okie
 
  -2  
Thu 14 May, 2009 09:02 am
@Gargamel,
Gargamel wrote:
He probably doesn't even know how to indirectly criticize one A2Ker by addressing his post to another!

Teach us all how to do that. You could start by addressing the points made, which you never touched on yet.
spendius
 
  1  
Thu 14 May, 2009 09:08 am
@okie,
Solzhenitsyn surely.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Thu 14 May, 2009 04:37 pm
This is interesting, what are the dems trying to hide....

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5isD4Tm-5D4OFcA0LUEPQcnltY46AD9850SJ00

Democrats stop GOP effort to start ethics inquiry
By LARRY MARGASAK " 1 day ago

Quote:
WASHINGTON (AP) " House Democrats on Tuesday stopped a Republican plan to force a campaign finance inquiry that likely would have investigated several influential Democrats. It was the eighth time since late February that the Republican move was halted.

One of the biggest recipients has been the chairman of the defense appropriations subcommittee, Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania.

The vote was 215-182 to stop consideration of a GOP resolution to initiate a House ethics committee inquiry. It called for an investigation into campaign contributions to House lawmakers by recipients of pet project money and their lobbyists.

Democratic leaders spoke to some of their newer members privately last month, to stop them from voting for the Republican initiative. Tuesday's vote showed they made little headway.

Twenty-nine Democrats voted with the Republicans on Tuesday in an unsuccessful effort to keep the GOP initiative alive and allow the investigation to begin. The first time the resolution was considered, in late February, 17 Democrats supported it.

The ethics committee doesn't need a House resolution to start an investigation. The committee usually operates in secret in the early stages, so it could be looking at the donations. However, some of the members who could face an investigation have said they have not been contacted.

The Republican resolution focused on a lobbying firm, PMA, which was raided by the FBI last year. The company's political action committee records were carted off, along with files of some of its lobbyists.

In 2007 and 2008, Murtha, Rep. Jim Moran, D-Va. and Rep. Peter Visclosky. D-Ind., directed $137 million to defense contractors who were paying PMA to get them government business.

At the same time, the three lawmakers received huge amounts of political donations from PMA lobbyists and their clients. Murtha has collected $2.37 million from PMA's lobbyists and the companies it has represented since 1989, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks political money. Visclosky has collected $1.36 million; Moran, $997,348.

Visclosky heads the appropriations subcommittee on energy and water development. Moran is on Murtha's defense subcommittee.


If the dems are so concerned about ethics, why do they keep blocking this investigation?
What are they hiding?
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Thu 14 May, 2009 06:39 pm
@mysteryman,
We should execute the ones who would execute libs, which would be most of them.
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  1  
Thu 14 May, 2009 07:47 pm
@Advocate,
Advocate wrote:

Let's pray we never again give the Reps total control to run the country down and undermine its important programs.



I'd extend this to include giving any political party compelte control of the government.

Bush and his crew obviously fucked up significant pieces of our country....and Obama and his crew aren't doing much better.

I've said it before, but what I really wish we had was a government would was gridlocked to an extent that they couldn't do anything.
maporsche
 
  1  
Thu 14 May, 2009 07:57 pm
@Advocate,
I don't disagree with you entirely here, but it's not like people who are retiring will be withdrawing all of their money right this second when the stock market is down. They'll take some money out this year, some next year, some 10 years from now.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Thu 14 May, 2009 08:36 pm
@maporsche,
You're sounding more like okie; predicting that Obama is f...kg up the country after four months in office. Is your crystal ball better than okie's?
maporsche
 
  1  
Thu 14 May, 2009 10:12 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Well, he's added 20% to our entire country's deficit after only 4 months. If that's not ******* up then I don't know what else is.

Is the stimulus plan actually doing anything yet?
hawkeye10
 
  2  
Thu 14 May, 2009 10:30 pm
@maporsche,
Quote:
Is the stimulus plan actually doing anything yet?


Further bankrupting our kids and grand kids, we know that FOR SURE
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Fri 15 May, 2009 06:02 am
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
Is the stimulus plan actually doing anything yet?


