Last night, Jon Stewart hosted four 9/11 first responders in an extraordinary segment of The Daily Show, talking about the Republican Party’s craven obstruction of a bill guaranteeing them health care, and the media’s lack of coverage of the issue. A must-see.
1 |
jamesfirecat Fri, Dec 17, 2010 9:51:28am |
This was heartbreaking to watch.
Especially the guy on the far right.
When he first started talking I couldn't help but think "Dude what is wrong with your voice.."
Then I found out that he had throat cancer....
Awkward, humiliating and enlightening all at once..
| 2 |
cineaste Fri, Dec 17, 2010 9:58:10am |
Stewart is doing a great public service here.
Congress (and let's face it, the GOP) should be shamed over this.
| 3 |
dragonfire1981 Fri, Dec 17, 2010 9:59:15am |
It's kind of disgusting to me that the Republicans killed the responders bill, yet made a strong point of getting through the tax bill that continues the tax cuts for the wealthy and even gives them a bonus in the form of the estate tax easing.
Even more sickening considering a lot of Republican politicians consider themselves very pro-American, patriotic types.
Yes, it's incredibly patriotic to shaft true American heroes and take care of the needy American corporations and rich folk.
| 4 |
jamesfirecat Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:00:56am |
re: #2 cineaste
Stewart is doing a great public service here.
Congress (and let's face it, the GOP) should be shamed over this.
What did Congress do to deserve being shamed?
///Besides establish an undemocratic necessity for supermajorities to get anything done?
| 5 |
rwmofo Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:03:43am |
Something is fishy here. The Democrat Party currently has large majorities in both houses of congress. If the Republican Party were actually the cause of holding up ensuring these guys, the media/Democrat Party would be all over it. Further, Reid, Pelosi and the President should be out front pushing this.
Something critical is being omitted in this "story" and there are those who are gullible enough to believe that the minority Republican Party is blocking coverage. I'm not that gullible.
| 6 |
wrenchwench Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:04:12am |
Kyl on working on Christmas was disgusting. What a spoiled brat.
| 7 |
cineaste Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:04:30am |
| 8 |
jamesfirecat Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:04:59am |
re: #5 rwmofo
Something is fishy here. The Democrat Party currently has large majorities in both houses of congress. If the Republican Party were actually the cause of holding up ensuring these guys, the media/Democrat Party would be all over it. Further, Reid, Pelosi and the President should be out front pushing this.
Something critical is being omitted in this "story" and there are those who are gullible enough to believe that the minority Republican Party is blocking coverage. I'm not that gullible.
"A large majority you say" ?
Guess what "Large majorities" can't do anything in the senate in the face of a determined 41 seat minority.
What do you expect the Dems to do to get the bill passed if 41 Republicans say "NO" and gentlemen's filibuster the bill?
| 9 |
jamesfirecat Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:06:09am |
| 11 |
jamesfirecat Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:07:51am |
re: #5 rwmofo
Something is fishy here. The Democrat Party currently has large majorities in both houses of congress. If the Republican Party were actually the cause of holding up ensuring these guys, the media/Democrat Party would be all over it. Further, Reid, Pelosi and the President should be out front pushing this.
Something critical is being omitted in this "story" and there are those who are gullible enough to believe that the minority Republican Party is blocking coverage. I'm not that gullible.
Also I love how you say "the minority Republican Party is blocking coverage"
As though the size of the party also determines how much control they have over the Media...
| 12 |
KingKenrod Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:08:02am |
re: #5 rwmofo
Something is fishy here. The Democrat Party currently has large majorities in both houses of congress. If the Republican Party were actually the cause of holding up ensuring these guys, the media/Democrat Party would be all over it. Further, Reid, Pelosi and the President should be out front pushing this.
Something critical is being omitted in this "story" and there are those who are gullible enough to believe that the minority Republican Party is blocking coverage. I'm not that gullible.
Collins and Murkowski have said they will support the bill. I don't know if two GOP votes are enough to stop a filibuster. However, with the tax bill issue settled, there's no reason this can't come to the floor for a quick vote.
| 13 |
MrSilverDragon Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:08:02am |
re: #6 wrenchwench
Kyl on working on Christmas was disgusting. What a spoiled brat.
Considering the salary he's getting, he should be working all the major holidays, until everything has been completed.
Yep. No sympathy here for working holidays. I've been doing it for years.
| 14 |
Political Atheist Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:08:05am |
The shame is an ongoing continuum. This should have been guaranteed by 10/11. All that money to victims and families. O.M.G. Still nothing for the first responders?!
| 15 |
mr.fusion Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:08:06am |
re: #5 rwmofo
Something critical is being omitted in this "story" and there are those who are gullible enough to believe that the minority Republican Party is blocking coverage. I'm not that
gullibleinformed.
FIFY
| 16 |
Kragar Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:08:20am |
Any one of those guys is better than 10 senators.
| 17 |
MrSilverDragon Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:09:05am |
re: #9 jamesfirecat
Do you know what the "gentleman's filibuster" is?
Sounds like something that's not safe for work... double entendre implied.
| 18 |
Kragar Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:09:06am |
re: #13 MrSilverDragon
Considering the salary he's getting, he should be working all the major holidays, until everything has been completed.
Yep. No sympathy here for working holidays. I've been doing it for years.
I've worked over holidays for years. Kyl's reasoning is bullshit.
| 19 |
cineaste Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:09:38am |
re: #5 rwmofo
Something is fishy here. The Democrat Party currently has large majorities in both houses of congress. If the Republican Party were actually the cause of holding up ensuring these guys, the media/Democrat Party would be all over it. Further, Reid, Pelosi and the President should be out front pushing this.
Something critical is being omitted in this "story" and there are those who are gullible enough to believe that the minority Republican Party is blocking coverage. I'm not that gullible.
Ok - let's go over US Civics class for those that missed it. A minority can filibuster and that can only be broken (called Cloture) by a super-majority (3/5ths of the Senate or 60 votes). There are 57 Democrats and 2 Independents in the current Senate. That is not enough to stop a filibuster. The GOP announced they would filibuster this vote until they got their tax deal.
Learning, it does a body good...
| 20 |
b_sharp Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:11:14am |
re: #17 MrSilverDragon
Sounds like something that's not safe for work... double entendre implied.
Don't you mean double entendre blatantly and explicitly stated.
| 21 |
Kronocide Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:11:50am |
Kyl's reasoning is extra double plus bullshit. The GOP did how many filibusters over the last few months, pushed for a tax bill, but now are complaining that there's not enough time to vote on First Responders and DADT?
Rhetorically and logically hollow. Zombies.
| 22 |
MrSilverDragon Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:12:02am |
re: #20 b_sharp
Don't you mean double entendre blatantly and explicitly stated.
Yes, but that would've taken longer to type.
| 23 |
NJDhockeyfan Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:12:59am |
re: #16 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
Any one of those guys is better than 10 senators.
Suppose you were an idiot. Suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.
~ Mark Twain
| 24 |
cineaste Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:13:04am |
re: #9 jamesfirecat
Do you know what the "gentleman's filibuster" is?
Yes, and I think that the Democrats should have forced the Republicans to filibuster. Let them stand on the floor, day and night, and read the phonebook while these men are dying. Let them stand there on Christmas Day and New Years Eve, don't remove the vote until it gets an up or down vote. But the Democrats want to go home too...
| 25 |
b_sharp Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:13:24am |
re: #19 cineaste
[snippety do dah]
Learning, it does a body good...
You milked that one for all its worth.
| 26 |
jamesfirecat Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:13:45am |
re: #24 cineaste
Yes, and I think that the Democrats should have forced the Republicans to filibuster. Let them stand on the floor, day and night, and read the phonebook while these men are dying. Let them stand there on Christmas Day and New Years Eve, don't remove the vote until it gets an up or down vote. But the Democrats want to go home too...
You can't force someone to do that though.
That's what the gentlmen's filibuster is.
They say they're going to do it, and then they don't have to do anything they can just sit there and flash smug shit eating grins at you.
| 27 |
Kragar Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:14:05am |
Note also that Kyl isn't even complaining about working on Christmas. He's talking about the week between Christmas and New Years, commonly know to the vast majority of the world as a work week.
| 28 |
Charles Johnson Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:15:14am |
My goodness. My, my. Pamela Geller is really out there today:
EVEN THE DEAD CANNOT ESCAPE THE VIOLATION AND HUMILIATION OF ISLAMIC SUPREMACIST GRAVE ROBBERS!
| 29 |
wrenchwench Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:15:17am |
| 30 |
Vicious Babushka Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:15:59am |
re: #27 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
Note also that Kyl isn't even complaining about working on Christmas. He's talking about the week between Christmas and New Years, commonly know to the vast majority of the world as a work week.
Ford and GM employees still get that week off, but if you are a supplier or a contractor sux 2 b u.
| 31 |
Surabaya Stew Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:16:07am |
| 32 |
CuriousLurker Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:16:53am |
re: #28 Charles
My goodness. My, my. Pamela Geller is really out there today:
EVEN THE DEAD CANNOT ESCAPE THE VIOLATION AND HUMILIATION OF ISLAMIC SUPREMACIST GRAVE ROBBERS!
Oh, for heaven's sake, now what??
| 33 |
KingKenrod Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:16:59am |
Anyone ever notice how much John Kyl looks like G'Kar?
| 34 |
Vicious Babushka Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:17:18am |
re: #28 Charles
My goodness. My, my. Pamela Geller is really out there today:
EVEN THE DEAD CANNOT ESCAPE THE VIOLATION AND HUMILIATION OF ISLAMIC SUPREMACIST GRAVE ROBBERS!
WTF
| 35 |
Political Atheist Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:17:58am |
re: #28 Charles
Is she using the rant generator to save time now?!
| 36 |
moose9t9 Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:18:00am |
This definitely had the lump in throat effect on me. I'm a bit of a cynic these days because of things like this. Senators and Representatives do this shit because they don't fear the electorate anymore. We sit around and ask ourselves "Why isn't the mainstream media covering this?" The truth is we, the populace, will have forgotten this act by the time its voting time. Breaks my heart really.
| 37 |
cineaste Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:18:17am |
re: #26 jamesfirecat
You can't force someone to do that though.
That's what the gentlmen's filibuster is.
They say they're going to do it, and then they don't have to do anything they can just sit there and flash smug shit eating grins at you.
My understanding is the Gentlemen's Filibuster was by mutual consent. That is a level of detail in Senate Parliamentary Procedure I don't have though, so I may well be wrong.
| 38 |
Kragar Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:18:25am |
re: #28 Charles
My goodness. My, my. Pamela Geller is really out there today:
EVEN THE DEAD CANNOT ESCAPE THE VIOLATION AND HUMILIATION OF ISLAMIC SUPREMACIST GRAVE ROBBERS!
That "cartoon" of her and Spencer was creepy.
| 39 |
MrSilverDragon Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:18:56am |
re: #28 Charles
My goodness. My, my. Pamela Geller is really out there today:
EVEN THE DEAD CANNOT ESCAPE THE VIOLATION AND HUMILIATION OF ISLAMIC SUPREMACIST GRAVE ROBBERS!
Jeez, that sounds like a ranting of a syphilitic mind.
| 40 |
jamesfirecat Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:19:27am |
re: #37 cineaste
My understanding is the Gentlemen's Filibuster was by mutual consent. That is a level of detail in Senate Parliamentary Procedure I don't have though, so I may well be wrong.
It's by "mutual consent" In that the senate sets its rules every time it opens every two years.
The next senate could do away with it by majority vote, but this one can't do anything about it now that they're underway....
| 41 |
Charles Johnson Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:19:33am |
re: #28 Charles
My goodness. My, my. Pamela Geller is really out there today:
EVEN THE DEAD CANNOT ESCAPE THE VIOLATION AND HUMILIATION OF ISLAMIC SUPREMACIST GRAVE ROBBERS!
Sounds like a quote from an Ed Wood movie.
| 42 |
Kragar Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:20:04am |
re: #30 Alouette
Ford and GM employees still get that week off, but if you are a supplier or a contractor sux 2 b u.
My office works the next 2 weeks, but none of the people we do business with do, so its movies, 2 hour lunches, and leaving early till 2011.
| 44 |
Varek Raith Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:21:45am |
re: #5 rwmofo
Something is fishy here. The Democrat Party currently has large majorities in both houses of congress. If the Republican Party were actually the cause of holding up ensuring these guys, the media/Democrat Party would be all over it. Further, Reid, Pelosi and the President should be out front pushing this.
Something critical is being omitted in this "story" and there are those who are gullible enough to believe that the minority Republican Party is blocking coverage. I'm not that gullible.
Your ignorance on how the House and Senate operate is quite astounding.
| 45 |
jamesfirecat Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:21:51am |
re: #40 jamesfirecat
It's by "mutual consent" In that the senate sets its rules every time it opens every two years.
The next senate could do away with it by majority vote, but this one can't do anything about it now that they're underway...
At least this is my understanding of it.
Do we have any well versed lizards here who could tell us more about the gentlemen's filibuster and if/when both parties have to agree with it?
| 46 |
MrSilverDragon Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:21:56am |
re: #42 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
My office works the next 2 weeks, but none of the people we do business with do, so its movies, 2 hour lunches, and leaving early till 2011.
I work at an ISP, and since the Internet never sleeps, it's work 24x7. There are times I want to throw our paging system into a giant bonfire, but that's why I get paid the big bucks... all 6 of them!
| 47 |
cineaste Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:21:58am |
re: #40 jamesfirecat
It's by "mutual consent" In that the senate sets its rules every time it opens every two years.
The next senate could do away with it by majority vote, but this one can't do anything about it now that they're underway...
What I meant by 'mutual consent' was that the Gentlemen's Filibuster is not a Senate Rule but, rather, just something that everyone agrees to adhere to out of courtesy to each other. If someone says that they're going to Filibuster that nobody will actually make them do it. I did not realize it was an actual, official rule.
| 48 |
Surabaya Stew Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:22:16am |
re: #28 Charles
My goodness. My, my. Pamela Geller is really out there today:
EVEN THE DEAD CANNOT ESCAPE THE VIOLATION AND HUMILIATION OF ISLAMIC SUPREMACIST GRAVE ROBBERS!
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the funds from the 9/11 1st Responders bill going to folks who are sick or widowed, AKA, alive? How does this even effect the dead? And just what do muslims have to do with this anyway?
Sigh....
| 49 |
bluecheese Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:25:48am |
re: #19 cineaste
The GOP announced they would filibuster this vote until they got their tax deal.
So is this the reason that they are giving for opposing this vote? I seem to recall someone complaining about costs/not enough oversight on the bill somewhere....
I can't help but think that the facts that these are people that are in a state that the Republicans will never win, and that they are all union workers are factors as well. They also seem quite confident that there will be no political price to pay for it in other states either.
It is baffling to me that something could not be worked out to get this done. What the fuck kind of idiots are holding up the show up there in DC?
| 50 |
Kragar Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:25:59am |
re: #48 Surabaya Stew
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the funds from the 9/11 1st Responders bill going to folks who are sick or widowed, AKA, alive? How does this even effect the dead? And just what do muslims have to do with this anyway?
Sigh...
I believe this comment was in reference to the news out of Kosovo.
| 51 |
Vicious Babushka Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:26:59am |
re: #42 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
My office works the next 2 weeks, but none of the people we do business with do, so its movies, 2 hour lunches, and leaving early till 2011.
Unless you have an objective that has to be achieved by end of 2010
| 52 |
jamesfirecat Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:27:38am |
re: #47 cineaste
What I meant by 'mutual consent' was that the Gentlemen's Filibuster is not a Senate Rule but, rather, just something that everyone agrees to adhere to out of courtesy to each other. If someone says that they're going to Filibuster that nobody will actually make them do it. I did not realize it was an actual, official rule.
Here
[Link: www.nationalreview.com...]
Yeah it's not something you agree as a point of conduct, it's a rule.
A guy can call for a filibuster and then he's free to go home put his feet up and sleep knowing he did his job and unless 60 votes show up, the issue can't be voted on, doesn't have to talk doesn't have to even be in the room or the building.
This is a problem with America, far too few people realize exactly how the modern fillibuster works....
| 53 |
SanFranciscoZionist Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:28:04am |
re: #16 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
Any one of those guys is better than 10 senators.
Hell, all 100 put together, and that includes the ones I like.
| 54 |
Kragar Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:28:43am |
re: #51 Alouette
Unless you have an objective that has to be achieved by end of 2010
Nope, we're good.
| 55 |
lawhawk Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:28:47am |
re: #48 Surabaya Stew
If this fact sheet is accurate for the current version under consideration, then the Zadroga bill would reopen the original VCF to allow for responders and others who became ill after the original close date:
Reopens September 11th Victims Compensation Fund for individuals who did not file before or became ill after the original December 22, 2003 deadline.
• Allows for adjustment of previous awards if the Special Master of the fund determines the medical conditions of the claimant warrants an adjustment.
• Amends eligibility rules so that responders to the 9/11 attacks who arrived later than the first 96 hours could be eligible if they experienced illness or injury from their work at the site.
It would enable families of those who died to obtain compensation for their losses/illnesses.
Additional background on the whole Ground Zero responder stuff can be found back on my blog (under WTC cough or James Zadroga).
| 56 |
b_sharp Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:28:57am |
re: #53 SanFranciscoZionist
Hell, all 100 put together, and that includes the ones I like.
Then why do you keep electing them?
| 57 |
Varek Raith Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:29:17am |
re: #5 rwmofo
Come on, you can't just leave it at this...
Explain why you think the GOP is filibustering this bill and why you need to deflect blame to the democrats.
| 58 |
Kragar Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:31:43am |
Jindal sand berm project was a colossal waste of time and money
In emphatic language, the bi-partisan commission announced that it can "comfortably conclude that the decision to green-light the underwhelmingly effective, overwhelmingly expensive Louisiana berms project was flawed."
Take the simple question of oil containment. "Estimates vary, and no precise figures are available," the report notes. "But no estimates of how much oil the berms captured are much greater than 1,000 total barrels. In comparison, according to peer-reviewed government estimates released in November, burning, skimming, and chemical dispersion addressed a total of between 890,000 and 1.85 million barrels spilled from the Macondo well."
In a statement emailed to The Lookout, Jindal blasted the report as "partisan revisionist history at taxpayer expense" and curiously invoked the name of a bygone populist Louisiana governor with a legacy of corruption.
| 59 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:31:45am |
Okay, got it. The grave robbers were grave movers. Robbing implies they removed something.
| 60 |
garzooma Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:32:18am |
and the media’s lack of coverage of the issue.
Now, now, Al Jazeera covered it. That was the funniest part of the segment.
Glad to see Giuliani calling it "a very big mistake"
| 61 |
SanFranciscoZionist Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:32:29am |
re: #56 b_sharp
Then why do you keep electing them?
I don't think they're bad people. They just can't hold a candle to 9/11 first responders.
Different callings, different walks of life.
| 62 |
Surabaya Stew Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:32:42am |
re: #50 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
I believe this comment was in reference to the news out of Kosovo.
Was it? Could very well be. I just can't bear to look up the exact target of Harpy's ranting - plus my job wouldn't like it either. :-D
| 63 |
Cineaste Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:33:31am |
re: #49 bluecheese
So is this the reason that they are giving for opposing this vote? I seem to recall someone complaining about costs/not enough oversight on the bill somewhere...
They said a lot of things, but on November 29th, the Republicans sent a signed letter to Harry Reid that said, in part:
"...we write to inform you that we will not agree to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to any legislative item until the Senate has acted to fund the government and we have prevented the tax increase that is currently awaiting all American taxpayers. With little time left in this Congressional session, legislative scheduling should be focused on these critical priorities. while there are other items that might ultimately be worthy of the Senate's attention, we cannot agree to prioritize any matters above the critical issues of funding the government and preventing a job-killing tax hike."
Seems pretty clear to me.
| 64 |
lawhawk Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:35:13am |
re: #57 Varek Raith
An earlier iteration of the bill was attached by Democrats to other legislation - the military appropriation bill, which GOPers opposed because of the DADT provisions. That was at least defensible on political grounds.
The clean version now under consideration is indefensible by any politician who votes against it and particularly reprehensible by GOPers who are opposed to it (some claiming it is fiscally irresponsible, but others simply oppose it because the Democrats support). These responders went to Ground Zero to provide relief and recovery of thousands murdered on 9/11 and a portion of those responders relied on government proclamations that the air was safe to breathe. That was anything but true as it turned out.
| 65 |
Charles Johnson Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:35:46am |
Wow. Geller is REALLY off her meds. She posted another pro-Serbian genocide article, claiming that Bosnian Muslims "harvested Serbian organs."
| 66 |
sagehen Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:36:41am |
re: #24 cineaste
Yes, and I think that the Democrats should have forced the Republicans to filibuster. Let them stand on the floor, day and night, and read the phonebook while these men are dying. Let them stand there on Christmas Day and New Years Eve, don't remove the vote until it gets an up or down vote. But the Democrats want to go home too...
Merkley (OR) and McCaskill (MO) are proposing some rule changes, when the new rules are settled for the new Congress in January. I'm loving the plan, but not so sure if it'll pass.
1. There can be no filibustering a motion to open debate. Ever.
2. If the minority wants to try to filibuster the close of debate, to block a vote -- you have to keep debating. It doesn't have to be just one person, all the people who object can take turns, but they have to stand up and talk about it and talk about it and talk and talk and talk, live on C-Span, for as long as it takes to either persuade a few away from the majority, or for the minority to run out of things they're willing to stand up and say in public. If the majority can gather 60 they can halt debate, or if the minority runs out of things to say it halts debate and goes to a vote. You should only be able to filibuster things you really feel strongly enough about to do that.
3. No anonymous holds. At all. Put your name on it, and stand up and say why.
| 67 |
Cineaste Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:37:52am |
re: #52 jamesfirecat
Here
[Link: www.nationalreview.com...]
Yeah it's not something you agree as a point of conduct, it's a rule.
A guy can call for a filibuster and then he's free to go home put his feet up and sleep knowing he did his job and unless 60 votes show up, the issue can't be voted on, doesn't have to talk doesn't have to even be in the room or the building.
This is a problem with America, far too few people realize exactly how the modern fillibuster works...
I read that article too but it says that it's not a rule, it's an agreement. Hence the last paragraph where she says that it shouldn't be observed.
| 68 |
jamesfirecat Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:37:55am |
re: #66 sagehen
Merkley (OR) and McCaskill (MO) are proposing some rule changes, when the new rules are settled for the new Congress in January. I'm loving the plan, but not so sure if it'll pass.
1. There can be no filibustering a motion to open debate. Ever.
2. If the minority wants to try to filibuster the close of debate, to block a vote -- you have to keep debating. It doesn't have to be just one person, all the people who object can take turns, but they have to stand up and talk about it and talk about it and talk and talk and talk, live on C-Span, for as long as it takes to either persuade a few away from the majority, or for the minority to run out of things they're willing to stand up and say in public. If the majority can gather 60 they can halt debate, or if the minority runs out of things to say it halts debate and goes to a vote. You should only be able to filibuster things you really feel strongly enough about to do that.
3. No anonymous holds. At all. Put your name on it, and stand up and say why.
There is nothing in that plan I disagree with....
| 69 |
Big Steve Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:38:07am |
re: #65 Charles
Wow. Geller is REALLY off her meds. She posted another pro-Serbian genocide article, claiming that Bosnian Muslims "harvested Serbian organs."
Ahhh....well that explains where her brain went!
| 70 |
Kragar Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:38:14am |
re: #65 Charles
Wow. Geller is REALLY off her meds. She posted another pro-Serbian genocide article, claiming that Bosnian Muslims "harvested Serbian organs."
Trust Harpy to report allegations as established facts.
| 71 |
Charles Johnson Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:38:38am |
If anyone doubts that a lot of right wingers are climate change deniers for religious reasons -- have a look at this:
[Link: www.bluecollarphilosophy.com...]
| 72 |
Vicious Babushka Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:38:39am |
| 73 |
nutz4Tuna Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:39:42am |
re: #65 Charles
Wow. Geller is REALLY off her meds. She posted another pro-Serbian genocide article, claiming that Bosnian Muslims "harvested Serbian organs."
It sickens me that European anti-Muslim groups are willing to stand by the Serbian nationalists simply because the Bosnians are Muslim.
Absolutely disgusting.
| 74 |
rwmofo Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:40:25am |
re: #12 KingKenrod
Collins and Murkowski have said they will support the bill. I don't know if two GOP votes are enough to stop a filibuster. However, with the tax bill issue settled, there's no reason this can't come to the floor for a quick vote.
Context. It's a whack to the head sometimes isn't it?
Now for the omitted part of this story.
"All 42 Senate Republicans signed a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, vowing to prevent a vote on "any legislative item until the Senate has acted to fund the government and we have prevented the tax increase that is currently awaiting all American taxpayers.""
So on December 1st, Republicans advise Reid to get off his ass and bring legislation to the Senate floor concerning 2011 tax policy (as in let's vote on whether you want to increase taxes or leave the rates as they are). Oh, BTW, where's the fiscal budget for the coming year? Waaay overdue.
Instead of bringing, arguably, the most critical legislation to the floor over which congress should be concerned, Reid pulls a political dirty trick. Should the first responders be covered? Of course, but Reid decided to play politics instead of addressing a bipartisan issue that just passed! This evil Bush tax cuts just got extended! Blame Republicans, but be sure to give credit to the Democrat Party for extending the Bush Tax Cuts.
Like I said above "Something critical is being omitted in this "story..."
| 75 |
sagehen Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:40:30am |
re: #36 moose9t9
This definitely had the lump in throat effect on me. I'm a bit of a cynic these days because of things like this. Senators and Representatives do this shit because they don't fear the electorate anymore. We sit around and ask ourselves "Why isn't the mainstream media covering this?" The truth is we, the populace, will have forgotten this act by the time its voting time. Breaks my heart really.
Did you catch the opening segment as well? Not only did no American network cover the story, Al Jazeera did a full 22-minutes on it. "Our media was scooped on a sympathetic treatment of the Zadroga bill, by the outlet Osama Bin Laden sends his mixtapes to."
| 76 |
Kragar Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:41:09am |
re: #71 Charles
If anyone doubts that a lot of right wingers are climate change deniers for religious reasons -- have a look at this:
[Link: www.bluecollarphilosophy.com...]
You know, I don't mind that they're fucking crazy. I do mind that they seem bound and determined to kill all the rest of humanity to prove themselves right.
| 77 |
lawhawk Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:41:19am |
re: #65 Charles
Even as the EU has found no evidence, and the Swiss official who penned the report claiming that the KLA harvested organs was told to submit the evidence and for anyone else to come forward who might have evidence of actual crimes.
Thus far, there's just the allegations. Nothing more.
| 78 |
nutz4Tuna Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:41:41am |
re: #71 Charles
If anyone doubts that a lot of right wingers are climate change deniers for religious reasons -- have a look at this:
[Link: www.bluecollarphilosophy.com...]
So "blue collar" is apparently a synonym for "poorly educated reactionary"....
| 79 |
SanFranciscoZionist Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:41:53am |
re: #65 Charles
Wow. Geller is REALLY off her meds. She posted another pro-Serbian genocide article, claiming that Bosnian Muslims "harvested Serbian organs."
There is apparently some investigation going on into whether the KLA used POWs as organ donors.
This, of course, in Geller's mind, must be true, and shows that Muslims--not the KLA, but Muslims--are bad.
Torture, mass slaughter and rape camps, of course, do not reflect badly on the Christians in the conflict.
Woman is a fucking bigot.
| 80 |
wrenchwench Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:42:13am |
re: #71 Charles
If anyone doubts that a lot of right wingers are climate change deniers for religious reasons -- have a look at this:
[Link: www.bluecollarphilosophy.com...]
Another self-righteous victim of Stinky's wrath good sense...
| 81 |
Cineaste Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:42:31am |
re: #74 rwmofo
So what you're saying is that a very complicated tax deal should be hammered out before the 9/11 responders benefits are funded.
I disagree. Tax deals are complicated pieces of legislation with long-lasting and deeply debated implications.
These responders are dying now. Easy call which to vote on first.
| 82 |
jamesfirecat Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:44:02am |
re: #67 Cineaste
I read that article too but it says that it's not a rule, it's an agreement. Hence the last paragraph where she says that it shouldn't be observed.
Then that article also has it wrongs, or you misread the end since it was talking about changing things when a new group came in.
Look at this one as well...
[Link: www.politico.com...]
That or can someone else here who knows more about filibusters please offer soem wisdom on this debate?
| 83 |
rwmofo Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:44:13am |
re: #81 Cineaste
So what you're saying is that a very complicated tax deal should be hammered out before the 9/11 responders benefits are funded.
I disagree. Tax deals are complicated pieces of legislation with long-lasting and deeply debated implications.
These responders are dying now. Easy call which to vote on first.
They can vote on it today. The filibuster has been removed from the equation. Where's Reid?
| 84 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:46:10am |
Okay, this is trivial, but creepy. I get little icons in the window tabs on firefox. LGF shows a little football. Norad Santa shows a little santa.
Geller's site has...an eyeball. Staring at me.
Um, creepy.
| 85 |
Cineaste Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:46:24am |
re: #74 rwmofo
Should the first responders be covered? Of course, but Reid decided to play politics instead of addressing a bipartisan issue that just passed!
To be clear, the "bipartisan issue that just passed" wasn't dealt with when the filibuster letter was sent. They said they would block the legislation before there was a bipartisan agreement.
| 86 |
Kragar Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:48:35am |
Dicky Marty, the man behind the Kosovo reports, has a history;
European Probe Finds Signs Of CIA-Run Secret Prisons
Dick Marty, a Swiss lawyer working on behalf of the Council of Europe, the continent's official human rights organization, said at least seven other European nations colluded with the CIA to capture and secretly detain terrorism suspects, including several who were ultimately cleared of any wrongdoing.
...
"Even if proof, in the classical meaning of the term, is not as yet available, a number of coherent and converging elements indicate that such secret detention centers did indeed exist in Europe," Marty wrote.
Who need evidence in the classical sense when you can make shit up?
| 87 |
jamesfirecat Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:51:56am |
re: #83 rwmofo
They can vote on it today. The filibuster has been removed from the equation. Where's Reid?
How has the filibuster been removed from the equation exactly?
| 88 |
moose9t9 Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:52:39am |
re: #75 sagehen
I did see this part and that wrapped up the entire package of the segment. I was in an extended state of facepalm during the whole thing. Huck did try to deflect (a very effective weapon the GOP uses) but Jon Jon wasn't having it, not on this.
Well ladies and gentlemen, its official Al Jazeera is a more credible news organization, has been for a while.
| 89 |
Mentis Fugit Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:56:52am |
re: #65 Charles
Wow. Geller is REALLY off her meds. She posted another pro-Serbian genocide article, claiming that Bosnian Muslims "harvested Serbian organs."
Has the woman never heard of "blood libel" or is she historically stone deaf?
| 90 |
rwmofo Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:58:08am |
re: #85 Cineaste
To be clear, the "bipartisan issue that just passed" wasn't dealt with when the filibuster letter was sent. They said they would block the legislation before there was a bipartisan agreement.
December 1st: Republicans advise Reid to ONLY bring up the tax bill. Anything else will be filibustered.
December 9th: Reid pushes the 9/11 First Responders bill as an obvious political ploy for the sole purpose of making it look like Republicans are against helping these guys. Reid's move was a five-star chicken-shit stunt.
In response, Republicans refer Reid to their December 1st letter.
December 16: The bill passes. The vote was 277-148, with each party contributing an almost identical number of votes in favor (the Democrats, 139 and the Republicans, 138). That's called bipartisan.
Worst case scenario, the Republicans delayed the First Responders' bill by two weeks. Conversely, I blame Reid and the Democrat Party for playing politics.
Now Reid can submit the 9/11 Responders Coverage Bill (or whatever it's called). The ball is in Reid's court. I predict he goes on vacation before bringing it to the floor of the Senate.
| 91 |
rwmofo Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:58:57am |
re: #87 jamesfirecat
How has the filibuster been removed from the equation exactly?
Ummm, they passed the tax bill?
| 92 |
SanFranciscoZionist Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:59:41am |
re: #89 Mentis Fugit
Has the woman never heard of "blood libel" or is she historically stone deaf?
The latter. The crap the Muslim-haters parrot to each other is often point-for-point derived from classic anti-Semitic crap, but Geller doesn't notice, or mind.
| 93 |
jamesfirecat Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:00:00am |
re: #90 rwmofo
December 1st: Republicans advise Reid to ONLY bring up the tax bill. Anything else will be filibustered.
December 9th: Reid pushes the 9/11 First Responders bill as an obvious political ploy for the sole purpose of making it look like Republicans are against helping these guys. Reid's move was a five-star chicken-shit stunt.
In response, Republicans refer Reid to their December 1st letter.
December 16: The bill passes. The vote was 277-148, with each party contributing an almost identical number of votes in favor (the Democrats, 139 and the Republicans, 138). That's called bipartisan.
Worst case scenario, the Republicans delayed the First Responders' bill by two weeks. Conversely, I blame Reid and the Democrat Party for playing politics.
Now Reid can submit the 9/11 Responders Coverage Bill (or whatever it's called). The ball is in Reid's court. I predict he goes on vacation before bringing it to the floor of the Senate.
So trying to get insurance for people who became sick when the government dropped the ball and told them it was safe to try and rescue people from the two towers and hoping that Republicans would be willing to show some actual human compassion is a five star chicken shit stunt?
I don't think so.
I think a five star chicken shit stunt is when you demand that the top 5% can't be taxed any more than they currently are even when the public supports the idea, and refusing to let any other legislation, even things that you claim to agree with go through until you get what what you want.
| 94 |
jamesfirecat Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:00:39am |
re: #91 rwmofo
Ummm, they passed the tax bill?
And this proves beyond a shadow of a doubt the Republicans won't try to filibuster anything?
Yeah right, and maybe next time Lucy will let Charlie Brown kick the ball!
| 95 |
Varek Raith Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:04:03am |
re: #91 rwmofo
Ummm, they passed the tax bill?
Funny how your party values tax cuts above all else.
Actually, that's freaking sad.
| 96 |
Obdicut Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:05:31am |
re: #95 Varek Raith
What really kills me is that they could have passed the breaks for everyone but the upper percentile, because both the GOP and the Democrats agreed on that. They could have simply passed that because everyone agreed, and THEN had an argument about the top percentile.
Why didn't they? Because they knew that most people wouldn't actually support that. They had to cast it in a false light in order to get it through.
Pa-fucking-thetic.
| 97 |
allegro Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:07:15am |
re: #95 Varek Raith
Funny how your party values tax cuts for their wealthiest donors above all else.
Actually, that's freaking sad.
They couldn't hold those who can't afford to fill their coffers in an lesser contempt.
| 98 |
allegro Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:09:24am |
re: #96 Obdicut
What really kills me is that they could have passed the breaks for everyone but the upper percentile, because both the GOP and the Democrats agreed on that. They could have simply passed that because everyone agreed, and THEN had an argument about the top percentile.
Why didn't they? Because they knew that most people wouldn't actually support that. They had to cast it in a false light in order to get it through.
Pa-fucking-thetic.
This is why I am so furious with Obama. Unless I'm mistaken this was exactly what was happening in Congress, i.e. separating the two parts of the bill, until he stepped in and made this back room deal.
| 99 |
rwmofo Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:12:06am |
re: #93 jamesfirecat
So trying to get insurance for people who became sick when the government dropped the ball and told them it was safe to try and rescue people from the two towers and hoping that Republicans would be willing to show some actual human compassion is a five star chicken shit stunt?
I don't think so.
I think a five star chicken shit stunt is when you demand that the top 5% can't be taxed any more than they currently are even when the public supports the idea, and refusing to let any other legislation, even things that you claim to agree with go through until you get what what you want.
I would say "nice try" except you showed what I said then twisted it around to say something entirely different. Fail on your part.
"...you demand that the top 5% can't be taxed any more than they currently are even when the public supports the idea..."
Again, quoting my words: "The vote was 277-148, with each party contributing an almost identical number of votes in favor (the Democrats, 139 and the Republicans, 138). Like it or not, you have a problem with 139 Democrats.
One more time for emphasis: Reid can bring the First Responders' bill to the floor today. The Republican filibuster threat was removed with the passage of the tax bill. Action: Reid.
Sparring with lefties is entertaining and easy, but you don't make it the least bit challenging.
| 100 |
sagehen Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:13:33am |
re: #99 rwmofo
I would say "nice try" except you showed what I said then twisted it around to say something entirely different. Fail on your part.
"...you demand that the top 5% can't be taxed any more than they currently are even when the public supports the idea..."
Again, quoting my words: "The vote was 277-148, with each party contributing an almost identical number of votes in favor (the Democrats, 139 and the Republicans, 138). Like it or not, you have a problem with 139 Democrats.
One more time for emphasis: Reid can bring the First Responders' bill to the floor today. The Republican filibuster threat was removed with the passage of the tax bill. Action: Reid.
Sparring with lefties is entertaining and easy, but you don't make it the least bit challenging.
You're confusing the House and the Senate. Harry Reid has zero authority in any room that can get 277 votes for something.
| 101 |
Obdicut Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:14:46am |
re: #98 allegro
This is why I am so furious with Obama. Unless I'm mistaken this was exactly what was happening in Congress, i.e. separating the two parts of the bill, until he stepped in and made this back room deal.
I haven't heard anything about that, and there's no reason why congress couldn't have done that a long time ago.
I'm rather angry with congress for not addressing taxes when they had more senators.
| 102 |
Varek Raith Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:15:51am |
re: #99 rwmofo
Yeah, pat yourself on the back.
Funny, though, that you ignored a number of posts directed at you.
Why? Too difficult for you to answer? Too hard to pin on the democrats.
| 103 |
rwmofo Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:16:08am |
re: #95 Varek Raith
Funny how your party values tax cuts above all else.
Actually, that's freaking sad.
The vote was 277-148, with each party contributing an almost identical number of votes in favor (the Democrats, 139 and the Republicans, 138).
Feel free to comment on the Democrat politicians who voted for the bill.
This is what we on the right have to deal with on a daily basis. Criticism only for the Republican Party while the Democrat Party does the exact same thing.
| 104 |
allegro Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:16:37am |
re: #101 Obdicut
I'm rather angry with congress for not addressing taxes when they had more senators.
Valid point, though I doubt it would have made any difference. The filibuster nonsense has kept most legislation from getting through the Senate for the full of the past 2 years. I don't see why this one would have been any different.
| 106 |
Cineaste Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:17:29am |
re: #103 rwmofo
The vote was 277-148, with each party contributing an almost identical number of votes in favor (the Democrats, 139 and the Republicans, 138).
Feel free to comment on the Democrat politicians who voted for the bill.
This is what we on the right have to deal with on a daily basis. Criticism only for the Republican Party while the Democrat Party does the exact same thing.
Remind me again what happened in the Senate which is what we're talking about.
Do we have to do another Civics Class for you, because we already did one earlier...
| 107 |
APox Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:17:40am |
re: #103 rwmofo
The vote was 277-148, with each party contributing an almost identical number of votes in favor (the Democrats, 139 and the Republicans, 138).
Feel free to comment on the Democrat politicians who voted for the bill.
This is what we on the right have to deal with on a daily basis. Criticism only for the Republican Party while the Democrat Party does the exact same thing.
And what would have happened had those democratsnot voted for the bill?
| 108 |
allegro Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:18:38am |
re: #103 rwmofo
The vote was 277-148, with each party contributing an almost identical number of votes in favor (the Democrats, 139 and the Republicans, 138).
You are referring to the "hostage" bill that allowed for the tax cut extension for the lower 98% as well as the continuation of UI funding, correct?
| 109 |
garhighway Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:19:14am |
re: #108 allegro
You are referring to the "hostage" bill that allowed for the tax cut extension for the lower 98% as well as the continuation of UI funding, correct?
Careful, there. When you use that word, Boehner cries.
| 110 |
Obdicut Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:19:36am |
re: #104 allegro
It certainly shouldn't have been kept for this lame-duck session. Way, way too easy for the GOP to effortlessly obstruct it.
Obama pleaded with congress to do something before now, so I just don't get why everyone is blaming him and only him.
| 111 |
Varek Raith Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:19:49am |
re: #103 rwmofo
The vote was 277-148, with each party contributing an almost identical number of votes in favor (the Democrats, 139 and the Republicans, 138).
Feel free to comment on the Democrat politicians who voted for the bill.
This is what we on the right have to deal with on a daily basis. Criticism only for the Republican Party while the Democrat Party does the exact same thing.
You dodged my point.
Your party vowed to block every piece of legislation until they got their tax cuts. They didn't care about anything else.
| 112 |
rwmofo Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:20:17am |
re: #100 sagehen
You're confusing the House and the Senate. Harry Reid has zero authority in any room that can get 277 votes for something.
Oops. Right. I was looking at the bill that passed last night.
The Senate passed the legislation 81 to 19 on Wednesday.
| 113 |
allegro Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:22:11am |
re: #110 Obdicut
It certainly shouldn't have been kept for this lame-duck session. Way, way too easy for the GOP to effortlessly obstruct it.
Obama pleaded with congress to do something before now, so I just don't get why everyone is blaming him and only him.
I do not disagree with you that this should have been taken on before the Nov. elections and I am entirely bewildered why it wasn't. Splitting the bills between the lower 98% and upper 2% would seem to have been a total winner on the part of the Dems because the Rep position is entirely indefensible.
| 114 |
jamesfirecat Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:23:37am |
re: #99 rwmofo
I would say "nice try" except you showed what I said then twisted it around to say something entirely different. Fail on your part.
"...you demand that the top 5% can't be taxed any more than they currently are even when the public supports the idea..."
Again, quoting my words: "The vote was 277-148, with each party contributing an almost identical number of votes in favor (the Democrats, 139 and the Republicans, 138). Like it or not, you have a problem with 139 Democrats.
One more time for emphasis: Reid can bring the First Responders' bill to the floor today. The Republican filibuster threat was removed with the passage of the tax bill. Action: Reid.
Sparring with lefties is entertaining and easy, but you don't make it the least bit challenging.
The republicans said that they would filibuster everything until their bill as passed.
They never said they would stop filibustering things once it was.
Also as for you both parties voted for it thing, that's because they were voting on a bill that had a lot of stuff that people from different parties could accept.
The GOP however voted damn near unamiously in the house and unamiously in the senate that they would rather have everyone's taxes go up than let 95% of us avoid a tax hike and the rich have to pay 3% of their income above 250K while still getting a break on the amount they make below it.
| 115 |
garhighway Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:25:03am |
re: #114 jamesfirecat
The GOP however voted damn near unamiously in the house and unamiously in the senate that they would rather have everyone's taxes go up than let 95% of us avoid a tax hike and the rich have to pay 3% of their income above 250K while still getting a break on the amount they make below it.
Gee, that makes it sounds like tax cuts for the 2% are their highest priority. That can't be right, can it?
| 116 |
jamesfirecat Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:25:22am |
re: #103 rwmofo
The vote was 277-148, with each party contributing an almost identical number of votes in favor (the Democrats, 139 and the Republicans, 138).
Feel free to comment on the Democrat politicians who voted for the bill.
This is what we on the right have to deal with on a daily basis. Criticism only for the Republican Party while the Democrat Party does the exact same thing.
How Many Democrats in the Senate voted against tax cuts for 95% of Americans?
How Many Republicans?
| 117 |
rwmofo Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:27:21am |
re: #102 Varek Raith
Yeah, pat yourself on the back.
Funny, though, that you ignored a number of posts directed at you.
Why? Too difficult for you to answer? Too hard to pin on the democrats.
Due to the percentage of people here on my side of the aisle, I typically have to spar on a 1/11 ratio. Some drop immediately into name calling, rather than offer any substance. I don't waste time on them and I don't come here to call people names just because they're on the left. I'll debate those who are civil and even some of those who aren't. Additionally, when it comes to politics, fiscal policy is one of the highest priorities for me, so I tend to comment more regarding that area.
| 118 |
Cineaste Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:29:31am |
re: #112 rwmofo
Oops. Right. I was looking at the bill that passed last night.
The Senate passed the legislation 81 to 19 on Wednesday.
And what you're skipping now is the fact that the Republicans have repeatedly shot down this bill. The Tax compromise was only the latest, revolting, justification.
[Link: blogs.wsj.com...]
[Link: www.politicsdaily.com...]
And, oh yeah, the Republicans shot it down back in August too...
[Link: www.truth-out.org...]
So really, we're just finding new reasons to do the same obstructionism...
| 119 |
sagehen Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:29:31am |
re: #115 garhighway
Gee, that makes it sounds like tax cuts for the 2% are their highest priority. That can't be right, can it?
With government takeover of our sexual behavior a close second.
| 120 |
rwmofo Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:30:21am |
re: #106 Cineaste
Remind me again what happened in the Senate which is what we're talking about.
Do we have to do another Civics Class for you, because we already did one earlier...
81-19. I got hung up on the House vote because that's today's news. A simple, honest mix-up that I admitted as soon as it was brought to my attention. Had you done the same thing I would have politely pointed it out to you.
| 121 |
APox Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:30:46am |
Republicans block passage of all bills until tax cuts for the very wealthy are appeased with a tax cut. Obama creates a compre: #117 rwmofo
Due to the percentage of people here on my side of the aisle, I typically have to spar on a 1/11 ratio. Some drop immediately into name calling, rather than offer any substance. I don't waste time on them and I don't come here to call people names just because they're on the left. I'll debate those who are civil and even some of those who aren't. Additionally, when it comes to politics, fiscal policy is one of the highest priorities for me, so I tend to comment more regarding that area.
Again, then, I ask you what would have happened had the democrats not voted for this compromising bill?
| 122 |
garhighway Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:31:28am |
re: #117 rwmofo
Due to the percentage of people here on my side of the aisle, I typically have to spar on a 1/11 ratio. Some drop immediately into name calling, rather than offer any substance. I don't waste time on them and I don't come here to call people names just because they're on the left. I'll debate those who are civil and even some of those who aren't. Additionally, when it comes to politics, fiscal policy is one of the highest priorities for me, so I tend to comment more regarding that area.
Fiscal policy is big for you?
So two questions: how quickly do you think we need to get the budget in balance, and
How would you do it?
| 123 |
APox Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:31:33am |
re: #121 APox
Damn iPad, no clue why that first sentence was saved.
| 124 |
b_sharp Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:31:33am |
re: #117 rwmofo
Due to the percentage of people here on my side of the aisle, I typically have to spar on a 1/11 ratio. Some drop immediately into name calling, rather than offer any substance. I don't waste time on them and I don't come here to call people names just because they're on the left. I'll debate those who are civil and even some of those who aren't. Additionally, when it comes to politics, fiscal policy is one of the highest priorities for me, so I tend to comment more regarding that area.
Sparring with lefties is entertaining and easy, but you don't make it the least bit challenging.
So, you start with personal attacks and then whine about it when it gets returned?
| 125 |
Fozzie Bear Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:31:55am |
This is stupefying to watch. You seriously have to be delusional to support the GOP's actions on this issue purely procedural grounds, and convince yourself that you aren't full of shit.
| 126 |
jamesfirecat Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:32:29am |
re: #120 rwmofo
81-19. I got hung up on the House vote because that's today's news. A simple, honest mix-up that I admitted as soon as it was brought to my attention. Had you done the same thing I would have politely pointed it out to you.
Why do you keep ignoring what happened in the Senate when the Democrats tried to cut taxes for 95% of Americans and the Republicans refused to let it happen, choosing to take everyone's tax cuts hostage rather than agree to it then bring forth their own bill?
Why its almost as if the Republicans didn't believe they could get a bill that would cut taxes for only the top 5% of Americans to pass! As if people might not want such a thing!
| 127 |
Cineaste Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:32:54am |
re: #124 b_sharp
So, you start with personal attacks and then whine about it when it gets returned?
I thought the same thing. What was with the cutesy use of a bold tag on the word "polite"?
| 128 |
Varek Raith Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:33:44am |
re: #124 b_sharp
So, you start with personal attacks and then whine about it when it gets returned?
Standard Republic party tactic.
;)
| 129 |
b_sharp Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:34:21am |
re: #120 rwmofo
81-19. I got hung up on the House vote because that's today's news. A simple, honest mix-up that I admitted as soon as it was brought to my attention. Had you done the same thing I would have politely pointed it out to you.
Yes absolutely, this is so polite.
I would say "nice try" except you showed what I said then twisted it around to say something entirely different. Fail on your part.
Sparring with lefties is entertaining and easy, but you don't make it the least bit challenging.
| 130 |
rwmofo Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:35:28am |
re: #111 Varek Raith
You dodged my point.
Your party vowed to block every piece of legislation until they got their tax cuts. They didn't care about anything else.
I didn't dodge anything.
Tax Cuts? I believe you're referring to leaving current tax rates as they are. Apparently lefty logic equates anything except raising taxes a cut.
"They didn't care about anything else." Heh. Yeah. That's it.
| 131 |
sagehen Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:36:07am |
re: #120 rwmofo
81-19. I got hung up on the House vote because that's today's news. A simple, honest mix-up that I admitted as soon as it was brought to my attention. Had you done the same thing I would have politely pointed it out to you.
Yeah, it finally passed because the 42 R's held firm that they wouldn't do another damn thing until they got what they wanted on this bill. And the D's paid the ransom, because otherwise there'd be no Senate business at all.
It doesn't mean they "liked" it, or "supported" it, it means that Zadroga and DADT and START and DREAM are so damn important they had to bribe the R's to let them get to debate on these things.
| 132 |
allegro Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:36:53am |
re: #130 rwmofo
I didn't dodge anything.
Tax Cuts? I believe you're referring to leaving current tax rates as they are. Apparently lefty logic equates anything except raising taxes a cut.
"They didn't care about anything else." Heh. Yeah. That's it.
I guess you missed the part of the bill that reduces estate taxes to lower rates than GWB even asked for. Right?
| 133 |
jamesfirecat Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:38:04am |
re: #130 rwmofo
I didn't dodge anything.
Tax Cuts? I believe you're referring to leaving current tax rates as they are. Apparently lefty logic equates anything except raising taxes a cut.
"They didn't care about anything else." Heh. Yeah. That's it.
Funny you should say you "didn't dodge anything" when this entire reply is nothing but dodging and arguing about the semantics of the argument put before you.
| 134 |
Obdicut Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:38:18am |
re: #117 rwmofo
Why don't you civilly call the Democratic party the Democratic party, instead of the purposefully insulting 'Democrat Party'?
| 135 |
rwmofo Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:38:21am |
re: #122 garhighway
Fiscal policy is big for you?
So two questions: how quickly do you think we need to get the budget in balance, and
How would you do it?
1) Now.
2) See Newt Gingrich. He was the last one to successfully drive it. Easy answer: Return to 2008 spending levels.
| 136 |
Obdicut Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:38:56am |
re: #135 rwmofo
You know that part of that balancing of the budget was a tax hike, right?
| 137 |
APox Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:38:59am |
re: #130 rwmofo
I didn't dodge anything.
Tax Cuts? I believe you're referring to leaving current tax rates as they are. Apparently lefty logic equates anything except raising taxes a cut.
"They didn't care about anything else." Heh. Yeah. That's it.
Apparently reinstating a lowered rate that had expired is not a tax cut?
| 138 |
jamesfirecat Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:39:04am |
re: #135 rwmofo
1) Now.
2) See Newt Gingrich. He was the last one to successfully drive it. Easy answer: Return to 2008 spending levels.
Should we be allocating money the same way we were in 2008 as well?
What should we reduce spending on?
| 139 |
sagehen Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:39:17am |
re: #130 rwmofo
I didn't dodge anything.
Tax Cuts? I believe you're referring to leaving current tax rates as they are. Apparently lefty logic equates anything except raising taxes a cut.
"They didn't care about anything else." Heh. Yeah. That's it.
The Bush tax cuts had a sunset clause built-in. It was the only way they could get them through in the first place because they're such a deficit bomb.
Renewing them, extending them, keeping them from dying of natural causes at their designated lifespan, whatever the hell you want to call it -- it's a tax cut.
| 140 |
APox Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:40:13am |
re: #135 rwmofo
1) Now.
2) See Newt Gingrich. He was the last one to successfully drive it. Easy answer: Return to 2008 spending levels.
Yes, the last decade has seen massively lowered spending and fiscal conservatism. 2008 is a fine example.
/
| 141 |
Fozzie Bear Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:41:09am |
What kills me about this is the GOP refuses to let any legislation pass until they get exactly what they want, even when the legislation in question would unquestionably save us money and make us more safe.
Take for example the START treaty:
Does it save money? Yes.
Does it make us safer? Yes.
Does it make the rest of the world safer? Yes.
Does it strengthen our alliances? Yes.
But the GOP will block it because they refuse to do anything at all until they get their tax cut. Fuck national security, fuck the deficit, and fuck our allies. All over a policy that a majority of Americans oppose.
And the GOP base is convinced that liberals are all about class warfare. To call the GOP base delusional is being kind.
| 142 |
garhighway Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:41:16am |
re: #135 rwmofo
1) Now.
2) See Newt Gingrich. He was the last one to successfully drive it. Easy answer: Return to 2008 spending levels.
But the budget wasn't in balance in 2008. So why would that do it?
| 143 |
rwmofo Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:41:17am |
re: #124 b_sharp
So, you start with personal attacks and then whine about it when it gets returned?
Refuting JFC's points was a personal attack? I don't see any name calling coming from me.
Me whine? Heh. Right.
| 144 |
allegro Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:42:13am |
re: #135 rwmofo
1) Now.
2) See Newt Gingrich. He was the last one to successfully drive it. Easy answer: Return to 2008 spending levels.
Would that be before war spending was actually a budget item? Before TARP that GWB said has to be passed RIGHT NOW or our entire economy would collapse? Before unemployment hit 10%?
Do you have any concept at all of what you're actually talking about?
| 145 |
Cineaste Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:42:31am |
re: #130 rwmofo
Tax Cuts? I believe you're referring to leaving current tax rates as they are. Apparently lefty logic equates anything except raising taxes a cut.
remind me again is 39% > 35%? I always get confused about that. If congress did nothing then the tax would be 39% on marginal income over $250k, if they pass new legislation the tax rate will be lower. That's called a Tax Cut.
| 146 |
rwmofo Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:43:28am |
re: #132 allegro
I guess you missed the part of the bill that reduces estate taxes to lower rates than GWB even asked for. Right?
Excellent! GWB was too liberal for me anyway.
| 147 |
Varek Raith Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:44:05am |
| 148 |
Cineaste Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:44:19am |
re: #135 rwmofo
2) See Newt Gingrich. He was the last one to successfully drive it. Easy answer: Return to 2008 spending levels.
Remind us how to do that while still spending a something around a quarter billion per day on Iraq and Afghanistan?
| 149 |
Fozzie Bear Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:45:11am |
re: #146 rwmofo
Excellent! GWB was too liberal for me anyway.
Excellent tactic. If you don't like it, call it liberal. That way there's no need to examine your ideology, because everything that you don't like must of course be part of an opposing ideology.
The politics of projection. Amazing to watch.
| 150 |
rwmofo Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:45:54am |
Heh. It's been fun. Gotta go now, but I'll be back.
| 151 |
garhighway Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:45:56am |
re: #141 Fozzie Bear
And the GOP base is convinced that liberals are all about class warfare.
Both sides practice class warfare. It's just that the GOP is really good at it.
| 152 |
garhighway Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:46:11am |
| 153 |
jamesfirecat Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:46:41am |
re: #151 garhighway
Both sides practice class warfare. It's just that the GOP is really good at it.
They're not good at it, they just decided to support the side that was already winning....
| 154 |
Varek Raith Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:47:48am |
| 155 |
Fozzie Bear Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:48:56am |
re: #151 garhighway
Both sides practice class warfare. It's just that the GOP is really good at it.
It's the projection aspect of spin that amazes me. Just accuse your opponent of doing whatever it is you are about to try to do, and presto, you have a "controversy" rather than what would have been called bullshit in more honest times.
| 156 |
Spocomptonite Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:51:33am |
re: #130 rwmofo
I didn't dodge anything.
Tax Cuts? I believe you're referring to leaving current tax rates as they are. Apparently lefty logic equates anything except raising taxes a cut.
"They didn't care about anything else." Heh. Yeah. That's it.
Cutting future tax rates is the same thing as leaving present rates the same in this situation. It is like having a sale price on something, and then continuing the sale price for another week. In the world of finance and accounting, that would be a price cut. But according to you, in the world of taxes, the same thing is not a tax cut? You are just arguing semantics instead of substance. Finishing with insulting quips about "lefty logic" after whining that others were insulting you is very, very hypocritical.
| 157 |
b_sharp Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:53:25am |
re: #143 rwmofo
Refuting JFC's points was a personal attack? I don't see any name calling coming from me.
Me whine? Heh. Right.
Do you have trouble with reading comprehension? I actually quoted your attacks.
| 158 |
sagehen Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:54:01am |
re: #138 jamesfirecat
Should we be allocating money the same way we were in 2008 as well?
What should we reduce spending on?
If my magic wand were functioning:
I'd let all the Bush tax cuts expire. (yes, I said *all* of them. Low income, middle-income, high-income, corporate, inheritance... ALL of them). Add two new brackets -- at $500k/yr (42%) and $1M/yr (45%). Put capital gains tax back to regular income-tax levels, with only a once-per-lifetime exclusion for the family home.
Eliminate Dept of Agriculture farm subsidies, but let small family farmers (as in, the family lives on the farm and works it themselves with a few employees) qualify for the same SBA assistance available to similar-revenue non-farm businesses.
Phase out the mortgage interest deducation.
$1/gallon gas tax.
On payroll tax/FICA -- I'd lower the rate but raise the cap.
Stop using military contractors for things Marines used to do and can do again.
Wave a surrender flag in the War on Drugs, and let 1/4 of our inmates back out onto the streets.
Hire 20,000 new inspectors/auditors/enforcement agents for the IRS/ FDA/ EPA/ OSHA/ MMS/ SEC; vigorously inspect everything everywhere and collect every single damn penny of fines and penalties allowed under current law.
(and I'd have written a way better Health Care bill, that would be a good deal cheaper, but that's a very long rant that I'll save for another time)
(I think I cut the deficit by a trillion or so).
| 159 |
Varek Raith Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:55:23am |
re: #158 sagehen
If my magic wand were functioning:
I'd let all the Bush tax cuts expire. (yes, I said *all* of them. Low income, middle-income, high-income, corporate, inheritance... ALL of them). Add two new brackets -- at $500k/yr (42%) and $1M/yr (45%). Put capital gains tax back to regular income-tax levels, with only a once-per-lifetime exclusion for the family home.
Eliminate Dept of Agriculture farm subsidies, but let small family farmers (as in, the family lives on the farm and works it themselves with a few employees) qualify for the same SBA assistance available to similar-revenue non-farm businesses.
Phase out the mortgage interest deducation.
$1/gallon gas tax.
On payroll tax/FICA -- I'd lower the rate but raise the cap.
Stop using military contractors for things Marines used to do and can do again.
Wave a surrender flag in the War on Drugs, and let 1/4 of our inmates back out onto the streets.
Hire 20,000 new inspectors/auditors/enforcement agents for the IRS/ FDA/ EPA/ OSHA/ MMS/ SEC; vigorously inspect everything everywhere and collect every single damn penny of fines and penalties allowed under current law.
(and I'd have written a way better Health Care bill, that would be a good deal cheaper, but that's a very long rant that I'll save for another time)
(I think I cut the deficit by a trillion or so).
Whoa, too complicated.
Here's something simpler;
Everything is free. Retroactively free.
Deficit problem solved.
///
| 160 |
sagehen Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:56:15am |
re: #151 garhighway
Both sides practice class warfare. It's just that the GOP is really good at it.
"Of course there's class warfare. It's been going on for 30 years, and my class is winning."
--Warren Buffett.
| 162 |
SanFranciscoZionist Fri, Dec 17, 2010 11:58:42am |
re: #103 rwmofo
The vote was 277-148, with each party contributing an almost identical number of votes in favor (the Democrats, 139 and the Republicans, 138).
Feel free to comment on the Democrat politicians who voted for the bill.
This is what we on the right have to deal with on a daily basis. Criticism only for the Republican Party while the Democrat Party does the exact same thing.
We on the left, OTOH, just have to deal with you being unable to type the name of the Democratic Party correctly.
Can anyone attend this pity party, or is it by invite only?
| 163 |
Varek Raith Fri, Dec 17, 2010 12:01:07pm |
re: #162 SanFranciscoZionist
We on the left, OTOH, just have to deal with you being unable to type the name of the Democratic Party correctly.
Can anyone attend this pity party, or is it by invite only?
No.
It's the Demonrat party.
;P
| 164 |
jamesfirecat Fri, Dec 17, 2010 12:02:04pm |
| 166 |
SanFranciscoZionist Fri, Dec 17, 2010 12:05:02pm |
re: #134 Obdicut
Why don't you civilly call the Democratic party the Democratic party, instead of the purposefully insulting 'Democrat Party'?
Because he's so persecuted here that he has to take his powerful opponents down a notch any way he can.
| 167 |
b_sharp Fri, Dec 17, 2010 12:18:33pm |
re: #162 SanFranciscoZionist
We on the left, OTOH, just have to deal with you being unable to type the name of the Democratic Party correctly.
Can anyone attend this pity party, or is it by invite only?
The party is over, Sir Robin ran away.
| 168 |
brownbagj Fri, Dec 17, 2010 12:19:56pm |
re: #65 Charles
Wow. Geller is REALLY off her meds. She posted another pro-Serbian genocide article, claiming that Bosnian Muslims "harvested Serbian organs."
Maybe she means pipe organs and they just are trying to corner the pipe music market.
//
| 169 |
simoom Fri, Dec 17, 2010 12:39:37pm |
re: #58 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
Jindal sand berm project was a colossal waste of time and money
This was a good example of the media enabling bad behavior. All the networks gave a constant platform to pols making this project the sole benchmark for gov action on the oil spill (and a prime example of gov getting in the way of "common sense" action). Anderson Cooper, Carville & Matalin, Morning Joe, etc (I'm skipping FNC as no one really expects them to act like journalists) took sides in the debate with silly populist rants.
The folks the media really should have been giving the majority of airtime to were the relevant scientists.
It was the same thing with the stupid, jurry-rigged vacuum barges. The Coast Guard hadn't certified them safe or effective, but the media and Jindal again browbeat Adm Thad Allen into backing down and approving their being staffed w/ National Guard, just to shut up the political / media pile on so he could more effectively focus on the real response.
| 170 |
bluecheese Fri, Dec 17, 2010 1:37:24pm |
re: #134 Obdicut
Why don't you civilly call the Democratic party the Democratic party, instead of the purposefully insulting 'Democrat Party'?
I think he earns something like ten cents for every comment he posts on the innertoobz with "democrat party" in it.
| 171 |
teleskiguy Fri, Dec 17, 2010 10:44:45pm |
Stunning. Brilliant.
If only George Carlin had seen this clip. He was right though, he knew Jon Stewart could do great things.
Gateway Pundit, Sued by Election Workers, Declares BankruptcyA onetime favorite, now just pathetic figure around these parts, Jim Hoft aka SMOTI ("Stupidest Man On The Internet"), has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in response to the defamation lawsuits filed against him to the same election workers that ...
Khal Wimpo (free internal organs upon request!)
The Pandemic Cost 7 Million Lives, but Talks to Prevent a Repeat Stall In late 2021, as the world reeled from the arrival of the highly contagious omicron variant of the coronavirus, representatives of almost 200 countries met - some online, some in-person in Geneva - hoping to forestall a future worldwide ...
Cheechako
Once Praised, the Settlement to Help Sickened BP Oil Spill Workers Leaves Most With Nearly Nothing When a deadly explosion destroyed BP’s Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico, 134 million gallons of crude erupted into the sea over the next three months — and tens of thousands of ordinary people were hired ... Cheechako
Alone in a Bathroom: The Fear and Uncertainty of a Post-Roe Medication Abortion Angel tucked two white pills into each side of her mouth, bracing herself as they began to dissolve. Her deepest fears and anxieties took over. Angel had wanted to talk to a doctor before she took the pills to ... Cheechako
They Were Desperate to Get Pregnant. Then IVF Gave Them Extra Embryos. One morning last spring, Ashley Harrolle put her 1-year-old daughter down for a nap and went to the kitchen. She pulled up her fertility clinic’s contact information. It was time to make the call. In a freezer several hundred ... CheechakoJoe Bacon ✅
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ... Cheechako
