• 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

mbig said:
LOL Rookie

I do this for a living
Citibank UNDER $1 a share from 50.
DOES THAT look like Obama's fault to you? Fear of Obama has people selling their stocks for 2c on the dollar?

C: Basic Chart for CITIGROUP INC - Yahoo! Finance

The goverment now having poured in $50 Billion and gauranteeing another $270 Billion in debt of Citi alone.
So Yeah.. it's a no Brainer.
(except for you)
Even Now Citibank is $3 a share Under water in Book value on a 'mark-to-market' net value.
Where do you think Citi would be without that Moola and Gaurantee?
Citi was 97 cents a share/A Penny stock until the govt gave it Huge bucks.

Bankamerica given another $50 Billion down to virtually -0-

BAC: Basic Chart for BK OF AMERICA CP - Yahoo! Finance

Merrill Lynch BROKE and forced INTO Bankamerica to save the System.
Wachovia, Gone.
Washington Mutual, Gone.
Lehman, Gone.
AIG, Gone.
Scores more.. GONE.

ALL The banks and brokers borrowing from the Fed as there was NO commercial paper market.
The system was Frozen/DEAD. Everyone was B- R -O -K -E.

Anything else SON?:
Click to expand...

Their doing so bad now Obama wants to tax them. They paid it back quickly telling me they weren't in that much trouble.

Yes Obama doing this caused negative publicity which I am suer is hurting them.

Obama is abusing power by taking shares in these companies. This is a government take over. He did it to the auto companies and banks.


Citibank to Pay Back $20 Billion Bailout | News10.net | Sacramento, California | Local News


Citigroup is repaying $20 billion in bailout money it received from the Treasury Department, in an effort to reduce government influence.

The New York-based bank was among the hardest hit by the credit crisis and rising loan defaults. It received $45 billion in government support as part of the Troubled Asset Relief Program.

Citigroup Inc. only has to pay back $20 billion because the remaining $25 billion was converted into a 34 percent ownership stake in the bank earlier this year.
 
Conservative said:
Fair enough, I apologize for the insults
Click to expand...

Thank you! Your apology is accepted.

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.
Click to expand...

My point was that the number of filibusters under the Republican party is unprecedented in the history of the filibuster, which I have established.


What legislation was blocked by the Republicans?
Click to expand...

I am not going to look up every time a Republican filibuster was used. There are far too many, and is not necessary to prove the claim I made. From the numbers given it would appear that almost every measure was filibustered.
 
Catawba said:
Thank you! Your apology is accepted.



My point was that the number of filibusters under the Republican party is unprecedented in the history of the filibuster, which I have established.




I am not going to look up every time a Republican filibuster was used. There are far too many, and is not necessary to prove the claim I made. From the numbers given it would appear that almost every measure was filibustered.
Click to expand...

Look, the chart you posted showed great numbers in the 110th Congress which was Democrat Controlled. Any filibuster was Democrat generated as it doesn't make any sense for the Republicans to filibuster anything with a GOP President.

As for 2009 the Republicans couldn't filibuster anything withouth Democrat assistance thus it had to be a bipartisan filibuster. Had Obama been able to keep all his own party in line there wouldn't have been any filibuster.

Filibusters have been used for decades and have served to make for biapartisan legislation. Seems that Democrats have a problem with that rule now that they are in charge and no longer have a filibuster proof Senator. There is absolutely nothing that Obama has proposed regarding the economy or healthcare that I support and I am sure you didn't have a problem during the Bush years when Democrats filibustered Republican legislation.

Still your statement regarding Republican stopping Obama legislation is false. Obama is spending way too much and growing the size of the Govt. to unsustainable levels. He is ignoring the private sector and I am glad some Democrats see that.
 
Catawba said:
Thank you! Your apology is accepted.



My point was that the number of filibusters under the Republican party is unprecedented in the history of the filibuster, which I have established.




I am not going to look up every time a Republican filibuster was used. There are far too many, and is not necessary to prove the claim I made. From the numbers given it would appear that almost every measure was filibustered.
Click to expand...

Democrats started it under Bush to the point of even filibustering judges.

The precedent was set by the democrats.

I don't see your argument when the GOP did not have enough votes to filibuster. You are making no sense. It was democrats that stopped passage not the GOP.
 
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...

You are really missing the point on this chart, because the Democrats Controlled Congress in 2007-2008 doesn't mean that Republicans filibustered legislation. They didn't have to, they had a President who could veto it. Democrats filibustered Bush nominees as well as legislation that Bush wanted including SS and Medicare reform. They also prevented legislation that would have provided greater supervision over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
 
Conservative said:
What legislation was blocked by the Republicans?
Click to expand...


Seems to me that the healthcare bill that came out of the Senate was written by three republicans, as well as three democrats,(the gang of six they were calle) when it came to the final vote not a single republican vote.
 
donc said:
Seems to me that the healthcare bill that came out of the Senate was written by three republicans, as well as three democrats,(the gang of six they were calle) when it came to the final vote not a single republican vote.
Click to expand...

Then that wouldn't be a filibuster, would it? Were you equally outraged when no Democrats voted for Bush legislation? The point has been made it was Democrats that derailed Obama issues not the Republicans.
 
Conservative said:
Look, the chart you posted showed....
Click to expand...

ptif219 said:
Democrats started it under Bush to the point of even filibustering judges.
Click to expand...


Conservative said:
You are really missing the point on this chart....
Click to expand...

Guys, I've already provided evidence that the number of Republican filibusters from 2007 through 2009 are unprecedented in the history of either party since the beginning of its use.

Provide documentation with links that refutes my documentation if you can.
 
Conservative said:
You are really missing the point on this chart, because the Democrats Controlled Congress in 2007-2008 doesn't mean that Republicans filibustered legislation. They didn't have to, they had a President who could veto it. Democrats filibustered Bush nominees as well as legislation that Bush wanted including SS and Medicare reform. They also prevented legislation that would have provided greater supervision over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Click to expand...

Catawba You chart shows it took off as of 1996-2006 that was under Bush. democrats were filibustering even judges. They set the precedent
 
Last edited:
donc said:
Seems to me that the healthcare bill that came out of the Senate was written by three republicans, as well as three democrats,(the gang of six they were calle) when it came to the final vote not a single republican vote.
Click to expand...

Because things changed through all the votes and deals Reid made
 
Catawba said:
Guys, I've already provided evidence that the number of Republican filibusters from 2007 through 2009 are unprecedented in the history of either party since the beginning of its use.

Provide documentation with links that refutes my documentation if you can.
Click to expand...

You mean they broke the democrats record under Bush that set the precedent.
 
ptif219 said:
Because things changed through all the votes and deals Reid made
Click to expand...

Care to point out what things were changed between the bill that came out of committee and the bill that was voted on? :confused:
 
ptif219 said:
You mean they broke the democrats record under Bush that set the precedent.
Click to expand...

Yes, did you not see the graph I provided that shows they went far beyond the historical record?
 
donc said:
Care to point out what things were changed between the bill that came out of committee and the bill that was voted on? :confused:
Click to expand...

Look it up yourself. You deny there was deals and payoffs?
 
ptif219 said:
Catawba You chart shows it took off as of 1996-2006 that was under Bush. democrats were filibustering even judges. They set the precedent
Click to expand...

Look to the far right of the graph where it sky rockets. That represents the unprecedented number of filibusters by the Republicans.
 
Catawba said:
Look to the far right of the graph where it sky rockets. That represents the unprecedented number of filibusters by the Republicans.
Click to expand...

The first big amount is democrats filibustering Bush which you ignore.

The chart is wrong since the GOP does not have enough votes to filibuster.
 
ptif219 said:
Look it up yourself. You deny there was deals and payoffs?
Click to expand...

When you said "Because things changed through all the votes and deals Reid made"I assumed that you knew what you talking about.

My mistake; as evidently you were pullin s*** out of your ***.Another mistake is thinking that somehow I could get a coherent response from you.Wont make them mistakes again.:2wave:
 
donc said:
When you said "Because things changed through all the votes and deals Reid made"I assumed that you knew what you talking about.

My mistake; as evidently you were pullin s*** out of your ***.Another mistake is thinking that somehow I could get a coherent response from you.Wont make them mistakes again.:2wave:
Click to expand...

Are you denying this happened? Remember Landrieu or Nelson?

Are you saying this does not change the Bill?
 
ptif219 said:
Are you denying this happened? Remember Landrieu or Nelson?

Are you saying this does not change the Bill?
Click to expand...

My mistake ,i didn't realize you were this eh,er,challenged; go back and read what i posted,perhaps you can get up to speed on what the thread is about.Just maybe with some luck,and if the stars are aligned just right you will succeed this time.:2wave:
 
ptif219 said:
The first big amount is democrats filibustering Bush which you ignore.
Click to expand...
I don't ignore it, I note that it is dwarfed by the number of Republican filibusters.

The chart is wrong since the GOP does not have enough votes to filibuster.
Click to expand...


Show me your evidence the chart is wrong.
 
Catawba said:
I don't ignore it, I note that it is dwarfed by the number of Republican filibusters.




Show me your evidence the chart is wrong.
Click to expand...


He needs to sober up before he post.:mrgreen:
 
Catawba said:
I don't ignore it, I note that it is dwarfed by the number of Republican filibusters.




Show me your evidence the chart is wrong.
Click to expand...

The evidence is that Obama wasn't in office in 2007-08 thus there is no way the GOP Could have made your statement true

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

What am I missing here, you posted the chart that went to 2008 then blamed the Republicans for unprecedented number of filibusters in a year when Bush was in the WH.

Then in 2009 Obama had a filibuster proof Senate therefore again your statement is invalid so not sure what your point is. Obama cannot even sell his own Party.
 
donc said:
Seems to me that the healthcare bill that came out of the Senate was written by three republicans, as well as three democrats,(the gang of six they were calle) when it came to the final vote not a single republican vote.
Click to expand...

Donc, the chart posted goes through the 110th Congress which was 2007-2008 thus during a period when Bush was in the WH. There is no evidence presented that it was the GOP doing the filibustering since the President can request legislation and the Democrats stop it.

As for 2009 when Specter switched to the Democrat Party that gave Democrats a filibuster proof Senate thus the Republicans couldn't stop any Obama legislation and that was the point I was making.

The chart posted and then the comments don't reconsile.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom