• 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 block Obama jobs bill

Status
Not open for further replies.
Republican Obstruction at Work: Record Number of Filibusters | NEWS JUNKIE POST

BTW, just to ask to have the floor and then to go through the motions of denying takes up time.

Right, the results of the Obama Administration are the responsibility of those evil Republicans?

Obama economic results in 2011,
.4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011(bea.gov)
25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011(bls.gov)
2.6 million fewer jobs(bls.gov)
4.2 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years(U.S. Treasury Site)
Downgrade of the U.S. credit rating(S&P)
Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.97 (The United States Misery Index By Year)
38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings(Gallup)
 
Right, the results of the Obama Administration are the responsibility of those evil Republicans?

Obama economic results in 2011,
.4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011(bea.gov)
25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011(bls.gov)
2.6 million fewer jobs(bls.gov)
4.2 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years(U.S. Treasury Site)
Downgrade of the U.S. credit rating(S&P)
Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.97 (The United States Misery Index By Year)
38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings(Gallup)

Yes if you block the senate, then you are blocking anything getting done.
 
Yes if you block the senate, then you are blocking anything getting done.
.

Here we go again, distortion and diversion. Obama had the Senate Democrat Caucus with 60 votes so I cannot help it if Obama cannot get the Democrat caucus to support his policies. I don't see one Democrat Policy that you claim was filibustered that I could support but you do ignore the policies that WERE implemented which should have been filibustered but weren't, Stimulus One and Obamacare. Never did Bush or Reagan have those overwhelming numbers that Obama had
 
Yes if you block the senate, then you are blocking anything getting done.

The problem that you seem to not get is that there were not enough DEMOCRATS who would vote UNIFORMLY to envolke cloture else they would have and thus 'over-ruled' the filibuster.
 
I see we are on step #4 today (Ssssspppppiiiiiinnnnn, with a little bit of #5, Make Personal Insult). Did you not read this statement?

"BTW, just to ask to have the floor and then to go through the motions of denying takes up time."

So that means IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER OR NOT THE DEMOCRATS COULD PERFORM CLOTURE.


Despite this written requirement, the possibility exists that the filibuster could be changed by majority vote, using the so-called nuclear option, also sometimes called the constitutional option by proponents. Even if a filibuster attempt is unsuccessful, the process takes floor time. In recent years the majority has preferred to avoid filibusters by moving to other business when a filibuster (This would mean the bill they are trying to pass doesn't get discussed) is threatened and attempts to achieve cloture have failed.[37]

Comon guys, lets at least bring a brain to the table...

Filibuster - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
I see we are on step #4 today (Ssssspppppiiiiiinnnnn, with a little bit of #5, Make Personal Insult). Did you not read this statement?

"BTW, just to ask to have the floor and then to go through the motions of denying takes up time."

So that means IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER OR NOT THE DEMOCRATS COULD PERFORM CLOTURE.


Despite this written requirement, the possibility exists that the filibuster could be changed by majority vote, using the so-called nuclear option, also sometimes called the constitutional option by proponents. Even if a filibuster attempt is unsuccessful, the process takes floor time. In recent years the majority has preferred to avoid filibusters by moving to other business when a filibuster (This would mean the bill they are trying to pass doesn't get discussed) is threatened and attempts to achieve cloture have failed.[37]

Comon guys, lets at least bring a brain to the table...

Filibuster - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Got it, Poor Obama couldn't get his own party to support some of his policies thus it is the Republicans' fault. Now let's ignore what Obama did get passed and the record he has generated, again of course all the Republicans' fault. Thanks for that incredible non partisan opinion
 
Got it, Poor Obama couldn't get his own party to support some of his policies thus it is the Republicans' fault. Now let's ignore what Obama did get passed and the record he has generated, again of course all the Republicans' fault. Thanks for that incredible non partisan opinion

Hint, there were never 60 Democrats, THEY COULDN'T PERFORM CLOTURE WITHOUT 60!!!!!!!!!! If I had to describe the discussion we are having here, I would start with this. Imagine a room full of mountaineers having a discussion. They can't even come to an agreement on whether their sport requires walking uphill and someone would begin to see the insanity of the conversation...

Party
(Shading indicates majority caucus)
Total

Democratic Independent Republican Vacant
End of previous congress 48 2 49 99 1
Begin 55 2 41 98 2
January 15, 2009 56 99 1
January 20, 2009 55 98 2
January 26, 2009 56 99 1
April 30, 2009 57 40
July 7, 2009 58 100 0
August 25, 2009 57 99 1
September 9, 2009 39 98 2
September 10, 2009 40 99 1
September 25, 2009 58 100 0
February 4, 2010 57 41
June 28, 2010 56 99 1
July 16, 2010 57 100 0
November 29, 2010 56 42
Final voting share 58% 42%
Beginning of the next Congress 51 2 47 100 0
 
Hint, there were never 60 Democrats, THEY COULDN'T PERFORM CLOTURE WITHOUT 60!!!!!!!!!! If I had to describe the discussion we are having here, I would start with this. Imagine a room full of mountaineers having a discussion. They can't even come to an agreement on whether their sport requires walking uphill and someone would begin to see the insanity of the conversation...

Party
(Shading indicates majority caucus)
Total

Democratic Independent Republican Vacant
End of previous congress 48 2 49 99 1
Begin 55 2 41 98 2
January 15, 2009 56 99 1
January 20, 2009 55 98 2
January 26, 2009 56 99 1
April 30, 2009 57 40
July 7, 2009 58 100 0
August 25, 2009 57 99 1
September 9, 2009 39 98 2
September 10, 2009 40 99 1
September 25, 2009 58 100 0
February 4, 2010 57 41
June 28, 2010 56 99 1
July 16, 2010 57 100 0
November 29, 2010 56 42
Final voting share 58% 42%
Beginning of the next Congress 51 2 47 100 0

there were 60 members of the Democrat caucus, learn what a caucus is?
 
So, to rap this all up, because the Republican party blocked "senate control" from 2008-2010 they gained control in 2010. They PURELY used this tactic to gain control of the senate so they could then go partisan on us. Republican's only care about their agenda and nothing else. They could care less if the country burns to the ground as long as they still have their position in the government, which I might add that they are in favor of making smaller. It seems Republican's are all in favor of removing jobs as long is it isn't theirs. In conclusion, as my previous post pointed out, the economy is not Obama's fault because he couldn't get ANY of his bills past with the exception of Obamacare, which the republicans could not even keep their paws out of. So now we are stuck with a half ass healthcare plan with a bunch of useless clauses so the republicans can later refute it and a ****ty economy. All because republicans wanted to prove Obama wrong. When in fact, they were the ones to blame all along.
 
So, to rap this all up, because the Republican party blocked "senate control" from 2008-2010 they gained control in 2010. They PURELY used this tactic to gain control of the senate so they could then go partisan on us. Republican's only care about their agenda and nothing else. They could care less if the country burns to the ground as long as they still have their position in the government, which I might add that they are in favor of making smaller. It seems Republican's are all in favor of removing jobs as long is it isn't theirs. In conclusion, as my previous post pointed out, the economy is not Obama's fault because he couldn't get ANY of his bills past with the exception of Obamacare, which the republicans could not even keep their paws out of. So now we are stuck with a half ass healthcare plan with a bunch of useless clauses so the republicans can later refute it and a ****ty economy. All because republicans wanted to prove Obama wrong. When in fact, they were the ones to blame all along.

I really am worried about the education system in this country that is brainwashing you. The Republicans don't control the Senate unless you believe Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid switched parties. You really are very misinformed and unfortunately a voter
 
I really am worried about the education system in this country that is brainwashing you. The Republicans don't control the Senate unless you believe Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid switched parties. You really are very misinformed and unfortunately a voter

Do you not understand that by blocking anything getting done, they are the sole responsibility of Obama not passing any positive legislation? (#5 oh and #1, I think a spin is coming up next, anyone else want to take a wager?)
 
Do you not understand that by blocking anything getting done, they are the sole responsibility of Obama not passing any positive legislation? (#5 oh and #1, I think a spin is coming up next, anyone else want to take a wager?)

Do you understand that you claimed that the Republicans took control of the Senate?
 
How many Republicans voted for it? Republicans from high-unemployment states. You know, those with constituents that need job, need the bill, need their Reps to do the right thing and stop trying to play partisan game to get the black man out of the White house.

oops.... Nice fail, though.

You mean those republicans who wanted to be reelected and not seen as someone voting against something called a "jobs bill" when their states needed jobs badly? I can't imagine why they would do that.
 
Amazing isn't it, 1377 posts on this thread with almost every liberal blaming Bush for the economic recession and absolving Obama of any responsibility. When a liberal claims that the President has very little power over the economy they mean a liberal President, not a Republican President who is totally responsible for everything bad that happens. Forget Congress for they are just place holders.
this line of bs coming from someone who thinks obama should have been able to fix the mess he inherited within 24 hours of taking office...good grief, the hackery here is simply amazing.
 
this line of bs coming from someone who thinks obama should have been able to fix the mess he inherited within 24 hours of taking office...good grief, the hackery here is simply amazing.

Let me know when that 24 hours is up on your clock? My problem with Obama isn't based upon the clock but instead the calendar which shows he has been in office now over 2 3/4 years and prior to that in the Congress that helped create the mess he claims he inherited. Then of course there is that minor issue of Congressional control which of course was Democratic control from 2008-2010. Interesting how the "smartest" person ever to hold the office with overwhelming numbers in Congress generated the results that you want to ignore. Guess that is what union employees do, ignore results.
 
Let me know when that 24 hours is up on your clock? My problem with Obama isn't based upon the clock but instead the calendar which shows he has been in office now over 2 3/4 years and prior to that in the Congress that helped create the mess he claims he inherited. Then of course there is that minor issue of Congressional control which of course was Democratic control from 2008-2010. Interesting how the "smartest" person ever to hold the office with overwhelming numbers in Congress generated the results that you want to ignore. Guess that is what union employees do, ignore results.
i'm seeing a pattern here with you, when busted, when backed into a corner, when you have no rebuttal, jump straight to step 5...lol..you are so damn predictable. your problem with obama is that he is a democrat, as has been shown repeatedly, his results are no worse, and in fact, again, as has been shown, are comparable if not better than several of his republican predecessors at this point in his term. yet, you give him hell, but you pulled the lever in favor of all his republican predecessors, multiple times. so AGAIN, AS HAS BEEN SHOWN, RESULTS DON'T MEAN CRAP TO YOU. so long as there is an (R) next to the name.
 
i'm seeing a pattern here with you, when busted, when backed into a corner, when you have no rebuttal, jump straight to step 5...lol..you are so damn predictable. your problem with obama is that he is a democrat, as has been shown repeatedly, his results are no worse, and in fact, again, as has been shown, are comparable if not better than several of his republican predecessors at this point in his term. yet, you give him hell, but you pulled the lever in favor of all his republican predecessors, multiple times. so AGAIN, AS HAS BEEN SHOWN, RESULTS DON'T MEAN CRAP TO YOU. so long as there is an (R) next to the name.

I will continue to give you an opportunity to be relevant and actually respond to the post. When you post crap like you become irrelevant. Better check out those Republican's and their performance at this time during their term and two years after the recessions they had occurred. You are going to find that liberal elites have lied their asses off to you.
 
Right, ignore the content and attack me. I cannot help it if you don't understand the data posted. Obviously your youth and inexperience are showing here. You don't understand leadership at all nor do you understand that if you had a job and generated the results Obama has generated after spending the amount of money he has spent you would be fired. Reagan won a huge electoral landslide in 1984 because of that leadership and the results generated. The Obama results don't warrant re-election
AGAIN, retire this 'age' argument, as it doesnt do anything for your credibility....just because you may be older than dirt, that in and of itself doesnt grant you wisdom on a topic.
 
I will continue to give you an opportunity to be relevant and actually respond to the post. When you post crap like you become irrelevant. Better check out those Republican's and their performance at this time during their term and two years after the recessions they had occurred. You are going to find that liberal elites have lied their asses off to you.
why that is mighty gracious of you , giving widdle ol' me a chance to be 'relevant':roll: as if you are in a posistion to grant anything :lamo let us turn this around, shall we? i'm gonna give YOU the chance to be 'relevant', and to respond to all the questions put to you...this is your chance now, best take it.
 
why that is mighty gracious of you , giving widdle ol' me a chance to be 'relevant':roll: as if you are in a posistion to grant anything :lamo let us turn this around, shall we? i'm gonna give YOU the chance to be 'relevant', and to respond to all the questions put to you...this is your chance now, best take it.

Oh yeah! well when did you stop beating your wife:2razz:

;)
 
Then read what you post before hitting the enter key. How will your words be interpreted by others?
:lamo great advice!! PERHAPS YOU SHOULD TAKE IT!!!!:mrgreen::lamo
 
why that is mighty gracious of you , giving widdle ol' me a chance to be 'relevant':roll: as if you are in a posistion to grant anything :lamo let us turn this around, shall we? i'm gonna give YOU the chance to be 'relevant', and to respond to all the questions put to you...this is your chance now, best take it.

Please point out the question in your comments? Would love to answer your direct questions but all I see from you is cheerleading and nothing specific and certainly no response when confused with facts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom