Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Mon 24 Jan, 2011 05:42 pm
@ican711nm,
Obama and the Dems offered to fix this provision, the Republicans blocked the fix of it before and have not responded to dialogue on the subject ever since.

But, it would take a little intellectual honesty for you to admit that.

Cycloptichorn
okie
 
  -2  
Mon 24 Jan, 2011 05:46 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

Obama and the Dems offered to fix this provision, ...Cycloptichorn
You honestly expect us to believe that, cyclops, ha ha.
I would not buy a used car from the Democrats, much less believe them on this.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Mon 24 Jan, 2011 05:59 pm
@okie,
okie wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Obama and the Dems offered to fix this provision, ...Cycloptichorn
You honestly expect us to believe that, cyclops, ha ha.


It is the truth. You're not required to believe it. And you've made it perfectly clear that you don't really care about anything but your narrative anyway.

Cycloptichorn
okie
 
  -1  
Mon 24 Jan, 2011 06:05 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:
okie wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Obama and the Dems offered to fix this provision, ...Cycloptichorn
You honestly expect us to believe that, cyclops, ha ha.
It is the truth. .....
Cycloptichorn
Would it be too much for you to offer actual evidence of your claim by a credible source, cyclops? And if there was an actual offer to fix it, what was the price tag, or what was asked in return?

Next questions, as dumb as the provision was, why was it in the bill in the first place? And why was it necessary to offer to fix it? Why not just fix it?

In other words, it makes as much sense as saying the Democrats included a provision in the bill to burn all of our houses down, and the Democrats offered to fix it, but since they were not asked to fix it, it is still in there, and therefore it is the Republicans fault. I have figured out your logic, cyclops, and it isn't.
ican711nm
 
  -1  
Mon 24 Jan, 2011 06:13 pm
@realjohnboy,
Quote:

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_amendments_11-27.html
Amendment XVII (1913)
The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each state shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the state legislatures.

When vacancies happen in the representation of any state in the Senate, the executive authority of such state shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, that the legislature of any state may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.

If the 17th Amendment were to be repealed, state legislatures and not the people would elect Senators.
Quote:

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html
Article I
Section 1. All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.
Section 2. The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several states ...

Section 3. The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state, chosen by the legislature thereof, for six years ...

So why repeal the 17th Amendment?

Repeal the 17th so that Senators will directly represent their state legislatures instead of directly representing the people in their state.

Repeal the 17th Amendment so that Senators cannot buy votes from the people and instead must buy votes from their state legislatures.

That will enable legislatures to demand Senators resign before their term shall expire when a legislature is no longer satisfied with a particular Senator.

0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  -1  
Mon 24 Jan, 2011 06:31 pm
@ican711nm,
Quote:

So I'll follow this post with a new cut and paste post lest you not have something else to complain about


The last two words of your sentence are incorrect. They should read "laugh at."
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  0  
Mon 24 Jan, 2011 06:32 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Quote:
And you've made it perfectly clear that you don't really care about anything but your narrative anyway.


Remember all the speculation about massagatto having been in an mental hospital?
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  0  
Tue 25 Jan, 2011 08:45 am
@okie,
Republicans Block Bill to Aid Small Business



plainoldme
 
  -1  
Tue 25 Jan, 2011 10:08 am
@revelette,
Nothing more be said: a hypocrite will always be a hypocrite.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Tue 25 Jan, 2011 10:40 am
@revelette,
They are full of contradictions - just like the bible.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Tue 25 Jan, 2011 10:42 am
Tonight's speech:

Here is just part of the reality of Barack Obama as he prepares for the SOTU tonight.

* He still dislikes the free markets and private enterprise

* He still believes that the economy should be planned by a central government

* He still believes that our nation is no more exceptional that, as he has said, Greece

* He still harbors an intense resentment toward America for what he believes to be it's role in the colonization of Africa

* He still believes that America's greatness comes from government, not from free people living and producing together under the protection of the Constitution

* He still believes that the Constitution is an inconvenient document

* He is still a man who spent his childhood years being raised in cultures where American history was not part of the learning experience, or a footnote at best

* He still believes that the tax code should be used to seize one person's property to give to another out of a sense of "fairness"

* And ... perhaps most importantly ... Barack Obama is still a man who believes it is his mission to "Radically Transform The United States of America"

* He is still, therefore, a radical


BOORTZ
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Tue 25 Jan, 2011 11:00 am
Can Americans buy insurance that will protect them from damages caused by Obama and the radical left?
parados
 
  1  
Tue 25 Jan, 2011 11:29 am
@H2O MAN,
Sure you can squirt.

Take all your money and short the market. Just like insurance, it only pays off if the country goes to hell.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  -1  
Tue 25 Jan, 2011 11:42 am
Quote:

ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/suppl/empsit.cpseea1.txt
Year……TOTAL US CIVIL EMPLOYMENT
1980…………............…..99 million [CARTER]
1988……….....+......…… 115 million [REAGAN]
1992……….....+.....….… 118 million [BUSH41]
2000……….....+.....…... 137 million [CLINTON]
2004……….....+.....….… 139 million [BUSH43]
2006……….....+.....….… 144 million [BUSH43]
2007……….....+.....….… 146 million [BUSH43]
2008……….....-.....….… 145 million [BUSH43]
2009……….....-.....….… 140 million [OBAMA]
2010……….....-.....….… 139 million [OBAMA] as of December 2010

Year.…….PERCENT OF CIVILIAN POPULATION EMPLOYED
1980………...........….… 59.2 [CARTER]
1988……….....+.....….… 62.3 [REAGAN]
1992……….....-.....….… 61.5 [BUSH41]
2000……….....+.....….… 64.4 [CLINTON]
2004……….....-.....….… 62.3 [BUSH43]
2006……….....+.....….… 63.1 [BUSH43]
2007……….....-.....….… 63.0 [BUSH43]
2008……….....-.....….… 62.2 [BUSH43]
2009……….....-.....….… 59.3 [OBAMA]
2010……….....-.....….… 58.3 [OBAMA] as of December 2010

parados
 
  2  
Tue 25 Jan, 2011 12:14 pm
@ican711nm,
You keep posting that ican. You don't seem to realize it is proof positive that Bush's tax cuts didn't create jobs.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Tue 25 Jan, 2011 12:35 pm
@parados,
ican is as static as the numbers he repeatedly posts on a2k; he's bankrupt! He still can't figure out that Bush's tax cuts in 2001 and 2002 that was promised as job creators only deepened our unemployment ranks, and the middle class and poor's wages remained stagnant. The top 10% was the biggest gainers in wages, benefits, and wealth.

The conservatives now want to get credit for our improving economy - after Obama's been in office for two years.

Believe it or not!
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Tue 25 Jan, 2011 02:39 pm
The State of the Union address can be seen on many sites tonight. Whitehouse.gov will include little sidebars that supposedly will expand on what the President Obama says. Charts, graphs etc.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  0  
Tue 25 Jan, 2011 05:12 pm
@revelette,
I agree with the Republican in your linked story, revelette:

"Mr. LeMieux shot back, “Half the truth is no truth at all.” "
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Tue 25 Jan, 2011 05:41 pm
@okie,
okie, Where does that place you? LOL
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Tue 25 Jan, 2011 07:35 pm
The text of President Obama's speech is available at the NY Times website, if anyone wants to read it.

Anyone planning on watching it?
 

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 1922
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.18 seconds on 10/01/2024 at 01:27:36