33
   

The Gun Fight in Washington. Your opinons?

 
 
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 May, 2013 09:23 pm
@MontereyJack,
When have you posted the truth, not recently.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 May, 2013 09:26 pm
@oralloy,
"Guaranteed?" ROFLMAO Is that anything like Romney's sure win as predicted by the GOP honchos? Mr. Green Laughing Laughing Laughing
RABEL222
 
  0  
Reply Fri 3 May, 2013 09:29 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Its the old baffle them with bull **** gambit CI.
oralloy
 
  2  
Reply Fri 3 May, 2013 09:50 pm
@RABEL222,
RABEL222 wrote:
Its the old baffle them with bull **** gambit CI.

It isn't BS that Obama wasted every bit of his political capital in a childish assault against the NRA, and now he has no energy left to do anything with his second term.

The only thing he has even a small chance of achieving is immigration reform, and that is only because the Republicans want it even more than he does.

It isn't BS that after four years of an ineffective do-nothing presidency (see above), the voters will be more than ready to switch which party controls the White House.

Keeping NRA voters all riled up through 2014 and into the presidential season is only going to make it even worse for the Democrats.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 May, 2013 09:57 pm
@oralloy,
To the extent that he did nothing,
he has my gratitude; he did not do enuf of it.





David
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Reply Fri 3 May, 2013 10:06 pm
@RABEL222,
It makes one wonder how many times they need to get "knocked down" before they learn they're full of bull ****!

Somethings missing from their brain cells. Mr. Green
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  2  
Reply Fri 3 May, 2013 10:21 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:
To the extent that he did nothing,
he has my gratitude; he did not do enuf of it.

Now that Obama has expended all of his political capital, he's going to be doing a lot more "nothing" over the coming years.

The next time we'll see a president with any ability to achieve something will be when a Republican takes office after the 2016 elections.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 May, 2013 11:19 pm
@oralloy,
You guys are so stupid, it makes many wonder where you left your brain.

From CNN.
Quote:
Gridlock in Congress? Blame the GOP


Congress performance ratings:
Quote:
CBS News/New York Times Poll. April 24-28, 2013. N=965 adults nationwide. Margin of error ± 3.
LV = likely voters. RV = registered voters. Among adults, except where indicated.

"Do you approve or disapprove of the way Congress is handling its job?"

DATE.............APPROVE...........DISAPPROVE...........DON'T KNOW
4/24-28/13........17...........................75................................8

hawkeye10
 
  2  
Reply Fri 3 May, 2013 11:32 pm
@cicerone imposter,
http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Congressional-Democrats-Approval-Rating-Over-Time.jpg

http://www.addictinginfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/homer-simpson-doh.gif
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 May, 2013 12:31 am
@hawkeye10,
hawk, Unless you missed it, it's the GOP that have reached new highs in their filibuster in congress. It doesn't matter what the democrats try to do. Do you understand how congress works?

Probably not.

