• 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!

Obama State of the Union

Conservative said:
Then you will have no problem showing me which legislation has been filibustered since January 2009?

I really am worried about people like you, so partisan that you do not understand even what you post. It is an op ed piece of what could happen between now and November, not what has happened. Obama has had nothing filibustered yet that doesn't stop you from posting this kind of cr.p.

You notice that no one is supporting you with your contention? Get off your knees and show some backbone as well as intellectual honesty for a change.
Click to expand...

Insults noted in bold above.

"research by Congressional scholar Barbara Sinclair of UCLA on the fact that we are confronting something very new:

In the 1960s, she finds, “extended-debate-related problems” — threatened or actual filibusters — affected only 8 percent of major legislation. By the 1980s, that had risen to 27 percent. But after Democrats retook control of Congress in 2006 and Republicans found themselves in the minority, it soared to 70 percent."
PostPartisan - Not your father's filibuster (or your mother's)

catawba-albums-charts-and-graphs-picture1481-gumming-up-works.jpg


The filibuster: let's talk about it - James Fallows
 
Last edited:
Catawba said:
Insults noted in bold.

"research by Congressional scholar Barbara Sinclair of UCLA on the fact that we are confronting something very new:

In the 1960s, she finds, “extended-debate-related problems” — threatened or actual filibusters — affected only 8 percent of major legislation. By the 1980s, that had risen to 27 percent. But after Democrats retook control of Congress in 2006 and Republicans found themselves in the minority, it soared to 70 percent."
PostPartisan - Not your father's filibuster (or your mother's)

catawba-albums-charts-and-graphs-picture1481-gumming-up-works.jpg


The filibuster: let's talk about it - James Fallows
Click to expand...

Please seek some help, you haven't a clue as to what you are talking about. You said that the Republicans have used the filibuster to prevent Obama legislation from getting passed. Read what you posted because this is embarrassing and your posts have nothing to do with what has happened in the last year.

Do you realize what you are even posting? Bush was in office in 2006-2008 so they had a President that could veto legislation and thus the Republicans didn't have to filibuster anything. How old are you? Obviously logic and common sense are lost in your own pure hatred of anything Republican
 
Last edited:
Catawba said:
When you can learn to post without insults, I'll continue our discussions. Until then..... :2wave:
Click to expand...

Not surprising, run, run, run. You haven't a clue as to what you posted or even are talking about. You made a foolish statement that absolutely false so now you run. I expected nothing less from an Obama supporter.
 
Catawba said:
Insults noted in bold above.

"research by Congressional scholar Barbara Sinclair of UCLA on the fact that we are confronting something very new:

In the 1960s, she finds, “extended-debate-related problems” — threatened or actual filibusters — affected only 8 percent of major legislation. By the 1980s, that had risen to 27 percent. But after Democrats retook control of Congress in 2006 and Republicans found themselves in the minority, it soared to 70 percent."
PostPartisan - Not your father's filibuster (or your mother's)

catawba-albums-charts-and-graphs-picture1481-gumming-up-works.jpg


The filibuster: let's talk about it - James Fallows
Click to expand...

This is your post that I was responding to

Every politician I've ever known has said things in their campaign they didn't carry out in office. Also Obama has had the handicap of being blocked by an unprecedented number of filibusters by the Republicans.
Click to expand...

and then you answer with this post?

110th Congress? Hmmmm, 2007-2008, what does any of this have to do with Obama legislation? Who was in the WH in 2007-2008?

Do you understand what a filibuster proof Senate is? Obama took office with 60 Democrat and "independent" Senators meaning it had a super majority. The Republicans couldn't stop any Obama legislation yet you claimed he had a handicap of being blocked by an unprecedented number of filibusters. Excuse me for the insults but that statement is totally over the top.
 
Conservative said:
Do you understand what a filibuster proof Senate is?
Click to expand...

One must question if you do.

