Those Darn Obstructionist Republicans!

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013...llows-house-members-calling-vote-on-clean-cr/
Late in the evening on September 30, 2013, the House Rules Committee Republicans changed the Rules of the House so that the ONLY Member allowed to call up the Senate’s clean CR for a vote was Majority Leader Eric Cantor or his designee — all but guaranteeing the government would shut down a few hours later and would stay shut down. Previously, any Member would have had the right to bring the CR up for a vote. Democracy has been suspended in the House of Representatives.
 
The whole default thing was/is very concerning. I don't care which side you're on, that shit cannot be allowed to happen.
 
Why not?

We are only postponing the inevitable.

Just because you are going to die someday is no reason to commit suicide.

barfo
 
Why not?

We are only postponing the inevitable.

That's a bit like saying, "Hey this house is a firetrap and a disaster waiting to happen ... here let me show you." and then proceed to bolt the doors with everyone inside, pour gasoline on all of the furniture and throw a lit match
 
The whole default thing was/is very concerning. I don't care which side you're on, that shit cannot be allowed to happen.

The republicans changed the rules in the House on sept 30th (one day before the government shut down) such that no longer can anyone in the house bring a bill to a vote, only the Speaker, or current acting Speaker, can bring a vote. They also showed the Tea Party had plans to do this back in the Spring of this year. It's not "either side" doing this.
 
The republicans changed the rules in the House on sept 30th (one day before the government shut down) such that no longer can anyone in the house bring a bill to a vote, only the Speaker, or current acting Speaker, can bring a vote. They also showed the Tea Party had plans to do this back in the Spring of this year. It's not "either side" doing this.

I didn't say either side was doing it. I said I don't care which side your'e on, it can't be allowed to happen.
 
What exactly happens if the government isn't allowed to borrow beyond the ~$17T it already has?

It means they can only spend the $3T or so they get from us. Seems like plenty, when you consider the actual debt payments we are obligated for are in the $400B range.

So pay that $400B first and prioritize the rest.
 
What exactly happens if the government isn't allowed to borrow beyond the ~$17T it already has?

It means they can only spend the $3T or so they get from us. Seems like plenty, when you consider the actual debt payments we are obligated for are in the $400B range.

So pay that $400B first and prioritize the rest.

The world economy gets a big shake up, and china and Japan start pulling their money?
 
18 clowns craving media attention for their campaigns ADDED several hundred million dollars of waste to the national debt. Vote them out.
 
I think this is a GOP/DEM coalition conspiracy to discredit the libertarians as a viable 3rd party
 
Geez I hate this!!
The Republicans should have held, let Obama and the Dems run out of money it they want to go there.
Then vote to impeach Obama if he failed to service the debt and blow the 14th amendment.
The final show down is way the hell over due.
 
Geez I hate this!!
The Republicans should have held, let Obama and the Dems run out of money it they want to go there.
Then vote to impeach Obama if he failed to service the debt and blow the 14th amendment.
The final show down is way the hell over due.

That's the spirit! Fuck everything, let's set it on fire! Cause you and I man, we are 20 years old, and we are anarchists! Let's fuck some shit up!

barfo
 
That's the spirit! Fuck everything, let's set it on fire! Cause you and I man, we are 20 years old, and we are anarchists! Let's fuck some shit up!

barfo

A fix my friend, a fix. No authority to barrow, means live within our means.
It is possible, it has been done.
 
A fix my friend, a fix. No authority to barrow, means live within our means.
It is possible, it has been done.

Live within our means? Do you remember what country you are living in?

EDIT: Or rather, which economic system we currently have in place?
 
A fix my friend, a fix. No authority to barrow, means live within our means.
It is possible, it has been done.

Not after already spending the money. That's just being a deadbeat.

barfo
 
This makes me want to donate money to every teabagging (invective of choice) that runs in 2014 and onward.

One of the reasons that spending can't be cut is because we have trillions tied up in overages on programs that can't be cut. Medicare/caid overruns alone would pay for entire DoD/DHS/DoE/NASA. But people don't want to have their FICA raised enough to pay for it (which would jump from the 12% range (of which they pay half) to the 27% range. Populist opinion is "raise taxes on the rich and very rich". This isn't a "very rich" people thing, it's a "300M people want a lifestyle (SS/Medicare/Medicaid/now-PPACA) but don't want to pay for it" thing. Go ahead and raise taxes--the people making that much will continue to find loopholes. But even if they didn't, it's basic math. The 100k people making $2M or more can't pay for the social services, national defense and infrastructure of 300M. As an example, 250k people earned $1,000,000 or more. People love to state how about 1200 didn't pay a penny in tax. But what they don't say is that the total of those incomes was $729B, or not even enough to fund the Medicare overrun if you taxed them 100%. Our DEFICIT is $1.6T with millionaires paying ~25% on average. If you taxed every millionaire 100%, you wouldn't cover 1/3 of the deficit.

This is one of the many reasons I am glad that PPACA was being blocked. Passing a horribly-constructed panacaea (no matter how good or bad the intent), that will not be easily able to be revoked when the costs are 8x the intake (like Medicare/Caid) is irresponsible and inappropriate. If you want people to have "affordable care", then do things that address care like a) more doctors and nurse practitioners, b) lower drug costs, c) no mandatory insurance, d) no preventative care in the emergency room, etc. I'd much rather have my taxes be raised for more doctors and clinics and shots for kids than to have my (now mandatory) insurance rates jacked up to pay some insurance company, with no net increase in care.

Even during the government "shutdown", SS is getting paid (even though it's not a break-even proposition anymore), Medicare/Caid are being funded (even though they're almost a trillion dollars PER YEAR overspent, or roughly what a decade of war cost), the interest on debt is being paid, etc. Poorly-thought out mandatory social programs are the largest outpouring of our government--triple what education, defense and science/research spending are combined.

I just found 144 representatives and 18 senators to donate to during the next campaign. All I've seen today is how "the Tea Party lost"/"should be arrested"/"wasted $24B dollars"--what happens in February when the debt ceiling is hit again? For that matter, why wasn't the compromised 2011 debt ceiling raise enough? Even after the "atom bomb" of sequestration, we're at the point of either raising the debt ceiling or "defaulting".
 
This is one of the many reasons I am glad that PPACA was being blocked.

It wasn't being blocked. It was just being whined about.

All I've seen today is how "the Tea Party lost"/"should be arrested"/"wasted $24B dollars"--what happens in February when the debt ceiling is hit again?

Same again, I imagine. Why would it be any different?

barfo
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top