• 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!

Why Did Senate Republicans Oppose Troop Funding?

How odd of you to ignore my post where I pointed out that the public option is a moot point. It's done, gone, that ship has sailed. What's being voted on now is the final bill, which most Americans are against. So you are entirely wrong, no matter what distortion tactics you use to cover that up.

Actually it's odd that you ignored all of my posts in this thread, just so you could continue your partisan masturbation. Well, it's not so much odd or unexpected as it is shameful and hypocritical.

Dav, the polling on healthcare has been all over the place, and you know this. The change of a single word in the wording of the question results in wide swings in results, consistently. If I remember right, "public option" gets support, "government run health care" not so much. Right now, I have no idea what most people really want, and with all the disinformation spread by those of both sides, I don't trust that what people want is based on a true understanding of the issues.

Note that I say this as some one who has stated all along that I think a public option at this time is a bad idea, and as a liberal. I am not trying to make a point about health care, only about what I see as the invalidity of the polling on the topic.
 
I'm sure there's a good reason. Besides, this "Republican's Oppose Troop Funding" propaganda, regardless of their reasons, sounds like a play right of the GOP handbook. When a dem has an objection such as this, for whatever their reasons, that's the GOP typical battle cry. "The dems don't support our troops." Wah, wah, wah....

I hate it when the right does that. Kinda hate to see the left stooping that low too. Whatever. Smart people usually see right through it. :roll:
 
I see our right-leaning friends are avoiding this debate like the plague.

:rofl :2wave: :rofl

Republicans have sealed their fate as The Party of NO. Their outright hypocrisy is sickening.



First, a purity test that even Ronnie Reagan couldn't pass. Now, a perfect example of exactly how hypocritical and self-important our Republican leaders are.

Upcoming congressional elections are going to be really interesting for these Republican Senators who voted against military funding...

Hey Glinda I guess you misssed the part about two riders that the Democrats try to sneak onto the bill :2wave:
 
How odd of you to ignore my post where I pointed out that the public option is a moot point.[\quote]

Awww. :) Are you feeling left out, Davie?

Actually it's odd that you ignored all of my posts in this thread

Is there some rule here that I must respond to every pathetic attempt to pretend the right hasn't done something outrageously hypocritical (yet again)? Poor thing. Not getting enough attention at home, I wager.

Fine. I'll play.

Both parties played politics here.

Senate Republicans have stated publicly that they voted against funding the military defense appropriations in order to stall work on the healthcare reform bill.

The public option is a moot point now; the fact is that as many as 60% of Americans oppose the current Senate bill.

No, it's not a moot point. The majority of American voters want a public option. They oppose the current Senate bill BECAUSE it has no public option or lowering of the eligibility age for Medicare. :doh

The "purity test" was never even close to being put into action and reflects nobody's views except those of the crazy who wrote it.

1. The GOP purity test hasn't even been voted on by the party. :doh The committee will debate the proposal at its winter meeting in January.

2. The chief sponsor of the proposal is Republican National Committeeman James Bopp. The proposed resolution was signed by ten Republican National Committee members (there are approximately 165 members in total) and supported by Republican National Committee Chair Michael Steele. That's 11 out of 165, Daviepoo. Nearly 7%!

The Democrats have 60% of both the House and the Senate right now, plus the Presidency (and hence, veto power). How the hell are Republicans supposed to get anything of their own accomplished under those circumstances? Voting "no" on all the crap the Democrats are putting forward is all they can do right now.

When Republicans owned the White House and both houses of Congress, it didn't stop the Democrats from trying to do the public's business, did it? I don't recall... Did those Dems ever try to stop military funding as a way to stall some other legislation they didn't particularly like?

Oh sorry, did I just interrupt your campaign-like slogan-spewing with thoughtful analysis? I apologize, you can go back to jerking off to pictures of Obama now.

Personal insults. Typical. :roll:
 
Hey Glinda I guess you misssed the part about two riders that the Democrats try to sneak onto the bill :2wave:

Why don't you tell us all about this attempt to "sneak" things into the bill, Scorp? Your posts are always so entertaining. :)
 
Dav, the polling on healthcare has been all over the place, and you know this. The change of a single word in the wording of the question results in wide swings in results, consistently. If I remember right, "public option" gets support, "government run health care" not so much. Right now, I have no idea what most people really want, and with all the disinformation spread by those of both sides, I don't trust that what people want is based on a true understanding of the issues.

Note that I say this as some one who has stated all along that I think a public option at this time is a bad idea, and as a liberal. I am not trying to make a point about health care, only about what I see as the invalidity of the polling on the topic.

You are right about polling on vague concepts relating to health care; you are not right about polling on the proposals put forward by Congress.

RealClearPolitics - Election Other - Obama and Democrats' Health Care Plan
 
When Republicans owned the White House and both houses of Congress, it didn't stop the Democrats from trying to do the public's business, did it? I don't recall... Did those Dems ever try to stop military funding as a way to stall some other legislation they didn't particularly like.


Quite a few time they did but hey your one for never understanding the truth. Oh and for the record i guess you missed the part about the Deocrates adding two Riders to the Bill as the reason why the Republicans voted against it.
 
Quite a few time they did but hey your one for never understanding the truth.

Scorp, your understanding of how things work in Washington has been repeatedly blown out of the water. You've been owned so many times on what "the truth" is in Washington that your comments on such things mean nothing at this point. But I do give you credit for doing the best with what you have.

Oh and for the record i guess you missed the part about the Deocrates adding two Riders to the Bill as the reason why the Republicans voted against it.

A. Never heard of Deocrates. Is that a Greek playwright/tragedian or something?

B. Republican leaders have specifically stated the reason they voted against funding the troops was to delay work on healthcare reform legislation.
 
Awww. :) Are you feeling left out, Davie?



Is there some rule here that I must respond to every pathetic attempt to pretend the right hasn't done something outrageously hypocritical (yet again)? Poor thing. Not getting enough attention at home, I wager.

It's just very hypocritical to jump at the chance to point out the "silence of the right", and then ignore me when I try to dispute your point.




Senate Republicans have stated publicly that they voted against funding the military defense appropriations in order to stall work on the healthcare reform bill.

...Did I ever deny that? What the hell does that have to do with the quote you are responding to here? I said that both parties play politics. The Republicans are one of those two parties, in case you forgot.

No, it's not a moot point. The majority of American voters want a public option. They oppose the current Senate bill BECAUSE it has no public option or lowering of the eligibility age for Medicare. :doh

This has nothing to do with what I was saying.

You claimed that the Republicans' efforts to obstruct the current bill is going against the public will. In fact, the public will is against the current bill. Whether or not the public would have supported a different bill has nothing to do with the fact that you were wrong.

1. The GOP purity test hasn't even been voted on by the party. :doh The committee will debate the proposal at its winter meeting in January.

2. The chief sponsor of the proposal is Republican National Committeeman James Bopp. The proposed resolution was signed by ten Republican National Committee members (there are approximately 165 members in total) and supported by Republican National Committee Chair Michael Steele. That's 11 out of 165, Daviepoo. Nearly 7%!

Sorry, I was wrong. It represents the view of 11 crazies.

Happy?

But wow, 7% is a big number :roll:.

When Republicans owned the White House and both houses of Congress, it didn't stop the Democrats from trying to do the public's business, did it? I don't recall... Did those Dems ever try to stop military funding as a way to stall some other legislation they didn't particularly like?

Did they ever do one specific thing that requires a set of very specific conditions? No. But they play politics just like Republicans do, because they are politicians.

Personal insults. Typical. :roll:

If you actually knew me you would know that they are not "typical" at all, and that I only use them on people who really deserve them.
 
Dav, there are two health care plans. The poll talks about one. Which is it, the senate or house version? They are significantly different.

Look again. The numbers go way back, and there are plenty for when the only proposed bill was the House one. From November on or so it can be reasonably assumed that the answers are based on the Senate bill.

Pollster.com: Health Care Plan: Favor / Oppose

From here it can be seen that as soon as actual bills became proposed, the public started leaning against them. Note that voters are more likely to be against the plans than all adults. The wording of each poll is at the bottom of the page if you're interested.

This also does not address my point about the misinformation.

Because it's a moot point. If people are too dumb to form their own opinions, Democracy isn't a good idea anyways.
 
Look again. The numbers go way back, and there are plenty for when the only proposed bill was the House one. From November on or so it can be reasonably assumed that the answers are based on the Senate bill.

Pollster.com: Health Care Plan: Favor / Oppose

From here it can be seen that as soon as actual bills became proposed, the public started leaning against them. Note that voters are more likely to be against the plans than all adults. The wording of each poll is at the bottom of the page if you're interested.

Before there was a senate bill, there where multiple bills in conference in the house. You know this.

Because it's a moot point. If people are too dumb to form their own opinions, Democracy isn't a good idea anyways.

Now what I said. I said disinformation, not stupidity. That is a large difference. Not every one has the time, ability and inclination that we have to spend the time researching this stuff.
 
Before there was a senate bill, there where multiple bills in conference in the house. You know this.

And pretty much every bill has been faced with public opposition.

None of this changes what I originally said though, which is that the public is completely against the current Senate bill, and that Glinda was wrong to say otherwise.

Now what I said. I said disinformation, not stupidity. That is a large difference. Not every one has the time, ability and inclination that we have to spend the time researching this stuff.

Not sure what this changes. If people are too susceptible to disinformation to have an informed opinion, democracy still doesn't work.
 
Senators OK defense budget bill, much left to 2010 - Yahoo! News


The defense bill, which contains $128 billion for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and a 3.4 percent pay raise for the military, enjoyed wide support. Just nine Republicans opposed pork barrel projects and some of the add-ons voted against the bill, as did anti-war Democrat Russ Feingold of Wisconsin.

The president has yet to request funds for his recently announced troop increase in Afghanistan, and there is no money in the bill for that.


So where is the rest of the money going?

The defense measure would trim $900 million from the Pentagon's $7.5 billion budget to train Afghan security forces. It would use the money to buy about 1,400 additional mine-resistance vehicles suited for rugged conditions in Afghanistan. Lawmakers say the training program can't absorb that much money in the coming year, so they used it for other purposes.

The measure also caps an emotional debate over closing the Guantanamo Bay detention facility in Cuba. While it omits Obama's $100 million request to close the facility, it permits Guantanamo detainees to be transferred to the U.S. to stand trial.

Sooooo... Less autonomy for the hope of an independant Afghanistan and more moneys for imperialism. And Obama will close Guantanamo only if he gets 100 million bucks to play with?
 
And pretty much every bill has been faced with public opposition.

None of this changes what I originally said though, which is that the public is completely against the current Senate bill, and that Glinda was wrong to say otherwise.

Your poll does not show this. It shows opposition to something that does not actually exist, which is a cohesive, single plan.

Not sure what this changes. If people are too susceptible to disinformation to have an informed opinion, democracy still doesn't work.

Every one is susceptible to disinformation.
 
The Democrats have 60% of both the House and the Senate right now, plus the Presidency (and hence, veto power). How the hell are Republicans supposed to get anything of their own accomplished under those circumstances?

If the Republicans had so many good ideas for healthcare reform, then why didn't they push them forward when they had control of the House, Senate, and the Presidency during the Bush years? They could have passed laws for insurance co-ops and allowed insurance companies to operate nationally and everything else they're proposing as alternatives to the Democrats' public option. But they didn't. You want to know why? Because they were too busy waging wars and passing spending bills that funneled taxpayer dollars into corporations they owned through no-bid contracts to think about that.

So until Republican politicians stop thinking of themselves and start thinking of their constituents they don't deserve control of the House, the Senate, or the Presidency. Once they've learned their lesson, then maybe I'll vote for one.
 
I said that both parties play politics.

Of course politicians play politics. :doh This particular thread happens to highlight just how hard the right "plays."

Furthermore, I'm also pointing out a situation where our rightwing "OMG! OUR TROOPS ARE DYING WHILE OBAMA DITHERS!!" shouters have nothing to say about their own party's dithering.

Hello!? Where are all you shouters now?

Rev? Scarecrow? Arch Enemy? ptif219? Agent Ferris? donc? Zimmer? American? apdst? Crunch? DeeJayH? Gibberish? LaMidRighter? EpicDude86? (and so on)

You all know as well as I do, if this was the Dems voting against military funding to dick around with some other completely unrelated legislation, there'd be a ****storm of threads about it.
 
If you believe this to be so, why don't you provide some evidence for us? :)
I don't have to prove to you the MO of the right. They are pro-military all the time without much question. So I think when you have found an exception to the rule, the ball is in your court.
 
Of course politicians play politics. :doh This particular thread happens to highlight just how hard the right "plays."

Furthermore, I'm also pointing out a situation where our rightwing "OMG! OUR TROOPS ARE DYING WHILE OBAMA DITHERS!!" shouters have nothing to say about their own party's dithering.

Hello!? Where are all you shouters now?

Rev? Scarecrow? Arch Enemy? ptif219? Agent Ferris? donc? Zimmer? American? apdst? Crunch? DeeJayH? Gibberish? LaMidRighter? EpicDude86? (and so on)

You all know as well as I do, if this was the Dems voting against military funding to dick around with some other completely unrelated legislation, there'd be a ****storm of threads about it.
And the MO of the left is usually what? I voted for it before I voted against it? Right, unless the contracts are in my state? The left is not generally pro-military.
 
Your poll does not show this. It shows opposition to something that does not actually exist, which is a cohesive, single plan.

It's pretty clear what's in the bill right now.

Every one is susceptible to disinformation.

Hence the qualifier, "too".

If the Republicans had so many good ideas for healthcare reform, then why didn't they push them forward when they had control of the House, Senate, and the Presidency during the Bush years? They could have passed laws for insurance co-ops and allowed insurance companies to operate nationally and everything else they're proposing as alternatives to the Democrats' public option. But they didn't. You want to know why? Because they were too busy waging wars and passing spending bills that funneled taxpayer dollars into corporations they owned through no-bid contracts to think about that.

While I'm not accusing the Republicans of doing a good job in regard to health care, the Democrats voted for both of those wars, and I don't know what spending bills you refer to but I wouldn't be surprised if Democrats voted for those too.

So until Republican politicians stop thinking of themselves and start thinking of their constituents they don't deserve control of the House, the Senate, or the Presidency. Once they've learned their lesson, then maybe I'll vote for one.

Whereas the Democratic politicians are selfless, and always think of their constituents?

Of course politicians play politics. :doh This particular thread happens to highlight just how hard the right "plays."

The right hasn't been playing any harder in trying to stop the health care bill than the left has been playing to try to pass it.

Furthermore, I'm also pointing out a situation where our rightwing "OMG! OUR TROOPS ARE DYING WHILE OBAMA DITHERS!!" shouters have nothing to say about their own party's dithering.

What "dithering"? They made a decision pretty quickly, and while they tried to delay passage some insignificant amount of time, they didn't try to delay implementation. And they knew that they would never succeed anyways. This was a political ploy, not "dithering".

Hello!? Where are all you shouters now?

Rev? Scarecrow? Arch Enemy? ptif219? Agent Ferris? donc? Zimmer? American? apdst? Crunch? DeeJayH? Gibberish? LaMidRighter? EpicDude86? (and so on)

You all know as well as I do, if this was the Dems voting against military funding to dick around with some other completely unrelated legislation, there'd be a ****storm of threads about it.

And those threads would be full of people pointing out some people's inconsistency.
 
It's pretty clear what's in the bill right now.

Which? One has a public option, one does not. That alone is a significant difference.
 
Which? One has a public option, one does not. That alone is a significant difference.

The Senate one. That is what is being debated right now. People have mostly forgotten about the House bill.

Again, if you want to see the wording that each poll uses, look at the bottom of the Pollster page I linked to.
 
I'm sure there's a good reason. Besides, this "Republican's Oppose Troop Funding" propaganda, regardless of their reasons, sounds like a play right of the GOP handbook. When a dem has an objection such as this, for whatever their reasons, that's the GOP typical battle cry. "The dems don't support our troops." Wah, wah, wah....

I hate it when the right does that. Kinda hate to see the left stooping that low too. Whatever. Smart people usually see right through it. :roll:

WAH!!!

Dammit! I feel like Patrick Swayze when he has his hands around Demi Moore's hands as she molds her pottery. Such love I have to give but you guys treat me like a ghost. What? No rebuttal? No one calling me a libbo tree-huggin', homo lover? Nobody screaming at me that I'm some redneck, retro hippy wingnut that needs to shut up and read my newspaper?

Holy sh!!. MUST be Christmas. (At first I thought it was my deodorant or lack thereof.)

Oh yes. Please notice I DID say Merry Christmas. Gotta problem wit' dat?:argue

:2wave:
 
The Senate one. That is what is being debated right now. People have mostly forgotten about the House bill.

Again, if you want to see the wording that each poll uses, look at the bottom of the Pollster page I linked to.

Which pretty much proves my point. Sorry, but the polling on this issue is pretty much meaningless.
 
WAH!!!

Dammit! I feel like Patrick Swayze when he has his hands around Demi Moore's hands as she molds her pottery. Such love I have to give but you guys treat me like a ghost. What? No rebuttal? No one calling me a libbo tree-huggin', homo lover? Nobody screaming at me that I'm some redneck, retro hippy wingnut that needs to shut up and read my newspaper?

Holy sh!!. MUST be Christmas. (At first I thought it was my deodorant or lack thereof.)

Oh yes. Please notice I DID say Merry Christmas. Gotta problem wit' dat?:argue

:2wave:

I agree with both of you.
 
Back
Top Bottom