Page 17 of 19 FirstFirst ... 71516171819 LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 183

Thread: Some Republicans embrace 'Party of No'

  1. #161
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Last Seen
    04-13-10 @ 04:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    240

    Re: Some Republicans embrace 'Party of No'

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    I only said, "welfare entitlement program". You are interjecting, "massive entitlement spending funded via an income tax and sustained debt". It is irrelevant to the statement I made and verging on intellectual dishonesty.
    It's an extension of our discussion concerning the healthcare bill. You were trying to justify it and cited Thomas Paine as a rationale for your position on Obamacare.

    If that's not what you were doing, then why did you even bother stating "Paine supported the first welfare entitlement program"? Why did you bring attention to it if not to justify your position on Federal welfare expenditures?

  2. #162
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,125

    Re: Some Republicans embrace 'Party of No'

    Quote Originally Posted by Gander View Post
    It's an extension of our discussion concerning the healthcare bill. You were trying to justify it and cited Thomas Paine as a rationale for your position on Obamacare.
    You have no clue what you are talking about. Go back and read. The Paine comment was in response to apdst when he made this comment...

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst
    Why wasn't a welfare program for the poor started? I'm not talking just about government run healthcare.
    In other words, the comment was related to why the Founders didn't start a welfare program for the poor and had nothing to do with health care.

    If that's not what you were doing, then why did you even bother stating "Paine supported the first welfare entitlement program"? Why did you bring attention to it if not to justify your position on Federal welfare expenditures?
    See above.

  3. #163
    User
    Chappy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    04-07-15 @ 01:50 AM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    2,443
    Blog Entries
    26

    Re: Some Republicans embrace 'Party of No'

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    … When the Dems opposed the GOP 1994-2006 were they also opposing progress?
    Look at the filibuster record. Were Democrats filibustering everything? No, indeed, filibusters declined during the period.

    Republicans have used filibusters like no party has in American history. And, consider the circumstances. America is suffering from a financial meltdown. Double digit unemployement. And what do Republicans do, they object to continuing unemployment benefits. It is scandalous!
    “Real environmentalists live in cities, and they visit what's left of the wilderness as gently and respectfully as possible.” — Donna Moulton, letter to the editor, Tucson Weekly, published on August 23, 2001

  4. #164
    Sage
    Dav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    04-16-16 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,539

    Re: Some Republicans embrace 'Party of No'

    Quote Originally Posted by Chappy View Post
    Look at the filibuster record. Were Democrats filibustering everything? No, indeed, filibusters declined during the period.
    You're under the assumption that the two parties, when put in the same position, will act differently, but that's not true.

    The GOP has been in a position that the Democrats were never in, namely, having exactly 40, or later 41, Senators. Such a dynamic will naturally partisanize the votes in the Senate.

    Republicans have used filibusters like no party has in American history. And, consider the circumstances. America is suffering from a financial meltdown. Double digit unemployement. And what do Republicans do, they object to continuing unemployment benefits. It is scandalous!
    Unfortunately, the GOP did not object to continuing unpaid for unemployment benefits. One brave senator did, and even his own party didn't have the balls to support him. I hope you realize that unemployment benefits disincentivize job creation; that's just basic economics.

  5. #165
    Student
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Last Seen
    04-13-10 @ 12:27 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    159

    Re: Some Republicans embrace 'Party of No'

    Kinda ironic, ain't it, when a poster breathlessly notes that we're in the middle of a financial meltdown and is whining that the Republicans were opposed to an extension of unemployment benefits?? Maybe he didn't realize that the Republicans were attemtping to ensure that we would actually pay for the extension rather than borrowing to pay for it??

    LMAO!!

  6. #166
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Some Republicans embrace 'Party of No'

    Quote Originally Posted by Chappy View Post
    Look at the filibuster record. Were Democrats filibustering everything? No, indeed, filibusters declined during the period.
    You didn't answer the question, which was not based on the use of the fillibuster, but on your use of the term 'progress' in an attempt to claim the morah high ground.

    So, I ask again:
    When the Dems opposed the GOP 1994-2006 were they also opposing progress?
    Republicans have used filibusters like no party has in American history.
    OK...how does that invalidate what I said?

    The Obama isnt offering anything the GOP, being the GOP, can support - what do you expect them to do other than vote no?

  7. #167
    User
    Chappy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    04-07-15 @ 01:50 AM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    2,443
    Blog Entries
    26

    Re: Some Republicans embrace 'Party of No'

    The unprecedented reliance on the filibuster is not enough to convince you of Republican obstructionism? Here, I'll give you another for instance: demanding cloture votes on uncontroversial nominees to the bench.

    Excerpted from “American Idle: Democratic Senators Call Out GOP Obstruction” Posted by Alliance for Justice at 5:48 PM, Tuesday, March 16, 2010
    Democratic Senators took to the floor of the Senate today to protest the unprecedented level of obstruction towards nominees by their Republican colleagues. …


    Over half of Bush’s nominees were confirmed by either unanimous consent or voice vote. In this Congress, Republicans have required cloture votes on uncontroversial nominees such as as Barbara Keenan for the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals who was ultimately confirmed by a vote of 99-0.

    That’s right, 99-0. The same people who requested the vote did not even voice opposition.

    They are stalling not on the basis of the nominees’ records or qualifications, but simply to obstruct Obama’s nominees. In addition to Keen, there is the example of Judge Greenaway, despite the fact that he was reported out of committee unopposed and was confirmed without opposition, he had to wait 235 days—almost eight months—for a final vote where he was confirmed 84-0. Jane Stranch and Thomas Vanaskie are rapidly approaching that same timeline, both have been waiting 218 days.

    There are currently 102 federal court vacancies, and according to the Senate Judiciary Committee, 31 of those vacancies are classified as “judicial emergencies” because of the size of the caseload in the court or the amount of time a seat has sat empty. …
    And, it's not just the bench, but also executive branch appointees, too. When announcing fifteen recess appointments last month and noting that was the same number of recess appointments issued by Bush at the same point in his first term, the White House statement also noted that “President Bush had only 5 nominees pending on the floor” compared to Obama's 77 pending nominees.
    “Real environmentalists live in cities, and they visit what's left of the wilderness as gently and respectfully as possible.” — Donna Moulton, letter to the editor, Tucson Weekly, published on August 23, 2001

  8. #168
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Some Republicans embrace 'Party of No'

    Quote Originally Posted by Chappy View Post
    The unprecedented reliance on the filibuster is not enough to convince you of Republican obstructionism? Here, I'll give you another for instance: demanding cloture votes on uncontroversial nominees to the bench.
    OK...how does that invalidate what I said?

    You still haven't answered the question, which was not based on the use of the fillibuster, but on your use of the term 'progress' in an attempt to claim the moral high ground.

    So, I ask again:
    When the Dems opposed the GOP 1994-2006 were they also opposing progress?

    Also unanswered:
    The Obama isnt offering anything the GOP, being the GOP, can support - what do you expect them to do other than vote no?

  9. #169
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,144

    Re: Some Republicans embrace 'Party of No'

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    The Obama isnt offering anything the GOP, being the GOP, can support - what do you expect them to do other than vote no?
    That is a total C.O.S.

    The GOP's strategy is to oppose everything that Obama proposes....even stuff that they have supported previously.

    The GOP is hoping that this strategy will pay off and that they can argue that they are an "alternative" to Obama.

    Problem is...the GOP is also the "Party of NO - ideas".
    If they expect their strategy to pay off, they have to offer more than the anti-Obama platform that they are currently running on.
    Especially...if the economy continues to improve. If that happens, then the, we are not Obama strategy will backfire on them big time.
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  10. #170
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Some Republicans embrace 'Party of No'

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    That is a total C.O.S.
    Ok, so... what has The Obama offered to the GOP that the GOP, being the GOP, can support?

Page 17 of 19 FirstFirst ... 71516171819 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •