• 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 Shut Out of Stimulus Conference Negotiations

I saw somewhere the total you might get in the cuts in the bill are about $5 a week... so $260.00 a year.

Some will go well its better then nothing..a hang on a bit.

Bush Tax Cuts you enjoy now will be allowed to run out. This will cost the average family about $2500 a year in higher taxes.

Oh not done yet..Obama has a Trillion dollars more in his own spending proposals which will require higher taxes on top of the expired Tax Cuts.


IOW you're all be taken for a ride.
 
Obama took office hoping to unite the parties in a bipartisan government. He went to Congress, met with Republicans, even had them over to the White House for cookies. He asked for their ideas and set up a framework to work together. But the Republicans don't want to work together. They rejected Obama and then claimed they were "shut out". This president has and continues to make a serious effort to include Republicans. Republicans have decided they don't want to be included, they want to be a government in exile.

To the Dems, working together is telling the Republicans everything they want, forcing it down their throats, and then expecting them to accept it. That is the Pelosi version of bi-partisanship.
 
Republicans are playing this pretty riskily.
If this bill is even remotely a success, then they are going to have a damn hard time finding their seats in a few years.
37% of the public support the bill.
Nobody has had time to read the massive bill. All 1000 pages.

The risk for Republicans is supporting this Pork Factory.
Supporting government waste.
Supporting government intrusion.
Supporting a bill with laughable tax cuts.

There will be a recovery... this just delayed it.

The history of such intervention is abysmal.
 
To the Dems, working together is telling the Republicans everything they want, forcing it down their throats, and then expecting them to accept it. That is the Pelosi version of bi-partisanship.
I thought that was the repub version... must be where dems got it.
 
I thought that was the repub version... must be where dems got it.

What fascinating denial and historical ignorance; could you please show ONE bill that was passed during Bush's Presidency that didn't have tremendous bi-partisan support and the voting record for those bills?

You can't can you? Carry on; your clown like defense of the indefensible is quite amusing and telling about the mental state of the Liberal left.
 
What fascinating denial and historical ignorance; could you please show ONE bill that was passed during Bush's Presidency that didn't have tremendous bi-partisan support and the voting record for those bills?

You can't can you? Carry on; your clown like defense of the indefensible is quite amusing and telling about the mental state of the Liberal left.
umm... doesn't that show that dems are more willing to by bi-partisan than repubs? Besides I thought I was responding to the particular practice of telling the opposition to sit down and shut up when they're in majority. try to follow along.
 
umm... doesn't that show that dems are more willing to by bi-partisan than repubs? Besides I thought I was responding to the particular practice of telling the opposition to sit down and shut up when they're in majority. try to follow along.

Nope, it shows that Bush was far more willing to talk with Dems about bills and incorporate their ideas than the Pelosi-Reid bunch in Washington right now.
 
Nope, it shows that Bush was far more willing to talk with Dems about bills and incorporate their ideas than the Pelosi-Reid bunch in Washington right now.
You HAVE GOT to be ****ing kidding right? I don't think Bush ever ONCE reached out to Dems while Obama did so on day one and several/many times since and it's been less than a month into his presidency.

You could prove me wrong by providing a link though.
 
You HAVE GOT to be ****ing kidding right? I don't think Bush ever ONCE reached out to Dems while Obama did so on day one and several/many times since and it's been less than a month into his presidency.

You could prove me wrong by providing a link though.

Or by simply knowing recent history....
 
You HAVE GOT to be ****ing kidding right? I don't think Bush ever ONCE reached out to Dems while Obama did so on day one and several/many times since and it's been less than a month into his presidency.

You could prove me wrong by providing a link though.

You have a horrible memory. Harshaw beat me to the links.
 
Great, I've been proved wrong... I don't find it such an ego shattering event that I can't admit it... like some. Regardless, the main comment was "it shows that Bush was far more willing to talk with Dems about bills and incorporate their ideas..."

Which is a load of crap. :mrgreen:
 
Think about who you're asking before you get into it. :lol:

Gee, I just went through and did a quick look at the links you provided. Only one of them was before the Dems took majority and that one was a WALL STREET JOURNAL propaganda piece that actually says that Portman appealed to the dems on Bush's behalf... So, basically, more deceit from you. But then, should we have expected more from you?
 
Gee, I just went through and did a quick look at the links you provided. Only one of them was before the Dems took majority and that one was a WALL STREET JOURNAL propaganda piece that actually says that Portman appealed to the dems on Bush's behalf... So, basically, more deceit from you. But then, should we have expected more from you?

Hey, o bright one, I didn't provide the links. Read much?
 
Harshaw said:
This is only the first page of Google hits on "Bush reaches out to Democrats."

How hard was that?
LOL...yeah, after the cons got their butt handed to them in the '06 elections, they decided they needed to work with the dems.

Notice the dates of the articles.

1st link
January 05, 2007

After Republicans’ resounding defeat in the fall election, Bush and his lieutenants are paying attention to Democratic power brokers they had all but ignored for years.
2nd link
1/24/07

Facing a Democratic-controlled - and hostile - Congress for the first time, a politically weak President George W. Bush bowed to political reality in his State of the Union address last night by advancing domestic policies that he hoped might win bipartisan support.
3rd link
January 4, 2007

President Bush greeted the incoming Democratic leadership of Congress on Wednesday with a message of bipartisanship.

But he also sent another message: I’m still the guy with the big plane, the big office (the oval one) and the presidential seal.
4th link
November 9, 2006

Democrats tonight control both houses of Congress for the first time in more than a decade.
[...]
Earlier in the day, President Bush called for a new bipartisan tone in Washington.
5th link
LOL...who doesn't say 'we can all get along' in a victory speech.
11/4/04
Bush Thanks Supporters, Reaches Out To Democrats In Victory Speech
[...]
When asked if the two could work together after such a divisive campaign, the President's press secretary insisted 'absolutely.'
6Th link
After the first election. It's the headline of an article.
In the article, Bush doesn't say or actually do anything to reach out to Democrats.
Bush reaches out to Democrats
7th link
December 2, 2005

President Bush is starting to embrace a different political strategy for getting trade agreements through Congress: bipartisanship.
[...]
As on many issues, the White House didn’t go out of its way to seek backing from the opposition party, especially early on.
[...]
Now, in maneuvering on Capitol Hill this fall, the politically weakened administration has taken steps to repair tattered relations...


Amusement...:lol:
 
Gee, I just went through and did a quick look at the links you provided. Only one of them was before the Dems took majority

It's still an instance -- you claimed there were none. Besides, it was just the first page of hits. I didn't screen them for when they were done.

You're just moving the goalpoasts. You didn't specify these conditions in your challenge.


and that one was a WALL STREET JOURNAL propaganda piece that actually says that Portman appealed to the dems on Bush's behalf...

Yeah, and the comparison was about Pelosi/Reid's "bipartisanship."


So, basically, more deceit from you. But then, should we have expected more from you?

No deceit. But I figured you'd find a way to dismiss.
 
Last edited:
LOL...yeah, after the cons got their butt handed to them in the '06 elections, they decided they needed to work with the dems.

Notice the dates of the articles.

1st link

2nd link

3rd link

4th link

5th link
LOL...who doesn't say 'we can all get along' in a victory speech.

6Th link
After the first election. It's the headline of an article.
In the article, Bush doesn't say or actually do anything to reach out to Democrats.

7th link



Amusement...:lol:

All he wanted was "ONCE."
 
You HAVE GOT to be ****ing kidding right? I don't think Bush ever ONCE reached out to Dems while Obama did so on day one and several/many times since and it's been less than a month into his presidency.

You could prove me wrong by providing a link though.



No Child left behind.




you fail as usual.
 
umm... doesn't that show that dems are more willing to by bi-partisan than repubs? Besides I thought I was responding to the particular practice of telling the opposition to sit down and shut up when they're in majority. try to follow along.

Fascinating hyper partisan denial; yet I never made any such statements. I like it when Liberals open their mouths; they always make my case that they are liars or in denial of the facts and reality.
 
LOL...yeah, after the cons got their butt handed to them in the '06 elections, they decided they needed to work with the dems.

So the Joint Resolution on Iraq, the Patriot Act, the Medicare Drug Reform Act, No Child Left Behind act and the Katrina Relief act were not bi-partisan legislation supported by BOTH sides of the aisle.

I am sorry, but even your rabid hyper partisanship cannot deny those simple FACTS.

The notion that Bush did not work WITH the Democrats on every major piece of legislation requires willful denial, or willful ignorance beyond the pale.
 
Back
Top Bottom