House passes **** Plan

yataheyyatahey Senior MemberPosts: 5,605 Senior Member
by 8 votes. No Dems voted yes.
"When the goin gets weird, the weird turn pro." Hunter S. Thompson

Replies

  • Mr. RightMr. Right Senior Member Posts: 535 Senior Member
    Good! Now the Senate has two plans from the House that they can approve and the Prez can sign into law. Nobody can blame the one branch that is not D or D majority of risking a default.
    At this point, any default is totally due to Senate D's and Obama.

    I haven't read up on this topic yet this afternoon. My guess is that Obama will threaten a veto because the can is not kicked down the road past the 2012 elections, and that Reid will fall in behind him. They and the MSM will wail about how this is a political move by the Rs, as if their desperate desire for a post 2012 date isn't. In reality, extending the debt ceiling by less than a year is normal. http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2011/jul/27/rob-portman/sen-rob-portman-says-most-debt-ceiling-increases-h/

    I think Obama mistakenly took his election as a mandate for his beliefs, rather than as a rejection of Bush and biz as usual in DC. His plummeting poll numbers reflect both a public rejection of way left policies and a huge public disappointment that he did not deliver on his hope and change pixie dust promises.

    I think he is failing to recognize that the Republican landslide of 2010 was a true mandate. Both budget bills the House has passed and sent on to the Senate are based on that mandate, IMHO. If Reid and Obama block them both, they will experience deep pain in 11/12.
  • yataheyyatahey Senior Member Posts: 5,605 Senior Member
    Wrong again as usual. Reid will send a bi-partisan bill back to the House and when they fail to pass it, it will all be on gopers and baggers.
    FAIL!!!
    "When the goin gets weird, the weird turn pro." Hunter S. Thompson
  • BufordBuford Senior Member Posts: 2,972 Senior Member
    yatahey wrote: »
    Wrong again as usual. Reid will send a bi-partisan bill back to the House and when they fail to pass it, it will all be on gopers and baggers.
    FAIL!!!

    This pi$$ng contest between the two dysfunctional parties has to stop.
    Just look at the flowers Lizzie just look at the flowers.
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 24,240 Senior Member
    Let's see winning the Presidency with an overwhelming majority of the vote, not a mandate. Winning a majority in the lower of two house of one branch of government is a mandate. Got it.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • yataheyyatahey Senior Member Posts: 5,605 Senior Member
    The so called mandate was to create JOBS, not bring the country to the verge of default. Why can't those wingnuts figure this out? First thing they did when they got the House was to attack women's issues and gays.
    "When the goin gets weird, the weird turn pro." Hunter S. Thompson
  • Scott ButnerScott Butner Senior Member Posts: 3,918 Senior Member
    yatahey wrote: »
    The so called mandate was to create JOBS, not bring the country to the verge of default. Why can't those wingnuts figure this out? First thing they did when they got the House was to attack women's issues and gays.

    don't forget about rolling back environmental regulations to the early 60's.

    on the bright side, if the river's already on fire, the fish come pre-cooked.
  • FishTXFishTX Super Moderator Posts: 8,048 Senior Member
    on the bright side, if the river's already on fire, the fish come pre-cooked.
    Which is healthier; cooking your fish in vegetable oil, or petroleum byproducts?
    "We have to find someone who can not only fly this plane, but who didn't have fish for dinner."

    Crooow:This music would work better with women in bikinis shaking all over the place. I guess that's true of any music really.
  • Brian D.Brian D. Senior Member Posts: 4,011 Senior Member
    Mr. Right wrote: »
    I haven't read up on this topic yet this afternoon. My guess is that Obama will threaten a veto because the can is not kicked down the road past the 2012 elections, and that Reid will fall in behind him. They and the MSM will wail about how this is a political move by the Rs, as if their desperate desire for a post 2012 date isn't. In reality, extending the debt ceiling by less than a year is normal.

    Oh, ****. The "factoid" is that most of the debt limit increases have been for less than a year. But how many of those increases are in the lead-up to a Presidential election year? The historical truth is that it's pretty unusual to have an increase be set up so that another vote has to be taken right before a Presidential election.

    Mr. Right, the stupidity of this argument is pretty overwhelming. The Republicans are intentionally setting up the increase so that Obama has to deal with it again right before the election next year. They're not interested in an extension to 2013, they're not even interested in an extension until just after the election next year. It HAS to be dealt with again before the election or they're not happy. And Republicans are having a hissy that they will be accused of a "political move"??? OF COURSE it's a political move!

    bd
  • FishTXFishTX Super Moderator Posts: 8,048 Senior Member
    Cut out the bashing of members. Disagree with opinions, but don't attack them.
    "We have to find someone who can not only fly this plane, but who didn't have fish for dinner."

    Crooow:This music would work better with women in bikinis shaking all over the place. I guess that's true of any music really.
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 24,240 Senior Member
    We can delete our own posts now.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • Brian D.Brian D. Senior Member Posts: 4,011 Senior Member
    FishTX wrote: »
    Cut out the bashing of members. Disagree with opinions, but don't attack them.

    Okay. I noticed that you edited my post, but since you left the parts where I talked about the stupidity of his argument and described him as having a hissy, I couldn't tell what you took out. I went ahead and generalized it a little more, just for you. Now it talks about the stupidity of "this" argument and "Republicans" having a hissy, so my insults are more indirect. Better?

    bd
  • FishTXFishTX Super Moderator Posts: 8,048 Senior Member
    I took out one sentence near the end. And, it's better. Thanks.

    For everybody: We do need to be careful out we phrase our sentences. Sometimes it is hard to tell whether we are bashing points of view or people. If we say "that's a stupid argument," then that's clear and fine. If we say "your argument is asinine," then it says the same thing, but could be misread as "you are asinine." It's easy to lose sight of little things when discussions get heated. In the heat of a discussion, we don't always read things closely and misinterpret what another has written.
    "We have to find someone who can not only fly this plane, but who didn't have fish for dinner."

    Crooow:This music would work better with women in bikinis shaking all over the place. I guess that's true of any music really.
  • Mr. RightMr. Right Senior Member Posts: 535 Senior Member
    Thanks, Tex. I do try to self-censor my posts here. Believe it or not. You would be totally offended if I let my true feelings come out. But I don't believe in that at all. I try to disagree without being disagreeable.

    I've been a bit amazed that my Mr. Right moniker gets me flak even when I am agreeing with the board majority.
    Talk about knee jerk!

    But I will continue to try to post in a civil way, albeit one that may not fit with the conventional wisdom of this board.

    (I have already self censored here by not mentioning Kool Aid drinking, but feel free to poof this post if you consider even this parenthetical reference to Kool Aid to be out of line.)
  • JulietJuliet Posts: 0
    FishTX wrote: »
    I took out one sentence near the end. And, it's better. Thanks.

    For everybody: We do need to be careful out we phrase our sentences. Sometimes it is hard to tell whether we are bashing points of view or people. If we say "that's a stupid argument," then that's clear and fine. If we say "your argument is asinine," then it says the same thing, but could be misread as "you are asinine." It's easy to lose sight of little things when discussions get heated. In the heat of a discussion, we don't always read things closely and misinterpret what another has written.

    Its a thankless job.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction.

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Fly Fisherman stories delivered right to your inbox.