Who do you support for U.S. Senate in...

“Registered Conservative”

Since: Jul 11

Draketown, GA

#32117 Nov 21, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
That's the claim, but it's pretty bogus. Comparing the number of judicial confirmations at the same point in their presidencies, Obama is behind Bush by a whopping 12 (203 confirmations vs 215). The argument can be made that it is just an attempt to take attention away from the failures of Obamacare.
Hopefully, this will be a move the Democrats will regret mightily after 2014.
Hopefully you're right, starting with McConnell.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#32118 Nov 21, 2013
now wrote:
<quoted text>
Ask him the eternal question........
which came first, the egg or the sperm.......
Ha
ChicknButt

Norcross, GA

#32119 Nov 21, 2013
General Robert E Lee wrote:
<quoted text>
Going nuclear is how Hairy rewards compromise?
The past few years, aside for a few judicial nominees, Republicans have been willing to grant Democrats a super-majority on major liberal initiatives. They helped Reid pass amnesty. They gave him the votes for the massive farm/food stamp bill. They were all in the tank for the deceptively-named Violence Against Women Act. They recently gave him the 60 votes for ENDA. And most importantly, they stood shoulder to shoulder with Reid against House Republicans during the most important time when conservatives were united behind defunding Obamacare.
I'd bet this nuclear attack was an order direct from Obama.
You're right. You're not up to speed on this.

Direct order from Obama? Not how it works. In America, we have 3 independent branches of government. There is the Legislative, the Judicial, and the Executive. Start with that. Once you've got that down, move on to this:

one too many

Cordele, GA

#32120 Nov 21, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
Speaking of echos -
You saw me use this term in just the last couple of days in relationship to the Koch propaganda machine, where the term refers to something specific.
Now you've used it twice today in completely the wrong context.
Would you mind just not being such a [email protected]? Please? I'm asking politely that you just quit being so dammm weird and stupid all day every day.
You must be an eternal optimist, CB. To Quote Bob Dylan- "You may as well try and catch the wind".
now

Buford, GA

#32121 Nov 21, 2013
Forum Award wrote:
<quoted text>
Aggie, you humorless witch. Here's your hypocrisy.
Let's not forget a little rule change that happened in the middle of the night in the House.

Ohhhhh, the hypocrisy of the hypocrites who first birthed hypocrisy…..…………..

“In 1974, Congress created a special methodology for balancing the budget, whereby the U.S. Senate could reduce the escalating budget deficit with a simple majority vote (i.e., 51 votes), rather than requiring the usual 60 votes that are needed to stop a filibuster. Under this Senate rule, the expediting process was called "reconciliation," but it was only to be used for balancing the budget.

First, President Obama and his Democrat congressional leaders, Pelosi and Reid, attempted to change the rules to effect passage of this legislation at any price. They used budget "reconciliation" rules to bypass the planned GOP Senate filibuster that would normally have allowed the Republicans to defeat the legislation with 41 Senate votes.(The 41-vote possibility became a potential reality when Massachusetts elected a Republican, Scott Brown, to the U.S. Senate on January 19, 2010.)

Second, the Democrat congressional leaders invoked a convoluted concept of "procedural rules," to make sure one way or the other President Obama could get this cherished piece of legislation through Congress.

The Washington Post article expounded the convoluted methodology as follows:
"Rather than passing the Senate bill and then passing the fixes, the House will pass the fixes under a rule that says the House "deems" the Senate bill passed after the House passes the fixes.

"The virtue of this, for Pelosi's members, is that they don't actually vote on the Senate bill. They only vote on the reconciliation package. But their vote on the reconciliation package functions as a vote on the Senate bill...the bottom line is this: When the House votes on the reconciliation fixes, the Senate bill is passed, even if the Senate hasn't voted on the reconciliation fixes, and even though the House never specifically voted on the Senate bill."

And that convoluted way of thinking did not even include Speaker Pelosi's “most revealing” comment expressed during an interview on Fox News on March 9, 2010: "We have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in it."

So, to make the story brief, the socialist members in the U.S. Congress were willing to do anything to pass and have signed into law what Vladimir Lenin deemed "the keystone in the arch of socialism" — government control of medical care!"

And we have found out what's in it!!! a sorry piece of legislation even demos are now blasting...of course to get re-elected........

http://www.haciendapub.com/articles/faria-oba...

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#32122 Nov 21, 2013
Forum Award wrote:
<quoted text>
....
ALSO let us not forget that the Republicans simply refused to do their job. Yes- it is their job to allow these appointments to go through - it's part of the process of our government. They are obligated to let these appointees go through unless there is some over-riding and major reason not to.
The current Republicans, in another overt display of reckless and dangerous irresponsibility, used these tricks more than in the entire rest of Americas history.
....
Oh, really - "their job" - tell it to the Democrats.

"George W. Bush suffered stiffer resistance and longer delays for his nominees than Obama. Bush’s nominees to the DC Circuit faced confirmations dragging on for 707 days on average, with one particular nomination (Brett ­Kavanaugh) dragging on past 1,000 days. By contrast, Patricia Millett was nominated on June 4 this year and obtained a vote by the Senate just 149 days later, on Oct. 31; Pillard, 161 days; Wilkins, 167 days; and Caitlin Halligan, 433 days. Earlier this year, the Senate confirmed Obama’s nomination of Sri Srinivasan for the DC Circuit after a 346-day wait.
...Obama’s circuit court nominees during his first term faced confirmation battles lasting 268 days. Again, that pales in comparison to the 362 days Bush’s nominees took.
.... Of all his circuit court nominations during his first term, the vast majority, 85 percent, have now been confirmed. Bush got only 72 percent of his nominees confirmed. In fact, a couple of the openings on the DC Circuit court are only available because Democrats refused to confirm Bush’s nominees."
now

Buford, GA

#32123 Nov 21, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
Speaking of echos -
You saw me use this term in just the last couple of days in relationship to the Koch propaganda machine, where the term refers to something specific.
Now you've used it twice today in completely the wrong context.
Would you mind just not being such a [email protected]? Please? I'm asking politely that you just quit being so dammm weird and stupid all day every day.

I've used it in the past, several weeks ago in fact,referring to the "laughing" poster you big dummy........

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#32124 Nov 21, 2013
Oops, forgot the link.
http://nypost.com/2013/11/21/1704907/
now

Buford, GA

#32125 Nov 21, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
I really do wish you'd just fall into a well.
Stupidity should be painful.

Well heck if you weren't such a big dummy who never gets anything right, I could go easy on you. Try something right for a change and I just might ligthen up........but not as long as you post crap like post # 32101, on page # 1538.....







now

Buford, GA

#32126 Nov 21, 2013
one too many wrote:
<quoted text>You must be an eternal optimist, CB. To Quote Bob Dylan- "You may as well try and catch the wind".

you're still a dummy jeb, always will be one. Ha, your fate in life.....
now

Buford, GA

#32127 Nov 21, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, really - "their job" - tell it to the Democrats.
"George W. Bush suffered stiffer resistance and longer delays for his nominees than Obama. Bush’s nominees to the DC Circuit faced confirmations dragging on for 707 days on average, with one particular nomination (Brett ­Kavanaugh) dragging on past 1,000 days. By contrast, Patricia Millett was nominated on June 4 this year and obtained a vote by the Senate just 149 days later, on Oct. 31; Pillard, 161 days; Wilkins, 167 days; and Caitlin Halligan, 433 days. Earlier this year, the Senate confirmed Obama’s nomination of Sri Srinivasan for the DC Circuit after a 346-day wait.
...Obama’s circuit court nominees during his first term faced confirmation battles lasting 268 days. Again, that pales in comparison to the 362 days Bush’s nominees took.
.... Of all his circuit court nominations during his first term, the vast majority, 85 percent, have now been confirmed. Bush got only 72 percent of his nominees confirmed. In fact, a couple of the openings on the DC Circuit court are only available because Democrats refused to confirm Bush’s nominees."

They always whine for their candy, they always have.....

Demos are the party of special interest who feed off gubmint revenues, always have been, always will be....



ChicknButt

Norcross, GA

#32128 Nov 21, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, really - "their job" - tell it to the Democrats.
"George W. Bush suffered stiffer resistance and longer delays for his .(........snipped bit of plagerized article from the pathetic rag the New York Post ....Not the Times...The Post ...yes..she really went there.)
Don't forget to give the New York Post credit for their work.

http://nypost.com/2013/11/21/1704907/

But really? the Post? You're better than that Aggie. But I'll match your New York Post and raise you a MotherJones that actually gives a factual and more than surface-deep explanation of why this was necessary.

Plus the article photo is awesome.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/11/s...

Actually read the article and you'll get a much deeper insight into the issues at stake than you'll get from the Post (LOL!), or Fox.
ChicknButt

Norcross, GA

#32129 Nov 21, 2013
now wrote:
<quoted text>
Well heck if you weren't such a big dummy who never gets anything right, I could go easy on you. Try something right for a change and I just might ligthen up........but not as long as you post crap like post # 32101, on page # 1538.....
Oh, please please go easy on me. Your intellectual powers ae...

awww screw it.

I can't even be sarcastic in light of the incredible dumbassery you display ever single day on here, all day, day after day, non-stop...post after post after post of pure relentless ever-flowing infinite lame stupidity.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#32130 Nov 21, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't forget to give the New York Post credit for their work.
http://nypost.com/2013/11/21/1704907/
But really? the Post? You're better than that Aggie. But I'll match your New York Post and raise you a MotherJones that actually gives a factual and more than surface-deep explanation of why this was necessary.
Plus the article photo is awesome.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/11/s...
Actually read the article and you'll get a much deeper insight into the issues at stake than you'll get from the Post (LOL!), or Fox.
It really is amusing to watch you Lefties disparage sources given the ones you so often use, but regardless of the source - matters of fact are matters of fact.
ChicknButt

Norcross, GA

#32131 Nov 21, 2013
one too many wrote:
<quoted text>You must be an eternal optimist, CB. To Quote Bob Dylan- "You may as well try and catch the wind".
You're right. My hoping he falls down a well tactic is probably more productive than asking him to recognize and correct his own idiocy.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#32132 Nov 21, 2013
one too many wrote:
<quoted text>You must be an eternal optimist, CB. To Quote Bob Dylan- "You may as well try and catch the wind".
Y'all are too busy breaking it.
one too many

Cordele, GA

#32133 Nov 21, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
Oops, forgot the link.
http://nypost.com/2013/11/21/1704907/
...dementia? Already? lol
Laughing at U

Blairsville, GA

#32134 Nov 21, 2013
now wrote:
<quoted text>
Ask him the eternal question........
which came first, the egg or the sperm.......
We're all just wishing your father hadn't come first... maybe if your mom had we wouldn't have to put up with your childish nonsense...
ChicknButt

Norcross, GA

#32135 Nov 21, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Y'all are too busy breaking it.
Why Aggie!

You made a fart joke! LOL!
one too many

Cordele, GA

#32136 Nov 21, 2013
one too many wrote:
<quoted text>You must be an eternal optimist, CB. To Quote Bob Dylan- "You may as well try and catch the wind".
My bad- it was Donavan(not Dylan). Maybe I am the one with dementia, huh Ag! lol

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Blairsville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Timmy : Call Your Mama ! 5 hr Timmys crush 4
Re-Elect Lamar Paris 2016 5 hr Bob 207
John F Kennedy 8 hr Tacitus 3
Remove Benny Erwin as Coroner Sun Ballerina1309 49
boycott mike's seafood till he takes orders at ... (Mar '11) Sat Good grub 251
Sheriff Race May 28 jimbo 2 23
Union Hospital Authority Board should resign May 28 No Cook 117
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Blairsville Mortgages