Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Page 37 of 67 FirstFirst ... 27353637383947 ... LastLast
Results 361 to 370 of 667
  1. #361
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    66,301

    Default

    Ok, lets take Jindal at his word, the Reps need to stop being stupid. We all agree on that. You may also see Jindal tone down the creationism alot if he wants to rise higher in office.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    Repent Ash, repent!

  2. #362

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by split decision View Post
    The commander-in-chief found out in his first term that compromise ain't happening when the other guys refuse to play. So now he's going to stomp a mudhole in the Republicans' asses more and more!

    Obama II
    Why the president is finally getting tough.
    Talk about puff journalism. He is "getting tough" because he spent a large part of his first term making sure he's doing just enough here and there, not upsetting various factions enough to ensure he was elected for a second term. Yes, he concentrated on a few areas to get legislation he wanted passed. But now he doesn't have to worry about getting re-elected, so we can expect to see all sorts of difference between Obama I and Obama II.

    "His cower has turned to swagger. “I will not have another debate with this Congress over whether or not they should pay the bills that they have already racked up through the laws that they passed,” he declared on New Year’s Day, laying down a marker." What a difference a few years makes, given that he was a member of the Congress that racked up the bills, and his viewpoint on paying those bills.

    Last edited by Thumpin; 01-25-2013 at 09:17 PM.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

  3. #363
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    66,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thumpin View Post
    Talk about puff journalism. He is "getting tough" because he spent a large part of his first term making sure he's doing just enough here and there, not upsetting various factions enough to ensure he was elected for a second term. Yes, he concentrated on a few areas to get legislation he wanted passed. But now he doesn't have to worry about getting re-elected, so we can expect to see all sorts of difference between Obama I and Obama II.

    "His cower has turned to swagger. “I will not have another debate with this Congress over whether or not they should pay the bills that they have already racked up through the laws that they passed,” he declared on New Year’s Day, laying down a marker." What a difference a few years makes, given that he was a member of the Congress that racked up the bills, and his viewpoint on paying those bills.

    You are racist for pointing that out.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    Repent Ash, repent!

  4. #364
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Castlevania
    Posts
    15,182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cbear View Post
    You are racist for pointing that out.
    not racist, just pointless.

    http://www.bankruptingamerica.org/to...-debt-ceiling/

    January 23, 2013

    Today the House will vote on a measure that would temporarily suspend the federal government’s debt limit, known as the “debt ceiling.” Until the last two years, few Americans had heard this term:

    1. What Is The Debt Limit? Most consumers have credit cards with limits – the maximum amount he or she can borrow under the agreement with the bank. The U.S. also has a limit to what it can borrow to meet its spending obligations. That limit is called the debt limit. The Congressional Budget Office explains the limit is comprised of two main components: “debt held by the public and debt held by government accounts. Debt held by the public consists mainly of securities that the Treasury issues to raise cash to fund the operations and pay off the maturing liabilities of the federal government that revenues are insufficient to cover. Such debt is held by outside investors, including the Federal Reserve System. Debt held by government accounts is debt issued to the federal government’s trust funds and other federal accounts for internal transactions of the government.”

    2. What Is The Current Debt Limit? The current limit is $16.394 trillion. With the national debt close to $16.433 trillion today, the federal government has already exceeded this ceiling. To keep funding its obligations, the government is, well, it’s borrowing again, this time from future obligations. Morning Money explains the U.S. Treasury has halted investments in the federal Thrift Savings Plan, which is the pension plan for federal workers. Morning Money calls this act “borrowing.”

    3. How Many Times Has Congress Raised The Debt Ceiling? According to the U.S. Treasury Department, 78 separate times since 1960. 49 increases occurred under Republicans presidents and 29 fell under Democratic regimes.

    4. What Would Happen If Congress Didn’t Raise The Debt Ceiling? Good question and, according to The International Business Times on that “no expert can answer with certainty.” Some argue the U.S. would default on its obligations, which, according to the Council on Foreign Relations, would mean “limiting or delaying payments to creditors, beneficiaries, vendors, and other entities.” Programs affected could include “military salaries, Social Security and Medicare payments, and unemployment benefits.” Others say the U.S. would not technically default, meaning it could keep making interest payments on the debt. With the option the government would still have to “prioritize” other spending like funding for the Departments of Defense and Education and Social Security and Medicare. To go back to the credit card analogy, this option is kind of like paying the minimum balance while not adding to the total outstanding obligation – but, when funding an entire life on credit, this option could mean sacrificing food or shelter. Regardless, since several firms downgraded the U.S.’s debt rating last year after Congress’s prolonged debate over raising the ceiling (which still resulted in an increase), it’s likely the U.S.’s credit rating would take another hit.

    5. What Does This Week’s Legislation Do And What Are Some Long-Term Solutions? According to The Associated Press, the bill to be voted on today “would give the government enough borrowing leeway to meet three months’ worth of obligations.” The bill also includes a provision that says if the House and Senate don’t pass a budget, lawmakers paychecks will be escrowed – put in an account and saved for them – until they do. (Notably, it doesn’t require Congress to complete the budget process by requiring the House and Senate to pass the same budget). For the long-term, some lawmakers and economists want to get rid of the debt ceiling. Congress could also keep it in place and, of course, finally cut spending and reform the nation’s entitlement programs in order to keep from hitting the higher limits.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

  5. #365

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tallica1981 View Post
    It's pointless? I'm not discussing the merits of raising the debt ceiling, which has to happen, but just the fact that Obama is basically criticizing himself for being part of a past Congress that racked up bills we are paying for today, while at the same time, his view while in that Congress was that having to raise the debt ceiling was a failure of leadership (aka "Bush's fault"), but now that he is president, it's absurd not to raise the ceiling.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

  6. #366

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thumpin View Post
    I'm not discussing the merits of raising the debt ceiling, which has to happen, but just the fact that Obama is basically criticizing himself for being part of a past Congress that racked up bills we are paying for today, while at the same time, his view while in that Congress was that having to raise the debt ceiling was a failure of leadership (aka "Bush's fault"), but now that he is president, it's absurd not to raise the ceiling.
    Quote Originally Posted by Thumpin View Post
    "His cower has turned to swagger. “I will not have another debate with this Congress over whether or not they should pay the bills that they have already racked up through the laws that they passed,” he declared on New Year’s Day, laying down a marker." What a difference a few years makes, given that he was a member of the Congress that racked up the bills, and his viewpoint on paying those bills.

    Okay, so you don't take issue with the debt ceiling having to be raised further. What offends you is the president's use of the word "they" when you feel he should have used "we." So let's say he's playing politics there. He's played the game well enough that this remains true -- a factual statement from the "puff piece":

    "Through the long, deep recession, the president’s approval rating never fell below the 40s. The Republican Congress bottomed out at 10 percent, near where it remains."

    Obama just got re-elected. He's decided to do a little ass kicking rather than ass kissing. I say good on him. We'll see his new approach in action again next week with immigration reform, if need be. Take these next two years and pound the Republicans with the ball. It's not the Dems who have a prominent member of the party speaking up and saying, "we might need to change just about everything else we do."

    Obama hasn't been beyond reproach but he hasn't stumbled as badly as the opposition either. In an ideal world, politics shouldn't be reduced to who ****s up less, but if you choose to be cynical about the process then there you have it. Glass half empty or glass half full...

    I'm glad the president is going to cement his legacy by flexing some muscle. Bush seemed to believe history will ultimately judge him well. I think that will actually prove true about Obama, more so from this term than last because he's even more determined to forge ahead. And that's not saying his first term was a failure, just that he tried too hard to compromise.
    Last edited by split decision; 01-26-2013 at 04:00 AM.

  7. #367

    Default

    As I said, Obama is not infallible. He's getting his hand slapped by the courts for a common political appointment process.

    Obama Labor Board Recess Appointments Are Unconstitutional, Federal Court Rules

    WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama violated the Constitution when he bypassed the Senate last year to appoint three members of the National Labor Relations Board, a federal appeals court ruled Friday in a far-reaching decision that could severely limit a chief executive's powers to make recess appointments.

    The decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit marked a victory for Republicans and business groups critical of the labor board. If it stands, it could invalidate hundreds of board decisions over the past year, including some that make it easier for unions to organize.

    When Obama filled the vacancies on Jan. 4, 2012, Congress was on an extended holiday break. But GOP lawmakers gaveled in for a few minutes every three days just to prevent Obama from making recess appointments. The White House argued that the pro forma sessions – some lasting less than a minute – were a sham.

    The court rejected that argument, but went even further, finding that under the Constitution, a recess occurs only during the breaks between formal year-long sessions of Congress, not just any informal break when lawmakers leave town. It also held that presidents can bypass the Senate only when administration vacancies occur during a recess.

    White House press secretary Jay Carney said the administration strongly disagrees with the decision and that the labor board would continue to conduct business as usual, despite calls by some Republicans for the board members to resign.

    "The decision is novel and unprecedented," Carney said. "It contradicts 150 years of practice by Democratic and Republican administrations."

    Under the court's decision, 285 recess appointments made by presidents between 1867 and 2004 would be invalid.


    The Justice Department hinted that the administration would ask the Supreme Court to overturn the decision, which was rendered by three conservative judges appointed by Republican presidents. "We disagree with the court's ruling and believe that the president's recess appointments are constitutionally sound," the statement said.

    The court acknowledged that the ruling conflicts with what some other federal appeals courts have held about when recess appointments are valid, which only added to the likelihood of an appeal to the high court.

    "I think this is a very important decision about the separation of powers," said Carl Tobias, a constitutional law professor at Virginia's University of Richmond. "The court's reading has limited the president's ability to counter the obstruction of appointments by a minority in the Senate that has been pretty egregious in the Obama administration."

    The ruling also threw into question the legitimacy of Obama's recess appointment of Richard Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Cordray's appointment, made on the same date, has been challenged in a separate case.

    Carney insisted the court's ruling affects only a single case before the labor board and would have no bearing on Cordray's appointment. Obama on Thursday renominated Cordray for the job.

    The case challenging the recess appointments was brought by Noel Canning, a Washington state bottling company that claimed an NLRB decision against it was not valid because the board members were not properly appointed. The D.C. Circuit panel agreed.

    Obama made the recess appointments after Senate Republicans blocked his choices for an agency they contended was biased in favor of unions. Obama claims he acted properly because the Senate was away for the holidays on a 20-day recess. The Constitution allows for such appointments without Senate approval when Congress is in recess.

    But during that time, GOP lawmakers argued, the Senate technically had stayed in session because it was gaveled in and out every few days for so-called pro forma sessions.

    GOP lawmakers used the tactic – as Democrats had done in the past – specifically to prevent the president from using his recess power to install members to the labor board and the consumer board. They had also vigorously opposed the nomination of Cordray.

    The three-judge panel flatly rejected arguments from the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, which claimed that the president has discretion to decide that the Senate is unavailable to perform its advice and consent function.

    "Allowing the president to define the scope of his own appointment power would eviscerate the Constitution's separation of powers," Chief Judge David Sentelle wrote in the 46-page ruling. He was appointed by President Ronald Reagan.

    The court ruled that during one of those pro forma sessions on Jan. 3, 2012, the Senate officially convened its second session of the 112th Congress, as required by the Constitution.

    Sentelle's opinion was joined by Judge Thomas Griffith, appointed to the court by President George W. Bush, and Karen LeCraft Henderson, who was appointed by President George H.W. Bush.

    "With this ruling, the D.C. Circuit has soundly rejected the Obama administration's flimsy interpretation of the law, and (it) will go a long way toward restoring the constitutional separation of powers," said Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah.

    GOP House Speaker John Boehner welcomed the ruling as "a victory for accountability in government."

    If the ruling stands, it would invalidate more than 600 board decisions issued over the past year. It also would leave the five-member labor board with just one validly appointed member, effectively shutting it down. The board is allowed to issue decisions only when it has at least three sitting members.

    Obama used the recess appointment to install Deputy Labor Secretary Sharon Block, union lawyer Richard Griffin and NLRB counsel Terence Flynn to fill vacancies on the labor board, giving it a full contingent for the first time in more than a year. Block and Griffin are Democrats, while Flynn is a Republican. Flynn stepped down from the board last year.

    All three vacancies on the labor board had been open for months before Obama acted to fill them.

    Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa called the ruling "a radical departure from precedent" and argued that Obama had no choice but to act.

    "Throughout his presidency, Republicans have employed unprecedented partisan delay tactics and filibusters to prevent confirmation of nominees to lead the NLRB, thus crippling the board's legal authority to act," Harkin said.

    If Obama's recess appointment of Cordray to the newly created consumer board is eventually ruled invalid, it could nullify all the regulations the consumer board has issued, many of which affect the mortgage business.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2550788.html

  8. #368

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by split decision View Post
    Okay, so you don't take issue with the debt ceiling having to be raised further. What offends you is the president's use of the word "they" when you feel he should have used "we." So let's say he's playing politics there.
    He absolutely did...he tries to make it sound like he was never part of the problem (but then again, he may not have been...I have read that he missed about 24% of all roll calls while in Congress).

    Quote Originally Posted by split decision View Post
    He's played the game well enough that this remains true -- a factual statement from the "puff piece":

    "Through the long, deep recession, the president’s approval rating never fell below the 40s. The Republican Congress bottomed out at 10 percent, near where it remains."
    How is that factual? We have a split congress, with the Republicans in control of the House, and the Dems in control of the Senate. Puff piece.

    Quote Originally Posted by split decision View Post
    Obama just got re-elected. He's decided to do a little ass kicking rather than ass kissing. I say good on him. We'll see his new approach in action again next week with immigration reform, if need be. Take these next two years and pound the Republicans with the ball. It's not the Dems who have a prominent member of the party speaking up and saying, "we might need to change just about everything else we do."

    Obama hasn't been beyond reproach but he hasn't stumbled as badly as the opposition either. In an ideal world, politics shouldn't be reduced to who ****s up less, but if you choose to be cynical about the process then there you have it. Glass half empty or glass half full...

    I'm glad the president is going to cement his legacy by flexing some muscle. Bush seemed to believe history will ultimately judge him well. I think that will actually prove true about Obama, more so from this term than last because he's even more determined to forge ahead. And that's not saying his first term was a failure, just that he tried too hard to compromise.
    Exactly my point...he's Obama II this term because he doesn't have to worry about getting re-elected. That's how he played his first term, with the final year of his term pandering to every group he could. Once he won the election, we saw him "champion" not raising middle class income taxes, but most overlook that we all saw a 2% payroll tax increase on Jan 1 and his administration conveniently left it out of their discussion since "income tax" is different than "payroll tax". Our health care costs will be ratcheting up soon as Obamacare takes effect. Entitlements are still driving a huge deficit. I don't think he tried to compromise in the first term - I think he let Congress take center stage and take him along for the ride. Don't even get me started on Congress though...Congress is a mess. Unfortunately our president didn't do well in reining them in and corralling them. Now that he has a second term in pocket, perhaps he'll do so.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

  9. #369

    Default

    Security dog bites it for Biden.

    Secret Service dog falls off roof and dies while protecting Vice President Biden in New Orleans





    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...w-Orleans.html

  10. #370
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    66,301

    Default

    A dog died for crazy joe.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    Repent Ash, repent!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •