Surprise....politics as usual...
gimmesometruth27
St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,308
more of the same from the gop senators, block everything, grand obstructionist party, party of NOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:roll: :roll: :roll:
Senate GOP letter calls for blocking most bills
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101201/ap_ ... epublicans
WASHINGTON – Senate Republicans intend to block action on virtually all Democratic-backed legislation unrelated to tax cuts and government spending in the current postelection session of Congress, officials said Tuesday, adding that the leadership has quietly collected signatures on a letter pledging to carry out the strategy.
If carried out, it would doom Democratic-backed attempts to end the Pentagon's practice of discharging openly gay members of the military service and give legal status to young illegal immigrants who join the military or attend college.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has made both measures a priority as Democrats attempt to enact legislation long sought by groups that supported them in the recent midterm elections.
A nuclear arms treaty with Russia that President Barack Obama wants ratified would not be affected, since any debate would take place under different rules than those that apply to legislation. Even so, its passage is not assured as Republicans are seeking concessions from the White House.
Officials who disclosed the new Republican maneuver did so on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to discuss it.
It was not known how many of the Senate's 42 Republicans had signed the draft letter, which the leadership intends to make public quickly.
Senate Democrats need 60 votes to overcome any delaying tactics, meaning they could be thwarted if 41 Republicans join in the commitment.
Democrats' chances of passing politically charged legislation will dim when the new Congress convenes in January, since Republicans will take control of the House and gain more Senate seats.
The letter comes after comments by Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell and others in his party that the voters made it clear in the elections they want lawmakers to focus on economic issues.
"Despite what some Democrats in Congress have suggested, voters did not signal they wanted more cooperation on the Democrats' big-government policies that most Americans oppose," McConnell and incoming House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, wrote in an op-ed article published in the Washington Post.
:roll: :roll: :roll:
Senate GOP letter calls for blocking most bills
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101201/ap_ ... epublicans
WASHINGTON – Senate Republicans intend to block action on virtually all Democratic-backed legislation unrelated to tax cuts and government spending in the current postelection session of Congress, officials said Tuesday, adding that the leadership has quietly collected signatures on a letter pledging to carry out the strategy.
If carried out, it would doom Democratic-backed attempts to end the Pentagon's practice of discharging openly gay members of the military service and give legal status to young illegal immigrants who join the military or attend college.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has made both measures a priority as Democrats attempt to enact legislation long sought by groups that supported them in the recent midterm elections.
A nuclear arms treaty with Russia that President Barack Obama wants ratified would not be affected, since any debate would take place under different rules than those that apply to legislation. Even so, its passage is not assured as Republicans are seeking concessions from the White House.
Officials who disclosed the new Republican maneuver did so on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to discuss it.
It was not known how many of the Senate's 42 Republicans had signed the draft letter, which the leadership intends to make public quickly.
Senate Democrats need 60 votes to overcome any delaying tactics, meaning they could be thwarted if 41 Republicans join in the commitment.
Democrats' chances of passing politically charged legislation will dim when the new Congress convenes in January, since Republicans will take control of the House and gain more Senate seats.
The letter comes after comments by Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell and others in his party that the voters made it clear in the elections they want lawmakers to focus on economic issues.
"Despite what some Democrats in Congress have suggested, voters did not signal they wanted more cooperation on the Democrats' big-government policies that most Americans oppose," McConnell and incoming House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, wrote in an op-ed article published in the Washington Post.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
blocking the start treaty is very reckless, blocking repeal of don't ask don't tell subjugates an entire segment of the population, yet repealing the health care law and tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires is good for everyone???
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
"Becoming a Bruce fan is like hitting puberty as a musical fan. It's inevitable." - dcfaithful
and it is all such petty shit.
"i disagree with you only because i can!!!"
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
it is just like how kyl is holding up the treaty ratification. why? and how does that benefit the people of this country???
i think the dems need to put up a bill to extend tax cuts to the middle class only and make the republicans vote against it. if it fails it proves that they are the party of the upper class and can't be bothered with doing things for the middle and lower classes whom they claim to be all for but actions show otherwise...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Actually by holding out they are showing that they are for ALL classes. Why do you and others find it so easy to not treat all American citizens the same?
they are NOT.
THEY are holding up repeal of don't ask don't tell.
THEY are against gay marriage.
THEY are holding up unemployment benefits. THEY are against health insurance reform. THEY are against ratifying the start teaty which has already been signed by both presidents mind you, THEY are for tax cuts for wealthy and are willing to let them expire for the middle and lower classes if the people that don't really need a tax cut don't get one as well. and don't give me that BS that they are creating jobs, because they have had those tax cuts for 7 years and where are the jobs??? THEY have opposed everything obama has proposed even when all citizens would benefit. I could go on all day, but i am pressed for time and i think you get my point...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
This move shouldn't shock anyone. And they'll really get this country back on track by doing so! :roll:
Since when did everyone in America earn more than $250,000? I'm seriously missing a MASSIVE chunk of my paycheck if that's the case...
I'm not trying to get in a pissing match with you. If you want to extend tax cuts then extend them for ALL.
DADT was signed into law by Bill Clinton and was considered progress at the time. Stop blaming the GOP for not ending it when a Dem signed it. Personally I don't care if there are gay troops in the military, but I just read that 60% of the troops think that allowing them would lower morale.
And just how long do you think unemployment benefits should last now? It used to be 26 weeks, now it is two years. How much more time does someone need to find a job? There are jobs out there if people would swallow their pride and broaden their search.
Regarding job creation, perhaps the job losses would have been even worse without the tax cuts. Difficult to prove that, but it's a possibility. Regardless, what small businesses really need in order to grow is a stable base upon which to make decisions about the future. Obviously the market and demand for their products is never guaranteed, but the least the gov't could do is give them a consistent framework within which to predict what their particular market is going to do.
Where did you read that about gay troops? The Pentagon just finished a study that found 70% of troops believe repealing DADT will either have a positive effect or no effect at all on their ability to complete missions. Interestingly enough, that number is higher than the overall numbers that show just 58% of Americans are in favor of repealing DADT (according to a PEW poll conducted last month)
I'm with you now - I misread it the first time around. That being said, the Republicans did everything they could to tilt things in favor of the upper class under Bush. The income gap in America is absolutely massive now, and almost everything in weighted in favor of the upper class. A lot of people like to talk about America being the land of opportunity where everyone can succeed, but in the real world it isn't that simple. I'm not saying staggered taxes or flat taxes will solve the problem, but I also disagree that the Republicans are supporting ALL Americans.
All people are not gay...so why waste time (at this time) passing bills that are only for special intrest group?
How long should Americans support the unemployed? .....special intrest group
Health reform is not going to help everyone....in fact people those that have good insurance thru work will lose there good insurance.
Right now the most important agenda for Washington needs to be the economy and jobs....
I am sure the gays will live without the getting married....
"Becoming a Bruce fan is like hitting puberty as a musical fan. It's inevitable." - dcfaithful
heakth reform might not help EVERYONE, but it will sure as hell help people who were uninsurable before the bill passed. do you have reputable links saying all those people will lose coverage? millions of people who had no insurance will be covered now, and you see that as a bad thing in what ways?
and i gotta tell you, this is one of the most condescending things i have read around here in weeks..
"I am sure the gays will live without the getting married...." that is like saying "i am sure women will live without the right to vote", or (in redneck condeferate accent) "i am sure them blacks will live without the emancipation proclamation.."
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
truth is the rich pay less of a percentage, and these are the people that can actually afford to pay more of a percentage in taxes. and that is all i will say about taxes, because you have your view, i have mine. it is just funny to me how the gop is now calling "unfair" when they are gonna let all tax cuts expire if their rich supporters don't get the same tax cuts.
clinton signed it, and the republicans in this congress are not going to support it's repeal. they have kept stonewalling it and the choice now is either:
1. congressionally overturn it and set a date for it to take effect, or
2. have a judge overturn it and have it become policy that day.
either way, don't ask don't tell is going away. the congress should overturn it, but they can't without gop support. i want to know where you got your poll numbers as well. i read of the pentagon study that concluded that the policy can be ended as well..
unemployment should be paid until the economy comes around and jobs actually come back. those that were shipped overseas are GONE. kaput. not coming back. so until more jobs can be created, those people that lost their jobs should be compensated until they find real work with a living wage. i'm sorry, an unemployed man with an MBA whose job was eliminated is not going to support his family by working drive through at mcdonalds, as you seem to be suggesting...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
again, how is being against the feeding of millions of poor kids "fixing" anything? and how is this benefitting the people of this country??
it is just pettiness because it is Michelle Obama's idea...
Republicans block child nutrition bill
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101201/ap_ ... _nutrition
WASHINGTON – House Republicans have temporarily blocked legislation to feed school meals to thousands more hungry children. Republicans used a procedural maneuver Wednesday to try to amend the $4.5 billion bill, which would give more needy children the opportunity to eat free lunches at school and make those lunches healthier. First lady Michelle Obama has lobbied for the bill as part of her "Let's Move" campaign to combat childhood obesity.
House Democrats said the GOP amendment, which would have required background checks for child care workers, was an effort to kill the bill and delayed a final vote on the legislation rather than vote on the amendment.
Because the nutrition bill is identical to legislation passed by the Senate in August, passage would send it to the White House for President Barack Obama's signature. If the bill were amended, it would be sent back to the Senate with little time left in the legislative session.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md. said the House would hold separate votes on Thursday on the amendment and the bill.
Republicans say the nutrition bill is too costly and an example of government overreach.
"It's not about making our children healthy and active," said Rep. John Kline, R-Minn., the top Republican on the House Education and Labor Committee. "We all want to see our children healthy and active. This is about spending and the role of government and the size of government — a debate about whether we're listening to our constituents or not."
Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has also taken a swipe at the first lady's campaign, bringing cookies to a speech at a Pennsylvania school last month and calling the campaign a "school cookie ban debate" and "nanny state run amok" on her Twitter feed.
The legislation would give the government the power to decide what kinds of foods could be sold and what ingredients may be limited in school lunch lines and vending machines.
The Agriculture Department would create the standards, which would likely keep popular foods like hamburgers and pizza in school cafeterias but make them healthier, using leaner meat or whole wheat crust, for example. Vending machines could be stocked with less candy and fewer high-calorie drinks.
The bill would provide money to serve more than 20 million additional after-school meals annually to children in all 50 states. Many of those children now only receive after-school snacks. It would also increase the number of children eligible for school meals programs by at least 115,000, using Medicaid and census data to identify them.
The legislation would increase the amount of money schools are reimbursed by 6 cents a meal, a priority for schools that say they don't have the dollars to feed needy kids.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Nope, I have not, so rolling your eyes at me really isn't the issue. My question remains unanswered. How long should unemployment benefits be extended? It used to be 26 weeks, now it is two years. How long should someone get them? How should it be paid for?
I believe Obama stated that the $1T stimulus package was supposed to bring unemployment down almost immediately from the 10% back to the 4.5% area. It is still at 9% two years later. How much longer should we give it?
I misread it. 60% of active fighting troops are against it, the entire military has the majority supporting it. Either way it is not clear cut. Either way it is something I am not concerned about, I am neither for nor against. I can't offer an opinion because I am not in the military. Ultimately if the decision were up to me I'd say let them serve because I don't believe it denying one their personal liberties.
"Becoming a Bruce fan is like hitting puberty as a musical fan. It's inevitable." - dcfaithful
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
"Becoming a Bruce fan is like hitting puberty as a musical fan. It's inevitable." - dcfaithful
i am convinced that they are only blocking it since it is Michelle Obama's baby. they did the same thing with Hillary's health care overhaul. all it is is partison politics. see, this is what happens when you let the gop run things. they will never ever compromise, and when they are in the minority they will piss and moan and claim the process is unfair, and still again refuse to compromise. i never thought they would stoop to this level of pettiness though.
on second thought, i knew that they would...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Stop trying to have everyone like you BO! Those days are long gone! Stop being a bitch, stick up your middle finger to the right and get shit passed while you can. The Democratic party is so f'n lame anymore. No balls, no spine, no nothing other than the same corporatists BS that put their "opposition" in office.
Who's hurting the most right now? The middle class.
Who would really not be effected by a 5-9% raise in their taxes? Those making a q-mil+.
What I don't get is how republicans can bitch and moan about the tax rate? For fuck sakes, it was higher in the Clinton era, the Bush 1 era, and *gasp* the Regan era. :?
Cut taxes.
Cut the deficit.
Yeah...ok.
^ and this is true too. i tried telling this to a republican friend of mine the other night and he did not believe me....we googled it and several sites all said the same thing, that it was true...it is funny how people think these tax issues happened on the day obama was sworn in...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
fuck you man; i know we're supposed to be polite on here, but i have 2 brothers in union construction with mortgages and family to support, you think they like staying home? What about my sister with 2 kids and a house to pay for, who was laid off from citigroup after 15 years. she tried applying at target and kids r us but there were no openings. Don't give people this bullshit about broadening their search. Why don't you broaden your mind first. And asshat, gay people want rights and deserve them. i swear to god some people are so detatched from this world. These tax cuts by the way, if they renew them for people making under 250,000 a year, they're working to help out 98% of the country, how does this seem wrong?