|
|
On October 19 2012 05:45 NeMeSiS3 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 05:33 kmillz wrote:On October 19 2012 04:44 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On October 19 2012 04:37 Zaqwert wrote:
Obama has had 4 years in office and his entire campaign and all his supporters have to offer at this point are binder, Big Bird, trying to scare women into voting for them on the basis of manufactured fake controversy, and standard class warfare (OMG the evilz rich!).
In 2008 you didn't hear any of that, it was all just this wishy washy "hope and change" I'm the black Messiash, give me a peace prize for showing up, etc.
In 2008 Obama was asking people to vote FOR him, which a lot of people did because he was nothing but a rorschach blot, people saw what they wanted to see).
His entire 2012 campaign is basically "Romney sucks, vote against him" which says a lot about his failed administration.
The media has been in the tank for Obama since day 1 and is going nuts right now. You go to CNN and the word "binders" appears on their front page TEN TIMES. There are 10 different "stories" trying to manufacture up a phony controversy.
Are the liberals so bankrupt on ideas and embarassed by the failure of Obama that's all they have at this point?
Obama may still win this thing, heck he's probably stil the favorite based on how the electoral college look, but you people supporting him are a disgrace.
Don't get me a wrong, Romney isn't that great, but you people are so obsessed with your Obamessiah.
It's not that suprising though, the vast majority TL is either young people who know nothing about how the world works and are duped into voting for what they think are hand outs (I'm all of 28 btw) or foreigners outside the US who are typically much further left than your average American and have been brainwashed their whole lives into thinking "Oh Americans who are Republicans? They are evil!" Your press is even more corrupt than the United States.
Thank God for the internet though, people still form their own little echo chambers where they convince themselves their world view is the only one, but the media's stranglehold on information has been crushed. Just today Newsweek announced they are basically dying.
Sorry for the long rambling stream of rants. I'm a very frustrated libertarian who views the world going to shit because everyone wants a handout.
Kids want free college, women think they deserve more money just for being women (the gender pay gap is a total myth btw), free health care, guaranteed jobs, etc.
Romney was wrong about 47% of people being parasites, the actual number is way higher.
When a host gets enough parasites it dies. America is f'ing bankrupt, we are playing shell games with fake numbers at this point, we are Enron.
The problem isn't taxes, it's spending. Romeny will spend a ton of money, Obama will spent a ton more, it's a sad situation we are in. Complains about how the internet users have their own little unchangeable world view .... Perpetrates stereotype like a boss without hesitation. Solid post. Yeah, almost as solid as: I feel like this thread is similar to the debates. The democrats or "liberals" present statistics and data or rather "arithmetic" and the republican users go "Nope, doesn'tt work that way! Didn't you hear romney or any of his studiesszzz, they say it works!". Democrats ask how and the republicans reply "Well he said it! he wouldn't lie!" What deductions the dems press "well durrr Obama is horrible look at his last 4 years!" and then the cycle continues of dodging any financial debate on Romneys currently flimsy at best plan. "derrrr Obama HAS a tax plan even though it will bankrupt us at least he has one!!" I apologize but doesn't every graph show America coming out of the recession? In fact the only argument used by REP's on how Obama has acted is "to slow" but they don't argue that America is coming out, they just think they can do it quicker. If Republicans think they can do it better, why not fucking say the plan? Who in the hell would vote for an imaginary plan where the creator won't explain the details over a plan that is actually getting America out of debt... Imagine walking over to an investors office and saying "this is what I'll do, you can't know how I'l get there give me this much money!" ... That is the sum of Romney's campaign.
I really do agree with you that it seems silly. However, your analogy is a little off. Who's the investor in the office? The people of the United States? With a bank or investor you can keep the important details confidential so a competitor can't steal them. In the situation with the election if Romney actually had a viable solution (just play along here) it's understandable he doesn't give out the details... it's an edge he has over Obama who has the track record to point at and criticize. Sure he looks like he's always dodging but the alternative is if the plan is actually solid Obama could adopt it too. American people would actually win that way T.T
edit: typo
|
1019 Posts
I don't understand how republicans rage so much about obama and his deficits. They have a terrible record when it comes to budget responsibility. Every republican president in the past 30 years blew up the total debt and the only recent time when the yearly deficit was ever balanced was when clinton, a democrat, did it in his second term.
Also, a significant part of the federal deficit in the past 4 years is due to tax break extensions (including the bush tax cuts) for middle income families as well as lower tax receipts because of the recession. The deficit didn't just happen because obama went around throwing money at every single government agency :O
|
I thought that Obama's reply to Romney when he tried blaming him for gas prices being up was pretty funny.
|
On October 19 2012 05:47 kmillz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 05:45 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On October 19 2012 05:33 kmillz wrote:On October 19 2012 04:44 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On October 19 2012 04:37 Zaqwert wrote:
Obama has had 4 years in office and his entire campaign and all his supporters have to offer at this point are binder, Big Bird, trying to scare women into voting for them on the basis of manufactured fake controversy, and standard class warfare (OMG the evilz rich!).
In 2008 you didn't hear any of that, it was all just this wishy washy "hope and change" I'm the black Messiash, give me a peace prize for showing up, etc.
In 2008 Obama was asking people to vote FOR him, which a lot of people did because he was nothing but a rorschach blot, people saw what they wanted to see).
His entire 2012 campaign is basically "Romney sucks, vote against him" which says a lot about his failed administration.
The media has been in the tank for Obama since day 1 and is going nuts right now. You go to CNN and the word "binders" appears on their front page TEN TIMES. There are 10 different "stories" trying to manufacture up a phony controversy.
Are the liberals so bankrupt on ideas and embarassed by the failure of Obama that's all they have at this point?
Obama may still win this thing, heck he's probably stil the favorite based on how the electoral college look, but you people supporting him are a disgrace.
Don't get me a wrong, Romney isn't that great, but you people are so obsessed with your Obamessiah.
It's not that suprising though, the vast majority TL is either young people who know nothing about how the world works and are duped into voting for what they think are hand outs (I'm all of 28 btw) or foreigners outside the US who are typically much further left than your average American and have been brainwashed their whole lives into thinking "Oh Americans who are Republicans? They are evil!" Your press is even more corrupt than the United States.
Thank God for the internet though, people still form their own little echo chambers where they convince themselves their world view is the only one, but the media's stranglehold on information has been crushed. Just today Newsweek announced they are basically dying.
Sorry for the long rambling stream of rants. I'm a very frustrated libertarian who views the world going to shit because everyone wants a handout.
Kids want free college, women think they deserve more money just for being women (the gender pay gap is a total myth btw), free health care, guaranteed jobs, etc.
Romney was wrong about 47% of people being parasites, the actual number is way higher.
When a host gets enough parasites it dies. America is f'ing bankrupt, we are playing shell games with fake numbers at this point, we are Enron.
The problem isn't taxes, it's spending. Romeny will spend a ton of money, Obama will spent a ton more, it's a sad situation we are in. Complains about how the internet users have their own little unchangeable world view .... Perpetrates stereotype like a boss without hesitation. Solid post. Yeah, almost as solid as: I feel like this thread is similar to the debates. The democrats or "liberals" present statistics and data or rather "arithmetic" and the republican users go "Nope, doesn'tt work that way! Didn't you hear romney or any of his studiesszzz, they say it works!". Democrats ask how and the republicans reply "Well he said it! he wouldn't lie!" What deductions the dems press "well durrr Obama is horrible look at his last 4 years!" and then the cycle continues of dodging any financial debate on Romneys currently flimsy at best plan. "derrrr Obama HAS a tax plan even though it will bankrupt us at least he has one!!" I apologize but doesn't every graph show America coming out of the recession? In fact the only argument used by REP's on how Obama has acted is "to slow" but they don't argue that America is coming out, they just think they can do it quicker. If Republicans think they can do it better, why not fucking say the plan? Who in the hell would vote for an imaginary plan where the creator won't explain the details over a plan that is actually getting America out of debt... Imagine walking over to an investors office and saying "this is what I'll do, you can't know how I'l get there give me this much money!" ... That is the sum of Romney's campaign. Because I dislike Obama's policies more than I like Romney's (or lack-there-of).
That is some ideology. "Well this guy got us out, but it's been going kinda slow and so... I think I'll take the guy who plans to put more money into military and cut everything but not explain how!"
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
lol some of these posts...
On October 19 2012 05:50 mordek wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 05:45 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On October 19 2012 05:33 kmillz wrote:On October 19 2012 04:44 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On October 19 2012 04:37 Zaqwert wrote:
Obama has had 4 years in office and his entire campaign and all his supporters have to offer at this point are binder, Big Bird, trying to scare women into voting for them on the basis of manufactured fake controversy, and standard class warfare (OMG the evilz rich!).
In 2008 you didn't hear any of that, it was all just this wishy washy "hope and change" I'm the black Messiash, give me a peace prize for showing up, etc.
In 2008 Obama was asking people to vote FOR him, which a lot of people did because he was nothing but a rorschach blot, people saw what they wanted to see).
His entire 2012 campaign is basically "Romney sucks, vote against him" which says a lot about his failed administration.
The media has been in the tank for Obama since day 1 and is going nuts right now. You go to CNN and the word "binders" appears on their front page TEN TIMES. There are 10 different "stories" trying to manufacture up a phony controversy.
Are the liberals so bankrupt on ideas and embarassed by the failure of Obama that's all they have at this point?
Obama may still win this thing, heck he's probably stil the favorite based on how the electoral college look, but you people supporting him are a disgrace.
Don't get me a wrong, Romney isn't that great, but you people are so obsessed with your Obamessiah.
It's not that suprising though, the vast majority TL is either young people who know nothing about how the world works and are duped into voting for what they think are hand outs (I'm all of 28 btw) or foreigners outside the US who are typically much further left than your average American and have been brainwashed their whole lives into thinking "Oh Americans who are Republicans? They are evil!" Your press is even more corrupt than the United States.
Thank God for the internet though, people still form their own little echo chambers where they convince themselves their world view is the only one, but the media's stranglehold on information has been crushed. Just today Newsweek announced they are basically dying.
Sorry for the long rambling stream of rants. I'm a very frustrated libertarian who views the world going to shit because everyone wants a handout.
Kids want free college, women think they deserve more money just for being women (the gender pay gap is a total myth btw), free health care, guaranteed jobs, etc.
Romney was wrong about 47% of people being parasites, the actual number is way higher.
When a host gets enough parasites it dies. America is f'ing bankrupt, we are playing shell games with fake numbers at this point, we are Enron.
The problem isn't taxes, it's spending. Romeny will spend a ton of money, Obama will spent a ton more, it's a sad situation we are in. Complains about how the internet users have their own little unchangeable world view .... Perpetrates stereotype like a boss without hesitation. Solid post. Yeah, almost as solid as: I feel like this thread is similar to the debates. The democrats or "liberals" present statistics and data or rather "arithmetic" and the republican users go "Nope, doesn'tt work that way! Didn't you hear romney or any of his studiesszzz, they say it works!". Democrats ask how and the republicans reply "Well he said it! he wouldn't lie!" What deductions the dems press "well durrr Obama is horrible look at his last 4 years!" and then the cycle continues of dodging any financial debate on Romneys currently flimsy at best plan. "derrrr Obama HAS a tax plan even though it will bankrupt us at least he has one!!" I apologize but doesn't every graph show America coming out of the recession? In fact the only argument used by REP's on how Obama has acted is "to slow" but they don't argue that America is coming out, they just think they can do it quicker. If Republicans think they can do it better, why not fucking say the plan? Who in the hell would vote for an imaginary plan where the creator won't explain the details over a plan that is actually getting America out of debt... Imagine walking over to an investors office and saying "this is what I'll do, you can't know how I'l get there give me this much money!" ... That is the sum of Romney's campaign. I really do agree with you that it seems silly. However, your analogy is a little off. Who's the investor in the office? The people of the United States? With a bank or investor you can keep the important details confidential so a competitor can't steal them. In the situation with the election if Romney actually had a viable solution (just play along here) it's understandable he doesn't give out the details... it's an edge he has over Obama who has the track record to point at and criticize. Sure he looks like he's always dodging but the alternative is if the plan is actually solid Obama could adopt it too. American people would actually win that way T.T edit: typo
so you think obama will steal his build order? that's not until the next game.
|
On October 19 2012 05:50 white_horse wrote:
I don't understand how republicans rage so much about obama and his deficits. They have a terrible record when it comes to budget responsibility. Every republican president in the past 30 years blew up the total debt and the only recent time when the yearly deficit was ever balanced was when clinton, a democrat, did it in his second term.
Also, a significant part of the federal deficit in the past 4 years is due to tax break extensions (including the bush tax cuts) for middle income families as well as lower tax receipts because of the recession. The deficit didn't just happen because obama went around throwing money at every single government agency :O
Republicans rage at Obama only; fiscal conservatives rage at both parties....
On October 19 2012 05:53 NeMeSiS3 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 05:47 kmillz wrote:On October 19 2012 05:45 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On October 19 2012 05:33 kmillz wrote:On October 19 2012 04:44 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On October 19 2012 04:37 Zaqwert wrote:
Obama has had 4 years in office and his entire campaign and all his supporters have to offer at this point are binder, Big Bird, trying to scare women into voting for them on the basis of manufactured fake controversy, and standard class warfare (OMG the evilz rich!).
In 2008 you didn't hear any of that, it was all just this wishy washy "hope and change" I'm the black Messiash, give me a peace prize for showing up, etc.
In 2008 Obama was asking people to vote FOR him, which a lot of people did because he was nothing but a rorschach blot, people saw what they wanted to see).
His entire 2012 campaign is basically "Romney sucks, vote against him" which says a lot about his failed administration.
The media has been in the tank for Obama since day 1 and is going nuts right now. You go to CNN and the word "binders" appears on their front page TEN TIMES. There are 10 different "stories" trying to manufacture up a phony controversy.
Are the liberals so bankrupt on ideas and embarassed by the failure of Obama that's all they have at this point?
Obama may still win this thing, heck he's probably stil the favorite based on how the electoral college look, but you people supporting him are a disgrace.
Don't get me a wrong, Romney isn't that great, but you people are so obsessed with your Obamessiah.
It's not that suprising though, the vast majority TL is either young people who know nothing about how the world works and are duped into voting for what they think are hand outs (I'm all of 28 btw) or foreigners outside the US who are typically much further left than your average American and have been brainwashed their whole lives into thinking "Oh Americans who are Republicans? They are evil!" Your press is even more corrupt than the United States.
Thank God for the internet though, people still form their own little echo chambers where they convince themselves their world view is the only one, but the media's stranglehold on information has been crushed. Just today Newsweek announced they are basically dying.
Sorry for the long rambling stream of rants. I'm a very frustrated libertarian who views the world going to shit because everyone wants a handout.
Kids want free college, women think they deserve more money just for being women (the gender pay gap is a total myth btw), free health care, guaranteed jobs, etc.
Romney was wrong about 47% of people being parasites, the actual number is way higher.
When a host gets enough parasites it dies. America is f'ing bankrupt, we are playing shell games with fake numbers at this point, we are Enron.
The problem isn't taxes, it's spending. Romeny will spend a ton of money, Obama will spent a ton more, it's a sad situation we are in. Complains about how the internet users have their own little unchangeable world view .... Perpetrates stereotype like a boss without hesitation. Solid post. Yeah, almost as solid as: I feel like this thread is similar to the debates. The democrats or "liberals" present statistics and data or rather "arithmetic" and the republican users go "Nope, doesn'tt work that way! Didn't you hear romney or any of his studiesszzz, they say it works!". Democrats ask how and the republicans reply "Well he said it! he wouldn't lie!" What deductions the dems press "well durrr Obama is horrible look at his last 4 years!" and then the cycle continues of dodging any financial debate on Romneys currently flimsy at best plan. "derrrr Obama HAS a tax plan even though it will bankrupt us at least he has one!!" I apologize but doesn't every graph show America coming out of the recession? In fact the only argument used by REP's on how Obama has acted is "to slow" but they don't argue that America is coming out, they just think they can do it quicker. If Republicans think they can do it better, why not fucking say the plan? Who in the hell would vote for an imaginary plan where the creator won't explain the details over a plan that is actually getting America out of debt... Imagine walking over to an investors office and saying "this is what I'll do, you can't know how I'l get there give me this much money!" ... That is the sum of Romney's campaign. Because I dislike Obama's policies more than I like Romney's (or lack-there-of). That is some ideology. "Well this guy got us out, but it's been going kinda slow and so... I think I'll take the guy who plans to put more money into military and cut everything but not explain how!"
You think Obama got us out of the economic mess? We were heading out of the worst of it just fine around the end of '08, if you ask me....
|
On October 19 2012 05:53 oneofthem wrote:lol some of these posts... Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 05:50 mordek wrote:On October 19 2012 05:45 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On October 19 2012 05:33 kmillz wrote:On October 19 2012 04:44 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On October 19 2012 04:37 Zaqwert wrote:
Obama has had 4 years in office and his entire campaign and all his supporters have to offer at this point are binder, Big Bird, trying to scare women into voting for them on the basis of manufactured fake controversy, and standard class warfare (OMG the evilz rich!).
In 2008 you didn't hear any of that, it was all just this wishy washy "hope and change" I'm the black Messiash, give me a peace prize for showing up, etc.
In 2008 Obama was asking people to vote FOR him, which a lot of people did because he was nothing but a rorschach blot, people saw what they wanted to see).
His entire 2012 campaign is basically "Romney sucks, vote against him" which says a lot about his failed administration.
The media has been in the tank for Obama since day 1 and is going nuts right now. You go to CNN and the word "binders" appears on their front page TEN TIMES. There are 10 different "stories" trying to manufacture up a phony controversy.
Are the liberals so bankrupt on ideas and embarassed by the failure of Obama that's all they have at this point?
Obama may still win this thing, heck he's probably stil the favorite based on how the electoral college look, but you people supporting him are a disgrace.
Don't get me a wrong, Romney isn't that great, but you people are so obsessed with your Obamessiah.
It's not that suprising though, the vast majority TL is either young people who know nothing about how the world works and are duped into voting for what they think are hand outs (I'm all of 28 btw) or foreigners outside the US who are typically much further left than your average American and have been brainwashed their whole lives into thinking "Oh Americans who are Republicans? They are evil!" Your press is even more corrupt than the United States.
Thank God for the internet though, people still form their own little echo chambers where they convince themselves their world view is the only one, but the media's stranglehold on information has been crushed. Just today Newsweek announced they are basically dying.
Sorry for the long rambling stream of rants. I'm a very frustrated libertarian who views the world going to shit because everyone wants a handout.
Kids want free college, women think they deserve more money just for being women (the gender pay gap is a total myth btw), free health care, guaranteed jobs, etc.
Romney was wrong about 47% of people being parasites, the actual number is way higher.
When a host gets enough parasites it dies. America is f'ing bankrupt, we are playing shell games with fake numbers at this point, we are Enron.
The problem isn't taxes, it's spending. Romeny will spend a ton of money, Obama will spent a ton more, it's a sad situation we are in. Complains about how the internet users have their own little unchangeable world view .... Perpetrates stereotype like a boss without hesitation. Solid post. Yeah, almost as solid as: I feel like this thread is similar to the debates. The democrats or "liberals" present statistics and data or rather "arithmetic" and the republican users go "Nope, doesn'tt work that way! Didn't you hear romney or any of his studiesszzz, they say it works!". Democrats ask how and the republicans reply "Well he said it! he wouldn't lie!" What deductions the dems press "well durrr Obama is horrible look at his last 4 years!" and then the cycle continues of dodging any financial debate on Romneys currently flimsy at best plan. "derrrr Obama HAS a tax plan even though it will bankrupt us at least he has one!!" I apologize but doesn't every graph show America coming out of the recession? In fact the only argument used by REP's on how Obama has acted is "to slow" but they don't argue that America is coming out, they just think they can do it quicker. If Republicans think they can do it better, why not fucking say the plan? Who in the hell would vote for an imaginary plan where the creator won't explain the details over a plan that is actually getting America out of debt... Imagine walking over to an investors office and saying "this is what I'll do, you can't know how I'l get there give me this much money!" ... That is the sum of Romney's campaign. I really do agree with you that it seems silly. However, your analogy is a little off. Who's the investor in the office? The people of the United States? With a bank or investor you can keep the important details confidential so a competitor can't steal them. In the situation with the election if Romney actually had a viable solution (just play along here) it's understandable he doesn't give out the details... it's an edge he has over Obama who has the track record to point at and criticize. Sure he looks like he's always dodging but the alternative is if the plan is actually solid Obama could adopt it too. American people would actually win that way T.T edit: typo so you think obama will steal his build order? that's not until the next game.
I'm not defending Romney -.- He brought up an analogy. I gave it some thought. Thanks for the Starcraft reference though. I would think it more akin to showing a new strategy you developed before a tournament and think no one else will use it if it's good. Actually now that I read your post again I don't understand what you're getting at.
|
The topic has moved on but I just want to say something real quick...
If you don't realize that politicians simply say stupid things to make stupid people happy, if you actually believe these politicians from Harvard and Yale believe everything they say about religion or anything else, then YOU are the idiot with a lack of understanding and education, not the politicians.
That's it. 
|
Canada847 Posts
On October 19 2012 05:01 Souma wrote:
How have the last 4 years been on an entirely different level? I am sincerely curious because I remember Republicans obstructing Clinton and Democrats obstructing Bush and I don't really see much difference between those eras and what we're seeing now. What exactly is it that makes you say this Republican congress is so different?
On October 02 2012 22:09 Souma wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2012 15:56 BluePanther wrote:On October 02 2012 13:42 Sanctimonius wrote:On October 02 2012 13:01 Kaitlin wrote:On October 02 2012 12:47 BlueBird. wrote:
The fact is Congress has an extremely low approval rating for what they are doing, so apparently that significant part of our country your talking bout is about 15% last time I heard. No, the significant part of the country I am speaking of, is enough to put a majority into the House of Representatives. Just because Congress' approval rating is shit, doesn't mean people are unhappy with what the people they voted for are doing. From my perspective, the Republicans standing firm and preventing as much Liberfail policies from being implemented is good. It doesn't mean I approve of the entire House and Senate. Two people can both be dissatisfied with Congress, yet disagree completely on what Congress should be doing. The Republican Congress has been the worst thing I've seen in politics in a long time. Seriously, if the policies Obama suggested were for the good of the country, hell even if the policies were identical to what a Republican president might suggest, they would vote it down, because it's more important that Obama fails than the country succeeds. And that, to me, is pathetic. Why would anyone support this childish behaviour, especially when it has quite literally threatened the US on a number of occasions - the one-up-manship of the debt ceiling, anyone? This Congress has one aim and one aim only, to try and make sure Obama is a one-term president - hell, arguments are already being made that Obama didn't do enough this presidency. I'm sure those arguments would be louder except they know the public will blame the Republicans at least as much as Obama. They aren't opposing his policies, they aren't disagreeing with his aims, they are taking a personal offence to his temerity in being the President of the US. Pretty sad, really, and certainly not doing anything worthwhile to earn their ridiculous tax breaks, salaries or pensions. Small wonder this has a 15% approval rating, people are getting angry that Congress is being paid to literally do nothing, and make damn sure nothing happens. Ummmmm.... the Democrats did the EXACT SAME THING to Bush. Oh OPEN YOUR EYES for once. It's one thing to agree with the policies of Republicanism, it's another thing to defend the current Republican party whose obstructionism is at an unprecedented all time high by FAR. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/9EY57.png) Democrats did the exact same thing? Not even close. Republicans broke the all-time record for filibusters during the 111th Congress, of which the previous record held was by the 110th Congress which was also led by the Republican minority (filibusters doubled compared to the 109th!). To top it all off, it's taken them an average of 139 days to confirm Circuit Court nominees compared to the 29 days it took the Bush Administration, and 99 days for District Court nominees compared to 21 days for Bush. We have TONS of vacancies in the federal courts and the Republicans are pissing off even the judiciary! They're even doing the same with executive nominations. Once again it's one thing to believe in the ideals of Republicanism. It's also nice if you'd have the balls like a couple of other posters in this thread to actually praise Republican obstructionism. But don't even try to say Democrats did the same shit. It's not even close. [/QUOTE]
Is this the only data that you're relying on? Because it doesn't seem very compelling to me. For instance, there is a lot of red in the chart during the last few years of the Bush presidency. Would that show that the republican minority in the senate was obstructing George Bush? Presumably not. So how do you go from a lot of filibusters in the senate to infer that the minority party is obstructing Obama today?
Further, the real criticism that I've heard is that it's the republican majority in the house that's been allegedly obstructing the president's agenda. But there is no filibuster in the house. Using a chart about filibusters in the senate to attack republicans in the house is misguided; you seem to be using this chart to prove something that it really doesn't have much to do with.
The other argument of course is that the republicans are resisting Obama because his policies are much more extreme and divisive than were the policies of Bush or Clinton. Thus the fact that there is more resistance to those policies shouldn't surprise anyone. Of course this is hard to establish objectively but I think it's reasonable to argue that Obama set the tone for his presidency with his massive stimulus bill and then Obamacare which were both purely partisan bills in which no effort was made to get any bipartisan buy-in.
Edit: quotes got screwed up
|
On October 19 2012 06:03 jdseemoreglass wrote:The topic has moved on but I just want to say something real quick... If you don't realize that politicians simply say stupid things to make stupid people happy, if you actually believe these politicians from Harvard and Yale believe everything they say about religion or anything else, then YOU are the idiot with a lack of understanding and education, not the politicians. That's it.
Agreed. There's bigger fish to fry here, folks.
I've a question: I'm looking for trustworthy polls. So I'm... asking biased strangers on the Internet, lol. I'm currently looking at Politico for the moment, but if someone's found a better poll-tracker, I'm all eyes and ears.
|
On October 19 2012 06:06 cLAN.Anax wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 06:03 jdseemoreglass wrote:The topic has moved on but I just want to say something real quick... If you don't realize that politicians simply say stupid things to make stupid people happy, if you actually believe these politicians from Harvard and Yale believe everything they say about religion or anything else, then YOU are the idiot with a lack of understanding and education, not the politicians. That's it. Agreed. There's bigger fish to fry here, folks. I've a question: I'm looking for trustworthy polls. So I'm... asking biased strangers on the Internet, lol. I'm currently looking at Politico for the moment, but if someone's found a better poll-tracker, I'm all eyes and ears.
Trustworthy poll? I don't know about that, but it could probably help to look at a poll of polls (average). Real Clear Politics tends to be pretty good.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/
|
On October 19 2012 05:57 cLAN.Anax wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 05:50 white_horse wrote:
I don't understand how republicans rage so much about obama and his deficits. They have a terrible record when it comes to budget responsibility. Every republican president in the past 30 years blew up the total debt and the only recent time when the yearly deficit was ever balanced was when clinton, a democrat, did it in his second term.
Also, a significant part of the federal deficit in the past 4 years is due to tax break extensions (including the bush tax cuts) for middle income families as well as lower tax receipts because of the recession. The deficit didn't just happen because obama went around throwing money at every single government agency :O Republicans rage at Obama only; fiscal conservatives rage at both parties.... Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 05:53 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On October 19 2012 05:47 kmillz wrote:On October 19 2012 05:45 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On October 19 2012 05:33 kmillz wrote:On October 19 2012 04:44 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On October 19 2012 04:37 Zaqwert wrote:
Obama has had 4 years in office and his entire campaign and all his supporters have to offer at this point are binder, Big Bird, trying to scare women into voting for them on the basis of manufactured fake controversy, and standard class warfare (OMG the evilz rich!).
In 2008 you didn't hear any of that, it was all just this wishy washy "hope and change" I'm the black Messiash, give me a peace prize for showing up, etc.
In 2008 Obama was asking people to vote FOR him, which a lot of people did because he was nothing but a rorschach blot, people saw what they wanted to see).
His entire 2012 campaign is basically "Romney sucks, vote against him" which says a lot about his failed administration.
The media has been in the tank for Obama since day 1 and is going nuts right now. You go to CNN and the word "binders" appears on their front page TEN TIMES. There are 10 different "stories" trying to manufacture up a phony controversy.
Are the liberals so bankrupt on ideas and embarassed by the failure of Obama that's all they have at this point?
Obama may still win this thing, heck he's probably stil the favorite based on how the electoral college look, but you people supporting him are a disgrace.
Don't get me a wrong, Romney isn't that great, but you people are so obsessed with your Obamessiah.
It's not that suprising though, the vast majority TL is either young people who know nothing about how the world works and are duped into voting for what they think are hand outs (I'm all of 28 btw) or foreigners outside the US who are typically much further left than your average American and have been brainwashed their whole lives into thinking "Oh Americans who are Republicans? They are evil!" Your press is even more corrupt than the United States.
Thank God for the internet though, people still form their own little echo chambers where they convince themselves their world view is the only one, but the media's stranglehold on information has been crushed. Just today Newsweek announced they are basically dying.
Sorry for the long rambling stream of rants. I'm a very frustrated libertarian who views the world going to shit because everyone wants a handout.
Kids want free college, women think they deserve more money just for being women (the gender pay gap is a total myth btw), free health care, guaranteed jobs, etc.
Romney was wrong about 47% of people being parasites, the actual number is way higher.
When a host gets enough parasites it dies. America is f'ing bankrupt, we are playing shell games with fake numbers at this point, we are Enron.
The problem isn't taxes, it's spending. Romeny will spend a ton of money, Obama will spent a ton more, it's a sad situation we are in. Complains about how the internet users have their own little unchangeable world view .... Perpetrates stereotype like a boss without hesitation. Solid post. Yeah, almost as solid as: I feel like this thread is similar to the debates. The democrats or "liberals" present statistics and data or rather "arithmetic" and the republican users go "Nope, doesn'tt work that way! Didn't you hear romney or any of his studiesszzz, they say it works!". Democrats ask how and the republicans reply "Well he said it! he wouldn't lie!" What deductions the dems press "well durrr Obama is horrible look at his last 4 years!" and then the cycle continues of dodging any financial debate on Romneys currently flimsy at best plan. "derrrr Obama HAS a tax plan even though it will bankrupt us at least he has one!!" I apologize but doesn't every graph show America coming out of the recession? In fact the only argument used by REP's on how Obama has acted is "to slow" but they don't argue that America is coming out, they just think they can do it quicker. If Republicans think they can do it better, why not fucking say the plan? Who in the hell would vote for an imaginary plan where the creator won't explain the details over a plan that is actually getting America out of debt... Imagine walking over to an investors office and saying "this is what I'll do, you can't know how I'l get there give me this much money!" ... That is the sum of Romney's campaign. Because I dislike Obama's policies more than I like Romney's (or lack-there-of). That is some ideology. "Well this guy got us out, but it's been going kinda slow and so... I think I'll take the guy who plans to put more money into military and cut everything but not explain how!" You think Obama got us out of the economic mess? We were heading out of the worst of it just fine around the end of '08, if you ask me....
Fine at the end of 08... Some people have absolutely no comprehension of how recessions work and it's scary.
|
On October 19 2012 06:17 NeMeSiS3 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 05:57 cLAN.Anax wrote:On October 19 2012 05:50 white_horse wrote:
I don't understand how republicans rage so much about obama and his deficits. They have a terrible record when it comes to budget responsibility. Every republican president in the past 30 years blew up the total debt and the only recent time when the yearly deficit was ever balanced was when clinton, a democrat, did it in his second term.
Also, a significant part of the federal deficit in the past 4 years is due to tax break extensions (including the bush tax cuts) for middle income families as well as lower tax receipts because of the recession. The deficit didn't just happen because obama went around throwing money at every single government agency :O Republicans rage at Obama only; fiscal conservatives rage at both parties.... On October 19 2012 05:53 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On October 19 2012 05:47 kmillz wrote:On October 19 2012 05:45 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On October 19 2012 05:33 kmillz wrote:On October 19 2012 04:44 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On October 19 2012 04:37 Zaqwert wrote:
Obama has had 4 years in office and his entire campaign and all his supporters have to offer at this point are binder, Big Bird, trying to scare women into voting for them on the basis of manufactured fake controversy, and standard class warfare (OMG the evilz rich!).
In 2008 you didn't hear any of that, it was all just this wishy washy "hope and change" I'm the black Messiash, give me a peace prize for showing up, etc.
In 2008 Obama was asking people to vote FOR him, which a lot of people did because he was nothing but a rorschach blot, people saw what they wanted to see).
His entire 2012 campaign is basically "Romney sucks, vote against him" which says a lot about his failed administration.
The media has been in the tank for Obama since day 1 and is going nuts right now. You go to CNN and the word "binders" appears on their front page TEN TIMES. There are 10 different "stories" trying to manufacture up a phony controversy.
Are the liberals so bankrupt on ideas and embarassed by the failure of Obama that's all they have at this point?
Obama may still win this thing, heck he's probably stil the favorite based on how the electoral college look, but you people supporting him are a disgrace.
Don't get me a wrong, Romney isn't that great, but you people are so obsessed with your Obamessiah.
It's not that suprising though, the vast majority TL is either young people who know nothing about how the world works and are duped into voting for what they think are hand outs (I'm all of 28 btw) or foreigners outside the US who are typically much further left than your average American and have been brainwashed their whole lives into thinking "Oh Americans who are Republicans? They are evil!" Your press is even more corrupt than the United States.
Thank God for the internet though, people still form their own little echo chambers where they convince themselves their world view is the only one, but the media's stranglehold on information has been crushed. Just today Newsweek announced they are basically dying.
Sorry for the long rambling stream of rants. I'm a very frustrated libertarian who views the world going to shit because everyone wants a handout.
Kids want free college, women think they deserve more money just for being women (the gender pay gap is a total myth btw), free health care, guaranteed jobs, etc.
Romney was wrong about 47% of people being parasites, the actual number is way higher.
When a host gets enough parasites it dies. America is f'ing bankrupt, we are playing shell games with fake numbers at this point, we are Enron.
The problem isn't taxes, it's spending. Romeny will spend a ton of money, Obama will spent a ton more, it's a sad situation we are in. Complains about how the internet users have their own little unchangeable world view .... Perpetrates stereotype like a boss without hesitation. Solid post. Yeah, almost as solid as: I feel like this thread is similar to the debates. The democrats or "liberals" present statistics and data or rather "arithmetic" and the republican users go "Nope, doesn'tt work that way! Didn't you hear romney or any of his studiesszzz, they say it works!". Democrats ask how and the republicans reply "Well he said it! he wouldn't lie!" What deductions the dems press "well durrr Obama is horrible look at his last 4 years!" and then the cycle continues of dodging any financial debate on Romneys currently flimsy at best plan. "derrrr Obama HAS a tax plan even though it will bankrupt us at least he has one!!" I apologize but doesn't every graph show America coming out of the recession? In fact the only argument used by REP's on how Obama has acted is "to slow" but they don't argue that America is coming out, they just think they can do it quicker. If Republicans think they can do it better, why not fucking say the plan? Who in the hell would vote for an imaginary plan where the creator won't explain the details over a plan that is actually getting America out of debt... Imagine walking over to an investors office and saying "this is what I'll do, you can't know how I'l get there give me this much money!" ... That is the sum of Romney's campaign. Because I dislike Obama's policies more than I like Romney's (or lack-there-of). That is some ideology. "Well this guy got us out, but it's been going kinda slow and so... I think I'll take the guy who plans to put more money into military and cut everything but not explain how!" You think Obama got us out of the economic mess? We were heading out of the worst of it just fine around the end of '08, if you ask me.... Fine at the end of 08... Some people have absolutely no comprehension of how recessions work and it's scary.
He didn't say we were fine at the end of 08, he said we were heading out of the worst of the recession. Technically speaking, the recession ended June 2009, so the worst of it probably was around the end of 08.
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On October 19 2012 06:03 ziggurat wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 05:01 Souma wrote:
How have the last 4 years been on an entirely different level? I am sincerely curious because I remember Republicans obstructing Clinton and Democrats obstructing Bush and I don't really see much difference between those eras and what we're seeing now. What exactly is it that makes you say this Republican congress is so different? Show nested quote +On October 02 2012 22:09 Souma wrote:On October 02 2012 15:56 BluePanther wrote:On October 02 2012 13:42 Sanctimonius wrote:On October 02 2012 13:01 Kaitlin wrote:On October 02 2012 12:47 BlueBird. wrote:
The fact is Congress has an extremely low approval rating for what they are doing, so apparently that significant part of our country your talking bout is about 15% last time I heard. No, the significant part of the country I am speaking of, is enough to put a majority into the House of Representatives. Just because Congress' approval rating is shit, doesn't mean people are unhappy with what the people they voted for are doing. From my perspective, the Republicans standing firm and preventing as much Liberfail policies from being implemented is good. It doesn't mean I approve of the entire House and Senate. Two people can both be dissatisfied with Congress, yet disagree completely on what Congress should be doing. The Republican Congress has been the worst thing I've seen in politics in a long time. Seriously, if the policies Obama suggested were for the good of the country, hell even if the policies were identical to what a Republican president might suggest, they would vote it down, because it's more important that Obama fails than the country succeeds. And that, to me, is pathetic. Why would anyone support this childish behaviour, especially when it has quite literally threatened the US on a number of occasions - the one-up-manship of the debt ceiling, anyone? This Congress has one aim and one aim only, to try and make sure Obama is a one-term president - hell, arguments are already being made that Obama didn't do enough this presidency. I'm sure those arguments would be louder except they know the public will blame the Republicans at least as much as Obama. They aren't opposing his policies, they aren't disagreeing with his aims, they are taking a personal offence to his temerity in being the President of the US. Pretty sad, really, and certainly not doing anything worthwhile to earn their ridiculous tax breaks, salaries or pensions. Small wonder this has a 15% approval rating, people are getting angry that Congress is being paid to literally do nothing, and make damn sure nothing happens. Ummmmm.... the Democrats did the EXACT SAME THING to Bush. Oh OPEN YOUR EYES for once. It's one thing to agree with the policies of Republicanism, it's another thing to defend the current Republican party whose obstructionism is at an unprecedented all time high by FAR. Democrats did the exact same thing? Not even close. Republicans broke the all-time record for filibusters during the 111th Congress, of which the previous record held was by the 110th Congress which was also led by the Republican minority (filibusters doubled compared to the 109th!). To top it all off, it's taken them an average of 139 days to confirm Circuit Court nominees compared to the 29 days it took the Bush Administration, and 99 days for District Court nominees compared to 21 days for Bush. We have TONS of vacancies in the federal courts and the Republicans are pissing off even the judiciary! They're even doing the same with executive nominations. Once again it's one thing to believe in the ideals of Republicanism. It's also nice if you'd have the balls like a couple of other posters in this thread to actually praise Republican obstructionism. But don't even try to say Democrats did the same shit. It's not even close.
Is this the only data that you're relying on? Because it doesn't seem very compelling to me. For instance, there is a lot of red in the chart during the last few years of the Bush presidency. Would that show that the republican minority in the senate was obstructing George Bush? Presumably not. So how do you go from a lot of filibusters in the senate to infer that the minority party is obstructing Obama today?
Further, the real criticism that I've heard is that it's the republican majority in the house that's been allegedly obstructing the president's agenda. But there is no filibuster in the house. Using a chart about filibusters in the senate to attack republicans in the house is misguided; you seem to be using this chart to prove something that it really doesn't have much to do with.
The other argument of course is that the republicans are resisting Obama because his policies are much more extreme and divisive than were the policies of Bush or Clinton. Thus the fact that there is more resistance to those policies shouldn't surprise anyone. Of course this is hard to establish objectively but I think it's reasonable to argue that Obama set the tone for his presidency with his massive stimulus bill and then Obamacare which were both purely partisan bills in which no effort was made to get any bipartisan buy-in.
Edit: quotes got screwed up
If this isn't compelling evidence I don't know what is. You don't seem to understand how the American legislature works so let me brief you on it. The argument is that the Republicans are obstructing both Obama and all Democratic legislation (which is what you saw during the last two years of the Bush presidency). Policies are drafted in a committee then introduced through the House then the Senate. So if Obama has a policy he wants to introduce he first has to get it approved by the House (tough luck). If it passes the House then the Senate has to approve it, which is hard because of the filibusters.
And yet, you still close your eyes to the one undeniable proof of Republican obstructionism: the federal judicial confirmations. It's nothing short of petty.
|
Canada847 Posts
On October 19 2012 06:24 Souma wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 06:03 ziggurat wrote:On October 19 2012 05:01 Souma wrote:
How have the last 4 years been on an entirely different level? I am sincerely curious because I remember Republicans obstructing Clinton and Democrats obstructing Bush and I don't really see much difference between those eras and what we're seeing now. What exactly is it that makes you say this Republican congress is so different? On October 02 2012 22:09 Souma wrote:On October 02 2012 15:56 BluePanther wrote:On October 02 2012 13:42 Sanctimonius wrote:On October 02 2012 13:01 Kaitlin wrote:On October 02 2012 12:47 BlueBird. wrote:
The fact is Congress has an extremely low approval rating for what they are doing, so apparently that significant part of our country your talking bout is about 15% last time I heard. No, the significant part of the country I am speaking of, is enough to put a majority into the House of Representatives. Just because Congress' approval rating is shit, doesn't mean people are unhappy with what the people they voted for are doing. From my perspective, the Republicans standing firm and preventing as much Liberfail policies from being implemented is good. It doesn't mean I approve of the entire House and Senate. Two people can both be dissatisfied with Congress, yet disagree completely on what Congress should be doing. The Republican Congress has been the worst thing I've seen in politics in a long time. Seriously, if the policies Obama suggested were for the good of the country, hell even if the policies were identical to what a Republican president might suggest, they would vote it down, because it's more important that Obama fails than the country succeeds. And that, to me, is pathetic. Why would anyone support this childish behaviour, especially when it has quite literally threatened the US on a number of occasions - the one-up-manship of the debt ceiling, anyone? This Congress has one aim and one aim only, to try and make sure Obama is a one-term president - hell, arguments are already being made that Obama didn't do enough this presidency. I'm sure those arguments would be louder except they know the public will blame the Republicans at least as much as Obama. They aren't opposing his policies, they aren't disagreeing with his aims, they are taking a personal offence to his temerity in being the President of the US. Pretty sad, really, and certainly not doing anything worthwhile to earn their ridiculous tax breaks, salaries or pensions. Small wonder this has a 15% approval rating, people are getting angry that Congress is being paid to literally do nothing, and make damn sure nothing happens. Ummmmm.... the Democrats did the EXACT SAME THING to Bush. Oh OPEN YOUR EYES for once. It's one thing to agree with the policies of Republicanism, it's another thing to defend the current Republican party whose obstructionism is at an unprecedented all time high by FAR. Democrats did the exact same thing? Not even close. Republicans broke the all-time record for filibusters during the 111th Congress, of which the previous record held was by the 110th Congress which was also led by the Republican minority (filibusters doubled compared to the 109th!). To top it all off, it's taken them an average of 139 days to confirm Circuit Court nominees compared to the 29 days it took the Bush Administration, and 99 days for District Court nominees compared to 21 days for Bush. We have TONS of vacancies in the federal courts and the Republicans are pissing off even the judiciary! They're even doing the same with executive nominations. Once again it's one thing to believe in the ideals of Republicanism. It's also nice if you'd have the balls like a couple of other posters in this thread to actually praise Republican obstructionism. But don't even try to say Democrats did the same shit. It's not even close. Show nested quote +Is this the only data that you're relying on? Because it doesn't seem very compelling to me. For instance, there is a lot of red in the chart during the last few years of the Bush presidency. Would that show that the republican minority in the senate was obstructing George Bush? Presumably not. So how do you go from a lot of filibusters in the senate to infer that the minority party is obstructing Obama today?
Further, the real criticism that I've heard is that it's the republican majority in the house that's been allegedly obstructing the president's agenda. But there is no filibuster in the house. Using a chart about filibusters in the senate to attack republicans in the house is misguided; you seem to be using this chart to prove something that it really doesn't have much to do with.
The other argument of course is that the republicans are resisting Obama because his policies are much more extreme and divisive than were the policies of Bush or Clinton. Thus the fact that there is more resistance to those policies shouldn't surprise anyone. Of course this is hard to establish objectively but I think it's reasonable to argue that Obama set the tone for his presidency with his massive stimulus bill and then Obamacare which were both purely partisan bills in which no effort was made to get any bipartisan buy-in.
Edit: quotes got screwed up If this isn't compelling evidence I don't know what is. You don't seem to understand how the American legislature works so let me brief you on it. The argument is that the Republicans are obstructing both Obama and all Democratic legislation (which is what you saw during the last two years of the Bush presidency). Policies are drafted in a committee then introduced through the House then the Senate. So if Obama has a policy he wants to introduce he first has to get it approved by the House (tough luck). If it passes the House then the Senate has to approve it, which is hard because of the filibusters. And yet, you still close your eyes to the one undeniable proof of Republican obstructionism: the federal judicial confirmations. It's nothing short of petty.
So just to sum up, you claim that the Republican party has been more obstructionist of Obama in the last 4 years than any other party in modern history. Your evidence to support this is (i) that filibusters by the minority republicans are slightly higher under Obama then they were under Bush; and (ii) judicial appointments in the senate are taking longer.
Interesting.
|
On October 19 2012 06:33 ziggurat wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 06:24 Souma wrote:On October 19 2012 06:03 ziggurat wrote:On October 19 2012 05:01 Souma wrote:
How have the last 4 years been on an entirely different level? I am sincerely curious because I remember Republicans obstructing Clinton and Democrats obstructing Bush and I don't really see much difference between those eras and what we're seeing now. What exactly is it that makes you say this Republican congress is so different? On October 02 2012 22:09 Souma wrote:On October 02 2012 15:56 BluePanther wrote:On October 02 2012 13:42 Sanctimonius wrote:On October 02 2012 13:01 Kaitlin wrote:On October 02 2012 12:47 BlueBird. wrote:
The fact is Congress has an extremely low approval rating for what they are doing, so apparently that significant part of our country your talking bout is about 15% last time I heard. No, the significant part of the country I am speaking of, is enough to put a majority into the House of Representatives. Just because Congress' approval rating is shit, doesn't mean people are unhappy with what the people they voted for are doing. From my perspective, the Republicans standing firm and preventing as much Liberfail policies from being implemented is good. It doesn't mean I approve of the entire House and Senate. Two people can both be dissatisfied with Congress, yet disagree completely on what Congress should be doing. The Republican Congress has been the worst thing I've seen in politics in a long time. Seriously, if the policies Obama suggested were for the good of the country, hell even if the policies were identical to what a Republican president might suggest, they would vote it down, because it's more important that Obama fails than the country succeeds. And that, to me, is pathetic. Why would anyone support this childish behaviour, especially when it has quite literally threatened the US on a number of occasions - the one-up-manship of the debt ceiling, anyone? This Congress has one aim and one aim only, to try and make sure Obama is a one-term president - hell, arguments are already being made that Obama didn't do enough this presidency. I'm sure those arguments would be louder except they know the public will blame the Republicans at least as much as Obama. They aren't opposing his policies, they aren't disagreeing with his aims, they are taking a personal offence to his temerity in being the President of the US. Pretty sad, really, and certainly not doing anything worthwhile to earn their ridiculous tax breaks, salaries or pensions. Small wonder this has a 15% approval rating, people are getting angry that Congress is being paid to literally do nothing, and make damn sure nothing happens. Ummmmm.... the Democrats did the EXACT SAME THING to Bush. Oh OPEN YOUR EYES for once. It's one thing to agree with the policies of Republicanism, it's another thing to defend the current Republican party whose obstructionism is at an unprecedented all time high by FAR. Democrats did the exact same thing? Not even close. Republicans broke the all-time record for filibusters during the 111th Congress, of which the previous record held was by the 110th Congress which was also led by the Republican minority (filibusters doubled compared to the 109th!). To top it all off, it's taken them an average of 139 days to confirm Circuit Court nominees compared to the 29 days it took the Bush Administration, and 99 days for District Court nominees compared to 21 days for Bush. We have TONS of vacancies in the federal courts and the Republicans are pissing off even the judiciary! They're even doing the same with executive nominations. Once again it's one thing to believe in the ideals of Republicanism. It's also nice if you'd have the balls like a couple of other posters in this thread to actually praise Republican obstructionism. But don't even try to say Democrats did the same shit. It's not even close. Is this the only data that you're relying on? Because it doesn't seem very compelling to me. For instance, there is a lot of red in the chart during the last few years of the Bush presidency. Would that show that the republican minority in the senate was obstructing George Bush? Presumably not. So how do you go from a lot of filibusters in the senate to infer that the minority party is obstructing Obama today?
Further, the real criticism that I've heard is that it's the republican majority in the house that's been allegedly obstructing the president's agenda. But there is no filibuster in the house. Using a chart about filibusters in the senate to attack republicans in the house is misguided; you seem to be using this chart to prove something that it really doesn't have much to do with.
The other argument of course is that the republicans are resisting Obama because his policies are much more extreme and divisive than were the policies of Bush or Clinton. Thus the fact that there is more resistance to those policies shouldn't surprise anyone. Of course this is hard to establish objectively but I think it's reasonable to argue that Obama set the tone for his presidency with his massive stimulus bill and then Obamacare which were both purely partisan bills in which no effort was made to get any bipartisan buy-in.
Edit: quotes got screwed up If this isn't compelling evidence I don't know what is. You don't seem to understand how the American legislature works so let me brief you on it. The argument is that the Republicans are obstructing both Obama and all Democratic legislation (which is what you saw during the last two years of the Bush presidency). Policies are drafted in a committee then introduced through the House then the Senate. So if Obama has a policy he wants to introduce he first has to get it approved by the House (tough luck). If it passes the House then the Senate has to approve it, which is hard because of the filibusters. And yet, you still close your eyes to the one undeniable proof of Republican obstructionism: the federal judicial confirmations. It's nothing short of petty. So just to sum up, you claim that the Republican party has been more obstructionist of Obama in the last 4 years than any other party in modern history. Your evidence to support this is (i) that filibusters by the minority republicans are slightly higher under Obama then they were under Bush; and (ii) judicial appointments in the senate are taking longer. Interesting.
No. That is not his claim.
Hell, the republicans themselves admitted obstructionism. They openly said that their number one goal was to prevent Obama from getting re-elected. I have no idea why you are defending them.
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On October 19 2012 06:33 ziggurat wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 06:24 Souma wrote:On October 19 2012 06:03 ziggurat wrote:On October 19 2012 05:01 Souma wrote:
How have the last 4 years been on an entirely different level? I am sincerely curious because I remember Republicans obstructing Clinton and Democrats obstructing Bush and I don't really see much difference between those eras and what we're seeing now. What exactly is it that makes you say this Republican congress is so different? On October 02 2012 22:09 Souma wrote:On October 02 2012 15:56 BluePanther wrote:On October 02 2012 13:42 Sanctimonius wrote:On October 02 2012 13:01 Kaitlin wrote:On October 02 2012 12:47 BlueBird. wrote:
The fact is Congress has an extremely low approval rating for what they are doing, so apparently that significant part of our country your talking bout is about 15% last time I heard. No, the significant part of the country I am speaking of, is enough to put a majority into the House of Representatives. Just because Congress' approval rating is shit, doesn't mean people are unhappy with what the people they voted for are doing. From my perspective, the Republicans standing firm and preventing as much Liberfail policies from being implemented is good. It doesn't mean I approve of the entire House and Senate. Two people can both be dissatisfied with Congress, yet disagree completely on what Congress should be doing. The Republican Congress has been the worst thing I've seen in politics in a long time. Seriously, if the policies Obama suggested were for the good of the country, hell even if the policies were identical to what a Republican president might suggest, they would vote it down, because it's more important that Obama fails than the country succeeds. And that, to me, is pathetic. Why would anyone support this childish behaviour, especially when it has quite literally threatened the US on a number of occasions - the one-up-manship of the debt ceiling, anyone? This Congress has one aim and one aim only, to try and make sure Obama is a one-term president - hell, arguments are already being made that Obama didn't do enough this presidency. I'm sure those arguments would be louder except they know the public will blame the Republicans at least as much as Obama. They aren't opposing his policies, they aren't disagreeing with his aims, they are taking a personal offence to his temerity in being the President of the US. Pretty sad, really, and certainly not doing anything worthwhile to earn their ridiculous tax breaks, salaries or pensions. Small wonder this has a 15% approval rating, people are getting angry that Congress is being paid to literally do nothing, and make damn sure nothing happens. Ummmmm.... the Democrats did the EXACT SAME THING to Bush. Oh OPEN YOUR EYES for once. It's one thing to agree with the policies of Republicanism, it's another thing to defend the current Republican party whose obstructionism is at an unprecedented all time high by FAR. Democrats did the exact same thing? Not even close. Republicans broke the all-time record for filibusters during the 111th Congress, of which the previous record held was by the 110th Congress which was also led by the Republican minority (filibusters doubled compared to the 109th!). To top it all off, it's taken them an average of 139 days to confirm Circuit Court nominees compared to the 29 days it took the Bush Administration, and 99 days for District Court nominees compared to 21 days for Bush. We have TONS of vacancies in the federal courts and the Republicans are pissing off even the judiciary! They're even doing the same with executive nominations. Once again it's one thing to believe in the ideals of Republicanism. It's also nice if you'd have the balls like a couple of other posters in this thread to actually praise Republican obstructionism. But don't even try to say Democrats did the same shit. It's not even close. Is this the only data that you're relying on? Because it doesn't seem very compelling to me. For instance, there is a lot of red in the chart during the last few years of the Bush presidency. Would that show that the republican minority in the senate was obstructing George Bush? Presumably not. So how do you go from a lot of filibusters in the senate to infer that the minority party is obstructing Obama today?
Further, the real criticism that I've heard is that it's the republican majority in the house that's been allegedly obstructing the president's agenda. But there is no filibuster in the house. Using a chart about filibusters in the senate to attack republicans in the house is misguided; you seem to be using this chart to prove something that it really doesn't have much to do with.
The other argument of course is that the republicans are resisting Obama because his policies are much more extreme and divisive than were the policies of Bush or Clinton. Thus the fact that there is more resistance to those policies shouldn't surprise anyone. Of course this is hard to establish objectively but I think it's reasonable to argue that Obama set the tone for his presidency with his massive stimulus bill and then Obamacare which were both purely partisan bills in which no effort was made to get any bipartisan buy-in.
Edit: quotes got screwed up If this isn't compelling evidence I don't know what is. You don't seem to understand how the American legislature works so let me brief you on it. The argument is that the Republicans are obstructing both Obama and all Democratic legislation (which is what you saw during the last two years of the Bush presidency). Policies are drafted in a committee then introduced through the House then the Senate. So if Obama has a policy he wants to introduce he first has to get it approved by the House (tough luck). If it passes the House then the Senate has to approve it, which is hard because of the filibusters. And yet, you still close your eyes to the one undeniable proof of Republican obstructionism: the federal judicial confirmations. It's nothing short of petty. So just to sum up, you claim that the Republican party has been more obstructionist of Obama in the last 4 years than any other party in modern history. Your evidence to support this is (i) that filibusters by the minority republicans are slightly higher under Obama then they were under Bush; and (ii) judicial appointments in the senate are taking longer. Interesting.
Not slightly higher, two times higher than the previous minority-Democratic Senate. Minority Republicans in the Senate are not only obstructing Obama, they are being obstructive of all Democratic legislation. Do you still not understand how our legislature works?
And not just longer, five times longer. When you manage to piss off the judiciary and put a wrench into the judicial process, I say you're doing a fine job!
|
As far as filibustering is concerned, it makes sense, given the ideological stand points of the two parties, that Republicans would use it more often. They are the more Conservative party, the Democrats are more Progressive, so of course Republicans are going to attempts to maintain status quo a disproportionate amount.
Don't see how that's intrinsically bad if you strip away any feelings you have over the actual policies.
One ideology is activist, the other is reactionary to activism.
|
On October 19 2012 06:33 ziggurat wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2012 06:24 Souma wrote:On October 19 2012 06:03 ziggurat wrote:On October 19 2012 05:01 Souma wrote:
How have the last 4 years been on an entirely different level? I am sincerely curious because I remember Republicans obstructing Clinton and Democrats obstructing Bush and I don't really see much difference between those eras and what we're seeing now. What exactly is it that makes you say this Republican congress is so different? On October 02 2012 22:09 Souma wrote:On October 02 2012 15:56 BluePanther wrote:On October 02 2012 13:42 Sanctimonius wrote:On October 02 2012 13:01 Kaitlin wrote:On October 02 2012 12:47 BlueBird. wrote:
The fact is Congress has an extremely low approval rating for what they are doing, so apparently that significant part of our country your talking bout is about 15% last time I heard. No, the significant part of the country I am speaking of, is enough to put a majority into the House of Representatives. Just because Congress' approval rating is shit, doesn't mean people are unhappy with what the people they voted for are doing. From my perspective, the Republicans standing firm and preventing as much Liberfail policies from being implemented is good. It doesn't mean I approve of the entire House and Senate. Two people can both be dissatisfied with Congress, yet disagree completely on what Congress should be doing. The Republican Congress has been the worst thing I've seen in politics in a long time. Seriously, if the policies Obama suggested were for the good of the country, hell even if the policies were identical to what a Republican president might suggest, they would vote it down, because it's more important that Obama fails than the country succeeds. And that, to me, is pathetic. Why would anyone support this childish behaviour, especially when it has quite literally threatened the US on a number of occasions - the one-up-manship of the debt ceiling, anyone? This Congress has one aim and one aim only, to try and make sure Obama is a one-term president - hell, arguments are already being made that Obama didn't do enough this presidency. I'm sure those arguments would be louder except they know the public will blame the Republicans at least as much as Obama. They aren't opposing his policies, they aren't disagreeing with his aims, they are taking a personal offence to his temerity in being the President of the US. Pretty sad, really, and certainly not doing anything worthwhile to earn their ridiculous tax breaks, salaries or pensions. Small wonder this has a 15% approval rating, people are getting angry that Congress is being paid to literally do nothing, and make damn sure nothing happens. Ummmmm.... the Democrats did the EXACT SAME THING to Bush. Oh OPEN YOUR EYES for once. It's one thing to agree with the policies of Republicanism, it's another thing to defend the current Republican party whose obstructionism is at an unprecedented all time high by FAR. Democrats did the exact same thing? Not even close. Republicans broke the all-time record for filibusters during the 111th Congress, of which the previous record held was by the 110th Congress which was also led by the Republican minority (filibusters doubled compared to the 109th!). To top it all off, it's taken them an average of 139 days to confirm Circuit Court nominees compared to the 29 days it took the Bush Administration, and 99 days for District Court nominees compared to 21 days for Bush. We have TONS of vacancies in the federal courts and the Republicans are pissing off even the judiciary! They're even doing the same with executive nominations. Once again it's one thing to believe in the ideals of Republicanism. It's also nice if you'd have the balls like a couple of other posters in this thread to actually praise Republican obstructionism. But don't even try to say Democrats did the same shit. It's not even close. Is this the only data that you're relying on? Because it doesn't seem very compelling to me. For instance, there is a lot of red in the chart during the last few years of the Bush presidency. Would that show that the republican minority in the senate was obstructing George Bush? Presumably not. So how do you go from a lot of filibusters in the senate to infer that the minority party is obstructing Obama today?
Further, the real criticism that I've heard is that it's the republican majority in the house that's been allegedly obstructing the president's agenda. But there is no filibuster in the house. Using a chart about filibusters in the senate to attack republicans in the house is misguided; you seem to be using this chart to prove something that it really doesn't have much to do with.
The other argument of course is that the republicans are resisting Obama because his policies are much more extreme and divisive than were the policies of Bush or Clinton. Thus the fact that there is more resistance to those policies shouldn't surprise anyone. Of course this is hard to establish objectively but I think it's reasonable to argue that Obama set the tone for his presidency with his massive stimulus bill and then Obamacare which were both purely partisan bills in which no effort was made to get any bipartisan buy-in.
Edit: quotes got screwed up If this isn't compelling evidence I don't know what is. You don't seem to understand how the American legislature works so let me brief you on it. The argument is that the Republicans are obstructing both Obama and all Democratic legislation (which is what you saw during the last two years of the Bush presidency). Policies are drafted in a committee then introduced through the House then the Senate. So if Obama has a policy he wants to introduce he first has to get it approved by the House (tough luck). If it passes the House then the Senate has to approve it, which is hard because of the filibusters. And yet, you still close your eyes to the one undeniable proof of Republican obstructionism: the federal judicial confirmations. It's nothing short of petty. So just to sum up, you claim that the Republican party has been more obstructionist of Obama in the last 4 years than any other party in modern history. Your evidence to support this is (i) that filibusters by the minority republicans are slightly higher under Obama then they were under Bush; and (ii) judicial appointments in the senate are taking longer. Interesting.
The idea that the Republicans have not been overwhelmingly obstructionist is a fact not even the most conservative Republicans try to argue. Usually the partisan angle is that somehow Obama's policies have been so much crazier than anything else ever proposed that 100% uniform obstructionism is warranted. This is the only argument that is even remotely successful since it is almost entirely based on opinion rather than facts.
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On October 19 2012 06:37 Kimaker wrote:
As far as filibustering is concerned, it makes sense, given the ideological stand points of the two parties, that Republicans would use it more often. They are the more Conservative party, the Democrats are more Progressive, so of course Republicans are going to attempts to maintain status quo a disproportionate amount.
Don't see how that's intrinsically bad if you strip away any feelings you have over the actual policies.
One ideology is activist, the other is reactionary to activism.
It does make sense.
Doesn't mean it's excusable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