Obama took office with 60 Democrat and "independent" Senators meaning it had a super majority.
Click to expand...

I wasn't aware that Democrats were a monolithic block that thought as a single entity and didn't have their own respective interests based on their respective states' voters interests. :rofl

By the way, since you think that Democrats are a monolithic entity, why did many Republicans betray Bush on ending the filibuster when they could have?

Perhaps, oh maybe, because groups aren't single minded monolithic entities you make them out to be?

The Republicans couldn't stop any Obama legislation
Click to expand...

O'rly? History appears to say you are wrong (as usual, by the way, still haven't figured out what linear regression is have you?).

yet you claimed he had a handicap of being blocked by an unprecedented number of filibusters. Excuse me for the insults but that statement is totally over the top.
Click to expand...

"We have crossed the mark of over 100 filibusters and acts of procedural obstruction in less than one year," Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat of Rhode Island, said on the floor on December 20, 2009. "Never since the founding of the Republic, not even in the bitter sentiments preceding Civil War, was such a thing ever seen in this body."
Click to expand...

Conservative, here's your ticket to the fail train.

You rely upon insults because you have no other way of arguing other then outright lying about what others said. Case in point, you falsely claiming I said Beck lost money for Fox directly after I pointed out where I said Fox's bottom line did not change.

You cannot argue without lies and insults.
 
obvious Child said:
One must question if you do.



I wasn't aware that Democrats were a monolithic block that thought as a single entity and didn't have their own respective interests based on their respective states' voters interests. :rofl

By the way, since you think that Democrats are a monolithic entity, why did many Republicans betray Bush on ending the filibuster when they could have?

Perhaps, oh maybe, because groups aren't single minded monolithic entities you make them out to be?



O'rly? History appears to say you are wrong (as usual, by the way, still haven't figured out what linear regression is have you?).





Conservative, here's your ticket to the fail train.

You rely upon insults because you have no other way of arguing other then outright lying about what others said. Case in point, you falsely claiming I said Beck lost money for Fox directly after I pointed out where I said Fox's bottom line did not change.

You cannot argue without lies and insults.
Click to expand...

Why would anyone waste their time with you? Facts, logic, and common sense obviously confuse you. Don't use big words like "lies" that you don't understand.

Here is the quote that I am waiting for a response to.

Also Obama has had the handicap of being blocked by an unprecedented number of filibusters by the Republicans.
Click to expand...

I am waiting for a list of the legislation of Obama that has been blocked by an "unprecedented" number of filibusters by the Republicans?
 
Last edited:
Conservative said:
Why would anyone waste their time with you? Facts, logic, and common sense obviously confuse you. Don't use big words like "lies" that you don't understand.
Click to expand...

Coming from someone who claimed I said Beck lost Fox money DIRECTLY AFTER I said Fox's bottom line didn't change....

Sounds like a lie to me.

I see you're ignoring this because it's easier for you to pretend things that prove you wrong (which are vast and many) don't exist:

""We have crossed the mark of over 100 filibusters and acts of procedural obstruction in less than one year," Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat of Rhode Island, said on the floor on December 20, 2009. "Never since the founding of the Republic, not even in the bitter sentiments preceding Civil War, was such a thing ever seen in this body.""

Sounds like you are wrong. Again. But that's not really news to this forum.

I am waiting for a list of the legislation of Obama that has been blocked by an "unprecedented" number of filibusters by the Republicans?
Click to expand...

Do you think that Filibusters haven't increased in 2009? Let's see you go on record making such a statement. I'd like to have your position as clear as possible before I beat you over the head about just how wrong you are. And I'd like to use it elsewhere when you eventually flee from this thread as you will.
 
obvious Child said:
Coming from someone who claimed I said Beck lost Fox money DIRECTLY AFTER I said Fox's bottom line didn't change....

Sounds like a lie to me.

I see you're ignoring this because it's easier for you to pretend things that prove you wrong (which are vast and many) don't exist:

""We have crossed the mark of over 100 filibusters and acts of procedural obstruction in less than one year," Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat of Rhode Island, said on the floor on December 20, 2009. "Never since the founding of the Republic, not even in the bitter sentiments preceding Civil War, was such a thing ever seen in this body.""

Sounds like you are wrong. Again. But that's not really news to this forum.



Do you think that Filibusters haven't increased in 2009? Let's see you go on record making such a statement. I'd like to have your position as clear as possible before I beat you over the head about just how wrong you are. And I'd like to use it elsewhere when you eventually flee from this thread as you will.
Click to expand...

Democrats had a 60 vote margin. If there was any filibuster Obama couldn't hold his own party and they would have had to join in. 40 GOP Senators couldn't stop anyone. None of his legislation was filibustered that I know of. Now if you want to continue this bs, carry on.

As for Fox losing money that was the title of the thread but then again you seem to be looking for a fight, carry on without me.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Conservative... STOP the personal attacks or there will be further consequences.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Moderator's Warning:
Conservative... STOP the personal attacks or there will be further consequences.
Click to expand...

Please accept my apology. too bad some here have such thin skin and post drivel that brings out the worst in me.
 
Conservative said:
Democrats had a 60 vote margin.
Click to expand...

Which brings us back to the point I originally made and which you chose to ignore:

"I wasn't aware that Democrats were a monolithic block that thought as a single entity and didn't have their own respective interests based on their respective states' voters interests.

By the way, since you think that Democrats are a monolithic entity, why did many Republicans betray Bush on ending the filibuster when they could have?

Perhaps, oh maybe, because groups aren't single minded monolithic entities you make them out to be?"

You act as if the Democrats are a single entity monolith. I'd love to see evidence of this.

If there was any filibuster Obama couldn't hold his own party and they would have had to join in.
Click to expand...

Like how Bush couldn't hold his own party on nuking the filibuster?

Oh wait. Care to show me a single point in American history were a President was able to control the actions of every member of his party in the Senate? Or are you all big talk and no game?

40 GOP Senators couldn't stop anyone.
Click to expand...

They don't have to. Only one democrat could.

None of his legislation was filibustered that I know of. Now if you want to continue this bs, carry on.
Click to expand...

Which means little coming from a person who thinks he knows all about economics yet cannot define linear regression which at its core is a key principle of understanding the impact of economic factors. Your lack of knowledge does not equate to what you do not know not existing.

How about you answer this real simple question: Yes or No: Filibusters in the last year have increased to record numbers. Let's get you on record for a change rather then your constant dodging of hard questions.

As for Fox losing money that was the title of the thread but then again you seem to be looking for a fight, carry on without me.
Click to expand...

All it serves in this thread is to point out that you cannot argue without lies and insults.
 
Conservative said:
Please accept my apology. too bad some here have such thin skin and post drivel that brings out the worst in me.
Click to expand...

Considering your first posts here when you started, that is about as likely as magical space pandas who live in the sun in Jello space ships being the cause of all life. You started right off insulting people from the first day you joined.

Either stop posting, or stop with the constant insults and lies.
 
obvious Child said:
Considering your first posts here when you started, that is about as likely as magical space pandas who live in the sun in Jello space ships being the cause of all life. You started right off insulting people from the first day you joined.

Either stop posting, or stop with the constant insults and lies.
Click to expand...

I have never once reported any individual on this thread but you are going to be my first ever. I have had it with your condescending BS and calling me a liar. Yours will now be reported.
 
Conservative said:
I have never once reported any individual on this thread but you are going to be my first ever. I have had it with your condescending BS and calling me a liar. Yours will now be reported.
Click to expand...

You are a liar and I have concrete evidence to support my accusation.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/bias-...-fox-news-losing-money-13.html#post1058493388

In that post, dated 01-18-10, post 123, you further attack me for claiming that Beck lost Fox money.

The problem is, that I never said that and in fact stated the exact opposite:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/bias-...-fox-news-losing-money-11.html#post1058492883

That post of mine, the same day 20 posts BEFORE yours repeats something I repeatively stated in the thread:

""By moving towards other shows, the advertisement revenue on Beck's show decreases. Fox at the bottom line results in the same"

You falsely claim I argued Beck lost Fox money despite me saying that Fox's bottom line did not change.

You being informed numerous times about what I said but stating something entirely different after being directly addressed proves you are in fact a liar. Or you can admit you can't read and I'll stop calling you a liar.

Still refusing to address this question eh?

Yes or No: Filibusters in the last year have increased to record numbers.

Let's get you on record for a change rather then your constant dodging of hard questions.

Tom Jones got banned. How about you next? As for condescending BS, I have to say, you're probably the king. After all, you treated everyone who argued that multiple economic factors could have been responsible for increased revenues were retarded while proclaiming that only one factor was responsible without any evidence much less a regression analysis.
 
Last edited:
Moderator's Warning:
OK, now THE BOTH OF YOU stop. Get back to the thread topic, immediately.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Moderator's Warning:
OK, now THE BOTH OF YOU stop. Get back to the thread topic, immediately.
Click to expand...

Both of us know full well that Conservative is not going to answer my question.

But here it is again for Conservative to ignore for a 4th time:

CONSERVATIVE ANSWER THE QUESTION

Yes or No: Filibusters in the last year have increased to record numbers.
 
Conservative said:
Excuse me for the insults but that statement is totally over the top.
Click to expand...

If you wish to continue let's agree on a starting point that includes the following assumptions:

Both of us possess at least average intelligence.

Neither of us is trying to destroy America.

Both of us are capable of passionately defending our perspective of what is best for the country without resorting to insults.


If we can not agree on those basic things, I see no point in continuing discussions between us.

Can we agree on the assumptions above as a starting point?
If so, we can move on from there.


Back to further evidence of record filibusters used in the Senate:

"Likewise, the public also doesn't realize that abuse has gotten completely out of control -- from 1949 to 1970, there were 30 cloture votes. In just 2009, there were 39."

The Washington Monthly
 
obvious Child said:
Both of us know full well that Conservative is not going to answer my question.

But here it is again for Conservative to ignore for a 4th time:

CONSERVATIVE ANSWER THE QUESTION

Yes or No: Filibusters in the last year have increased to record numbers.
Click to expand...

Is anyone surprised?
 
Catawba;1058562440]If you wish to continue let's agree on a starting point that includes the following assumptions:

Both of us possess at least average intelligence.

Neither of us is trying to destroy America.

Both of us are capable of passionately defending our perspective of what is best for the country without resorting to insults.

If we can not agree on those basic things, I see no point in continuing discussions between us

Can we agree on the assumptions above as a starting point?
If so, we can move on from there.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, I apologize for the insults

Back to further evidence of record filibusters used in the Senate:

"Likewise, the public also doesn't realize that abuse has gotten completely out of control -- from 1949 to 1970, there were 30 cloture votes. In just 2009, there were 39."

The Washington Monthly
Click to expand...

You do realize that the Republicans did not have enough votes to prevent the Democrats from passing anything and thus any filibuster had to be bipartisan as there had to be at least one Democrat and total Republican support for a filibuster. Your point that the Democrats do not walk in lockstep with Obama can be applied as well as to the Republicans as indicated by the Stimulus Plan which got Snowe, Collins, and Specter from the Republican side. Specter then switched parties.

My point all along has been and still stands, the Republicans alone could not stop anything that Obama wanted so any filibuster had to be bipartisan. Not sure what your point is but your statement was absolutely false.

Also Obama has had the handicap of being blocked by an unprecedented number of filibusters by the Republicans
Click to expand...

What legislation was blocked by the Republicans?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom