of his platform. Perhaps they were focused on specific issues of greater interest to them?

It's surprising to me that conservatives can say that health care didn't seem important during the election. It was always going to be at the forefront of issues Obama intended to confront upon his entry into the White House.

Health care reform WAS popular. This health care reform is NOT popular.
 
Health care reform WAS popular. This health care reform is NOT popular.

Did you vote for Obama?

This health care plan was not popular with Republicans, though it has it's roots in Romney's plan, The Heritage Foundation, Rep. Chuck Grassley's plan in 1993 (the individual mandate).

There is some unpopularity amongst Democrats because they wanted a single payer system.
 
Back
Top Bottom