What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

2nd Term, Part VI: Burnin' down the House

  • Thread starter Thread starter Priceless
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: 2nd Term, Part VI: Burnin' down the House

walrus said:
Didn't Harry Reid say screw the cancer patients, why should I care about them?
Click to expand...

Well at least you dont pretend like you dont favor one side over the other anymore :D
 
Re: 2nd Term, Part VI: Burnin' down the House

The longer this has dragged on, the more I think that the only way out of this is for The Boner to be deposed. For whatever his reasons, its appear he's putting keeping his job above what's good for the country. If he isn't then why doesn't he pass short term extension and then go to conference, the same conference he's refused to appoint people to for months? I'm not saying Nancy Pelosi is going to be Speaker, but either a King or even a Paul Ryan who's been interestingly silent throughout this might get a deal done. Boner looks and sounds pickled.

On another note, I received an unsigned neg rep that was spot on recently as I compared USCHO conservative posters to the idiots in the House. That was an out of bounds cheap shot on people that I enjoy bantering with out here so apologies. It takes a big man to admit when he's wrong, and a bigger one to admit when others are wrong. :D Regardless, my bad. Now sign your reps people so I can give you the proper attribution. ;)
 
Re: 2nd Term, Part VI: Burnin' down the House

GOP donors threaten rebellion over shutdown

The ongoing government shutdown may be the the product of months of planning by the conservative grass-roots, but not everyone in the GOP is happy with the result.

According to a new report from the Washington Post, the Republican Party’s donor class is becoming increasingly uneasy with the government shutdown strategy and the ascendant Tea Party faction behind it, to the point that some donors may curtail their usual level of fundraising for the 2014 election.

“The fact is, donors have had it,” Bobbie Kilberg, a longtime GOP donor and fundraiser, told the Washington Post. “I oppose Obamacare as much as anyone else does, but [a government shutdown] is not the way to repeal it.”

“There are a lot of liabilities with this approach,” former Congressman Vin Weber said to the Post. “To portray Republicans as universally cheering the shutdown is a mistake,” Weber added. ”Not all of our donors are activist tea party people. Some are, but they are a vocal minority.”
Click to expand...
This clearly Obama's fault somehow.
 
Re: 2nd Term, Part VI: Burnin' down the House

joecct said:
It's the Post. They're the Dem's propaganda machine. Would the Post report dissatisfaction in the Democratic ranks (of course they would. But the Dems are 100% united!!)??
Click to expand...

So the quotes of people who have given big money to the GOP were made up? Not accurate? Or just the fact they talked to the Post means they're really Muslin terrorists?
 
Re: 2nd Term, Part VI: Burnin' down the House

“The fact is, donors have had it,” Bobbie Kilberg, a longtime GOP donor and fundraiser, told the Washington Post. “I oppose Obamacare as much as anyone else does, but [a government shutdown] is not the way to repeal it.”
Click to expand...

At the heart of it all: The majority in the house are unwilling to accept that they cannot unilaterally change the law. They need to grow up so we can all move on with our lives.

What idiocy made them think that it would be a good idea to try something this bold when they don't hold both houses of congress?
 
Re: 2nd Term, Part VI: Burnin' down the House

ExileOnDaytonStreet said:
At the heart of it all: The majority in the house are unwilling to accept that they cannot unilaterally change the law. They need to grow up so we can all move on with our lives.

What idiocy made them think that it would be a good idea to try something this bold when they don't hold both houses of congress?
Click to expand...

What would have been better is if they had actually worked on the stupid law in a bipartisan fashion and made it better. Instead we have this abortion of a law from the Democrats only and a bunch of whiners who can't defeat a President who accomplished near nill of his agenda from his first term.

Somebody better wake up the Republicans or they will be irrelevant in very short order.
 
Re: 2nd Term, Part VI: Burnin' down the House

ScoobyDoo said:
What would have been better is if they had actually worked on the stupid law in a bipartisan fashion and made it better
Click to expand...

You couldn't get a single congressman of either party to show up to a meeting with that on the agenda. Not even if you offered punch and pie.
 
Re: 2nd Term, Part VI: Burnin' down the House

Its false IMHO to say that Dems would not have negotiated with the GOP in exchange for a few token votes to make the ACA "bipartisan". I'm sure they would have gladly included tort reform for example or some other goodies. The problem was the GOP decided that politically this was an opportunity to defeat Obama's agenda, and then defeat him for re-election. The last part isn't speculation, Itch McConnell and then Senator Jim DeMint openly spoke of it.

However, what the Republican party is doing right now is spitting in the face of American voters and democracy in general. In 2012 we had a referendum on how the country should be governed. Republicans lost in the race for the WH, lost Senate seats, and lost House seats. Like it or not, the people spoke. Yet, the GOP essentually wants to undo the results of the election. For all the Constitutional lovers on the right, I'm curious how they reconcile these two mutually exclusive positions. If this effort succeeds, what do you think is going to happen the next time the Republicans control the Presidency but the Dems one part of Congress? Get ready for gun control, immigration, gay marriage, etc, all of which have the support of the majority of people in the country.
 
Re: 2nd Term, Part VI: Burnin' down the House

Rover said:
Its false IMHO to say that Dems would not have negotiated with the GOP in exchange for a few token votes to make the ACA "bipartisan". I'm sure they would have gladly included tort reform for example or some other goodies. The problem was the GOP decided that politically this was an opportunity to defeat Obama's agenda, and then defeat him for re-election. The last part isn't speculation, Itch McConnell and then Senator Jim DeMint openly spoke of it.
Click to expand...
You mean make the ACA even bigger and ensure there was even less time to actually read it before it was voted into law?
 
Bob Gray said:
You mean make the ACA even bigger and ensure there was even less time to actually read it before it was voted into law?
Click to expand...

A typical right wing talking point. What was going into the health care law had been debated for 6 months. Tell me Bob, what exactly about the details of the law surprised you after you read it yourself?
 
Re: 2nd Term, Part VI: Burnin' down the House

Rover said:
A typical right wing talking point. What was going into the health care law had been debated for 6 months. Tell me Bob, what exactly about the details of the law surprised you after you read it yourself?
Click to expand...
Ah, this isn't one of the strong points of your argument. Need I cite the famous Nancy Pelosi quote about finding out later what's in the bill? Even its strongest proponents stay away from this discussion.
 
Bob Gray said:
Ah, this isn't one of the strong points of your argument. Need I cite the famous Nancy Pelosi quote about finding out later what's in the bill? Even its strongest proponents stay away from this discussion.
Click to expand...

Be my guest. As I say again, what about the bill surprised you once enacted? Its a simple question Bob. I was expecting you to mention no death panels. :D
 
Re: 2nd Term, Part VI: Burnin' down the House

Rover said:
Be my guest. As I say again, what about the bill surprised you once enacted? Its a simple question Bob. I was expecting you to mention no death panels. :D
Click to expand...

But we do have death camels!
 
Re: 2nd Term, Part VI: Burnin' down the House

Bob Gray said:
You mean make the ACA even bigger and ensure there was even less time to actually read it before it was voted into law?
Click to expand...

This is just a dumb talking point that all pundits use when it serves their purpose. There isn't a person in Congress or on their staff who reads most of, let alone all of, any bill.


Not to say that Congress shouldn't read the bills. They should. It's just that they never do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top