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.

The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

While I think sexting is stupid, if you're 20 years old and doing it....well, you're 20 years old, so you're supposed to do stupid things. But when you're pushing 50?!?! After Anthony the Weiner don't these guys realize how ridiculous they look?
 
Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

Rover said:
While I think sexting is stupid, if you're 20 years old and doing it....well, you're 20 years old, so you're supposed to do stupid things. But when you're pushing 50?!?! After Anthony the Weiner don't these guys realize how ridiculous they look?
Click to expand...

...yet people such as you showing interest gives them reason to continue.
 
Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

Rover said:
While I think sexting is stupid, if you're 20 years old and doing it....well, you're 20 years old, so you're supposed to do stupid things. But when you're pushing 50?!?! After Anthony the Weiner don't these guys realize how ridiculous they look?
Click to expand...

I think at this point that line is more like 16 or 17. As stupid as 20-year olds are, some traps are so obvious they should know better. "Even brute beasts and flying birds do not fall into the same snares twice." -- St. Jerome.

This is a case of young woman flirts with middle aged man, whose brain dissolves. It's not exactly a new phenomenon. That's why God made hookers, dude.
 
Last edited:
Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

Proof the Republicans have no interest in balancing the budget or cutting spending.

http://thehill.com/policy/defense/242083-gop-leaders-blast-dems-for-opposing-612b-defense-bill

Democrats, including Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and Armed Services Committee ranking member Adam Smith (Wash.), have said they would vote against the bill (Defense Budget Bill) because it funnels an additional $38 billion into the Defense Department’s war fund.

The budget maneuver is a way around spending caps set for the Pentagon in the 2011 Budget Control Act, but the bill leaves the caps in place for domestic spending, drawing criticism from Democrats.
Click to expand...
 
Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

ScoobyDoo said:
Proof the Republicans have no interest in balancing the budget or cutting spending.
Click to expand...

We have known since the 1990's that when Republicans talk about fiscal responsibility they mean diverting spending from recipients they don't care about (the poor and the middle class) to the donors they serve (FIRE, defense) and reducing taxes on the 1%. The Bush deficits are the natural result.

What few deficit hawks are left are all Democrats or libertarians.
 
Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

Kepler said:
We have known since the 1990's that when Republicans talk about fiscal responsibility they mean diverting spending from recipients they don't care about (the poor and the middle class) to the donors they serve (FIRE, defense) and reducing taxes on the 1%. The Bush deficits are the natural result.

What few deficit hawks are left are all Democrats or libertarians.
Click to expand...

That 38 Billion would be great for an East Coast High Speed Safe rail line to replace that piece of **** Amtrak service that can't even prevent speeding into curves.
 
Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

Kepler said:
We have known since the 1990's that when Republicans talk about fiscal responsibility they mean diverting spending from recipients they don't care about (the poor and the middle class) to the donors they serve (FIRE, defense) and reducing taxes on the 1%. The Bush deficits are the natural result.

What few deficit hawks are left are all Democrats or libertarians.
Click to expand...

FIRE is filled with a bunch of ACLU lawyers... you sure that's knuck support? Also, every tax cut reduces taxes for "the 1%". And given the deficit run up in 2007 and 2008 when Pelosi took over; not sure Democrats are the party of fiscal responsibility. And here comes trying to use the dot-com boom as a crutch...
 
Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

FlagDUDE08 said:
FIRE is filled with a bunch of ACLU lawyers... you sure that's knuck support? Also, every tax cut reduces taxes for "the 1%". And given the deficit run up in 2007 and 2008 when Pelosi took over; not sure Democrats are the party of fiscal responsibility. And here comes trying to use the dot-com boom as a crutch...
Click to expand...

This line of BS has to stop. Not every tax cut that can be created benefits or reduces the taxes on the 1%. It's a specious argument and it's entirely dishonest and misleading.
 
Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

ScoobyDoo said:
That 38 Billion would be great for an East Coast High Speed Safe rail line to replace that piece of **** Amtrak service that can't even prevent speeding into curves.
Click to expand...

We don't need another pork project targeting the wrong kind of infrastructure that no one's going to use because of NIMBY and the cost of commuting.
 
Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

FlagDUDE08 said:
We don't need another pork project targeting the wrong kind of infrastructure that no one's going to use because of NIMBY and the cost of commuting.
Click to expand...

Rail is used on the East Coast all the time. It's the perfect corridor for it. It's not the wrong kind of infrastructure for that part of the country.
 
Re: The 114th Congress: How Low Can They Go?

ScoobyDoo said:
Rail is used on the East Coast all the time. It's the perfect corridor for it. It's not the wrong kind of infrastructure for that part of the country.
Click to expand...

Where are you going to put the rail? And remember, the freight companies are the ones that own the present-day rail.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top