Further bankrupting our kids and grand kids, we know that FOR SURE


Change you can believe in.
maporsche
 
  3  
Fri 15 May, 2009 06:36 am
@H2O MAN,
Obama has so far been a huge dissapointment for me. He received my vote because I believed him when he said he'd bring fiscal responsibility back to our government. What a ******* joke.
rabel22
 
  1  
Fri 15 May, 2009 09:08 am
@maporsche,
Isent fiscal responsibility what Bush and company practiced for eight long years. My dissapointment lies in the fact that Obama is following the same game plan of super support of business and banking while he lets the middle class go down the drain. Where is the support for the people loseing thier homes because the banks gave them loans the bank knew they couldent pay back. For the banks this is a win because they will forclose on the homes and resell them when the economy recovers. When the government supports you with public money you cant lose but the public sure as hell can. Show me where Obama isent just another lieing politician who big business has bought.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Fri 15 May, 2009 09:14 am
@maporsche,
Can you provide the resource where Obama increased the deficit by 20% in four months?
Advocate
 
  1  
Fri 15 May, 2009 09:21 am
@maporsche,
I guess you have not heard. The Great Depression was extended because there was insufficient spending at the beginning to save the banks and get people working. Finally, govt. spending for WWII got us out of the depression. That is why O is spending big. Have you noticed that unemployment is soaring (500 to 600,000 per month, which may increase)? Clinton was producing jobs at a rate two million a month.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Fri 15 May, 2009 09:33 am
@rabel22,
rabel22 wrote:

Isent fiscal responsibility what Bush and company practiced for eight long years. My dissapointment lies in the fact that Obama is following the same game plan of super support of business and banking while he lets the middle class go down the drain. Where is the support for the people loseing thier homes because the banks gave them loans the bank knew they couldent pay back. For the banks this is a win because they will forclose on the homes and resell them when the economy recovers. When the government supports you with public money you cant lose but the public sure as hell can. Show me where Obama isent just another lieing politician who big business has bought.


http://money.cnn.com/2009/05/14/news/economy/Obama_foreclosure_update/?postversion=2009051414

Quote:
55,000 helped by Obama mortgage rescue
Servicers are adjusting loans under Obama's foreclosure prevention program. The administration is expanding the program to help those that don't qualify for a modification.


It seems as if they are at least trying to address your concerns, Rabel.

Cycloptichorn
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Fri 15 May, 2009 09:38 am
@Cycloptichorn,
It's unreasonable to come to conclusions about Obama's stimulus plan after he's been in office for five months. Impatience seems to be rampant, and criticisms free-flowing about the timing of Obama's economic recovery plans.

Hundreds of thousands of American are still losing their jobs and homes every week; don't expect any plan to reverse this trend, because Obama is not a miracle worker - as some claim him to be the messiah.

People needs to put a little bit of reality into their basket of complaints.
okie
 
  0  
Fri 15 May, 2009 09:55 am
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Hundreds of thousands of American are still losing their jobs and homes every week; don't expect any plan to reverse this trend, because Obama is not a miracle worker - as some claim him to be the messiah.

Plus he is incompetent. He is a Chicago street organizer, thats all, that made president because the media hyped one speech he made at the DNC. And he is even a lousy speaker if you take away the teleprompter. What do you have left? A poor reincarnation of Jimmy Carter.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Fri 15 May, 2009 09:59 am
@okie,
okie wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:

Hundreds of thousands of American are still losing their jobs and homes every week; don't expect any plan to reverse this trend, because Obama is not a miracle worker - as some claim him to be the messiah.

Plus he is incompetent. He is a Chicago street organizer, thats all, that made president because the media hyped one speech he made at the DNC. And he is even a lousy speaker if you take away the teleprompter. What do you have left? A poor reincarnation of Jimmy Carter.


Better than every single person the Republican party put forward. He beat your best, and not by a little bit. So if you think he is incompetent, what does that say about your group of losers?

Cycloptichorn
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Fri 15 May, 2009 10:19 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Dwindling losers.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Fri 15 May, 2009 10:19 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

Better than every single person the Republican party put forward. He beat your best, and not by a little bit. So if you think he is incompetent, what does that say about your group of losers?

Cycloptichorn

It may mean that voters chose the wrong guy. Our guy was not the messiah, only a flawed politician, but he at least had some realistic goals. He would not have proposed the nonsensical spending, that even Obama says is unsustainable now, and we might have some realistic policies in regard to energy (get going on nuclear for example), and all the other issues.

Just because somebody gets elected means nothing about their competence. It means hype and hyperbole won over sanity.
 

Related Topics

So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Obama 2012? - Discussion by snood
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama '08?
  3. » Page 1254
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 7.07 seconds on 11/23/2024 at 06:47:45