Why congress is broken.
Quote:
It's incredible to look back now on how the Reagan tax cut passed the Democratic House in 1981. The Democratic House leaderships could have refused to schedule votes on Reagan's tax plans. Instead, they not only allowed the tax plan to proceed -- but they allowed 48 of 243 Democrats to break ranks on the key procedural vote without negative consequences to their careers in the Democratic party. (Rep. Dan Glickman of Kansas, for example, who voted for the tax cuts would rise to become Secretary of Agriculture under President Clinton.)
Possible shutdown looms... again Near gov't shutdown? Enough, already! Keeping them honest: Disaster aid
Hard to imagine Speaker John Boehner allowing his Republicans to get away with similar behavior on a measure proposed by President Obama.
What's happening before our eyes is that the US congressional system is adopting the attitudes of a Westminster-style parliamentary system.
In a parliamentary system, "the duty of an opposition is to oppose" (in the famous words of Benjamin Disraeli). The opposition uses every trick and technique to thwart and defeat the government; the government uses all the powers of a parliamentary majority to overwhelm the opposition. (To quote Disraeli again: "a majority is always better than the best repartee.")
Then, at regular intervals, the two sides switch roles.
In the American system, there is no "government" and no "opposition." Who would lead such a "government"? President Obama? Or the man in command of the majority in the lower House -- Prime Minister John Boehner?
In a system built around an administration and a bicameral Congress, everybody is part of the government -- and the government only functions if there exists a certain baseline spirit of cooperation between the mutually indispensable parts.
That spirit of cooperation has tended to vanish in recent years. Back in 1986, Democratic leaders quashed those in their party who wished to try impeach Ronald Reagan over Iran-Contra. But as the Cold War ended, the party struggle intensified. The shock of the economic crisis since 2008 has made things worse still: desperate times lead to desperate politics.
The old rules were based upon certain conditions that have long since vanished.
Back then, Congress was filled with legislators who shared the common bond of military service: in 1981, 73 of the senators were veterans as compared to only 25 today; a similar trend characterizes the House.
The imperatives of the Cold War inspired a spirit of deference to the president.
The long association of the filibuster with opposition to civil rights tended to discredit its use.
The national media were dominated by a few big institutions that professed (even if they did not always deliver) nonpartisanship.
Americans intermingled more with people of different points of view. Bill Bishop points out in his important book, "The Big Sort," in the very close presidential election of 1976, only 26% of Americans lived in a county that went for Gerald Ford or Jimmy Carter by a margin of 20 points or more. In the also close presidential election of 2004, almost 50% of Americans lived in a county that voted by more than 20 points for either George W. Bush or John Kerry.
Perhaps above all: the long prosperity of the postwar years lubricated the system with enough resources that just about everybody could get some of what they wanted: more spending, moderate taxes, reasonable borrowing, strong national defense.
Now instead we have a country that is spatially polarized, that gets its information from highly partisan media, and that confronts the worst recession and the darkest financial outlook since the 1930s.
The results of these changes are breaking the American political system -- destroying public confidence in the U.S. government -- and paralyzing the U.S. economic policy
. It will take more than a change in attitudes to address these concerns. It will take fundamental institutional reform.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 May, 2013 12:38 am
@cicerone imposter,
From Huff Post.
Quote:
The poll found that 49 percent of respondents have a negative view of the GOP, the highest negative marks for the party in the poll since 2008. Just 26 percent said they have a positive view of the Republican Party.

In contrast, 44 percent of adults surveyed said they have a positive view of the Democratic Party, while 38 percent have a negative one.

The Tea Party also found earned strong negative marks, with 47 percent viewing the movement unfavorably.

Recent polls have showed similar trends in the weeks since the fiscal cliff agreement between the White House and Congress. A Washington Post/ABC poll released last week found that most Americans disapproved of how House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) handled the deal, while a Pew survey found "abysmal" marks for the GOP, with just 19 percent approving of how Republicans handled the fiscal negotiations.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 May, 2013 12:40 am
@hawkeye10,
What's the source for your graph? FOX News?

This is from Gallup.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/1600/congress-public.aspx

This shows Democrats higher by 10%. That's something when anybody considers the fact that the Republican Party has turned into the No Party.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  2  
Reply Sat 4 May, 2013 12:41 am
@cicerone imposter,
Sure, I know why Congress is broken.....long ago D's and R's agreed that they would rather play at their pety political skirmishes than work on America's ptoblems.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 May, 2013 08:47 am
@hawkeye10,
I wonder why the Dems gained seats in the House and Senate in 2012? Could it be because the GOP approval is even lower?

If the Dems approval is 35% and the total approval is 17% where does that leave the GOP?

Thank you Homer.
hawkeye10 wrote:


http://www.addictinginfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/homer-simpson-doh.gif
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 May, 2013 02:08 pm
Holder wants WAR

Eric Holder says Feds Will Ignore State Laws and Enforce Gun Grab
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Sun 5 May, 2013 02:12 pm
@H2O MAN,
What the state law states is
Quote:
It is unlawful for any official, agent or employee of the government of the United States, or employee of a corporation providing services to the government of the United States to enforce or attempt to enforce any act, law, treaty, order, rule or regulation of the government of the United States regarding a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately and owned in the state of Kansas and that remains within the borders of Kansas. Violation of this section is a severity level 10 nonperson felony.


CLUE: The Second Amendment doesn't protect states from declaring US law unlawful.
0 Replies
 
Region Philbis
 
  3  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 05:54 am

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/316355_624867834207452_66532186_n.jpg
revelette
 
  2  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 06:08 am
@Region Philbis,
Laughing
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 06:44 am

Democrat Douchebaggery
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 06:59 am
@Region Philbis,
Background checks r unConstitutional discrimination
as to WHO can defend his life n who is not good enuf for that.

Background checks violate Constitutional "equal protection of the laws".


". . . never cede an inch." Have the courage of your convictions.

". . . armed Jews" gave a pretty decent account of themselves in the Warsaw Ghetto;
better than un-armed ones elsewhere.





David
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.11 seconds on 12/23/2024 at 07:14:38