Stupid Republican idea of the day

  • Thread starter Thread starter acsenray
  • Start date Start date
I know what he means though. My cat scratched me last night and boy, now I know how Jesus felt being nailed to the cross.
 
What percent of Republican Congressmen are whackjobs like him and Bachmann? I can tolerate classic conservatives (lower taxes/smaller government/reduce spending), but it seems like more and more of them are these shrill ideologues that are slaves to hot button social issues. Is that really still working for them?
 
It's a bunch of bureaucratic functionaries and manipulative, self-serving politicians and legislators who more and more want to increase our taxes and control our lives.
Losing an election has consequences.

Time to man up and accept that your "ilk" is in the minority, and no longer gets to dictate to the majority of Americans. We don't like the world you want to foist on us.

The more you struggle, the less lube we will use.
 
Whoo-boy:
Not only are Republican senators threatening to block funding for the troops. Not only are they doing so under cover of night. (The move happened around 1 a.m. early this, Friday morning.) Not only does this go against all of the soft-on-defense attacks the GOP has launched against Democrats since, oh, 1968.

But some Republicans openly admit they are doing it.

If President Obama and Senate Democrats cannot turn this into a holy shit storm of criticism, there's something wrong with them. This is a breakaway dunk for Lebron James. This is a tipped pass headed straight into the cornerback Darrell Green's hands, with nothing but an open sideline between him and the end zone. This is a fat pitch down the middle to Albert Pujols on a full count with the bases loaded. This is my beloved Alex Ovechkin with the puck on his stick and an open net in front of him.

This is, in short, an opportunity for Obama--not Reid, Obama--to throw up his hands and finally say what he should have said long ago, something like: "You know what, for a year now I've tried to negotiate in good faith with my Republican counterparts, but too many of them have ceased to be people of good faith. Their threats to shut down military funding are like the government shutdown of 1995--actually worse, because these are troops fighting two wars abroad right now. Apparently, the Republicans were for the troops before they were against them. This proves they are the party that stands for nothing--absolutely nothing--other than the excercise of power for power's sake. And they should be ashamed."
 
Senator Graham (R-NC) say the House bill is DOA in the Senate.

I'm not claiming this is a stupid Republican idea. I'm sure there is a nuance here that I'm missing-- but doesn't the Senate have their own bill? And the House bill can't be DOA because it isn't Aing in the Senate? Or is it that the Senate is taking the House bill and using it as their own?

This isn't snarkiness but an actual question. Did School House Rock mislead me for all these years?
 
Well, there are about 40 BCBS-related entities, and if I hadn't worked in the healthcare field I might be a bit leery about throwing out a name which might or might not actually exist.

Right, but I bet if you had to deal with your provider directly you would know.

And not knowing is ok, if you're an average guy, not the head of a party that's doing all it can to criticize the administration's plan.

He doesn't know because he doesn't need to know, other people take care of it. He doesn't have to worry about deductables or being denied treatment or using the ER has his primary "insurance".

That's the thing that bugged me; this country is having a huge discussion concerning health care. You would think that any politcian who is making hay out of either supporting or rejecting it, would have enough intellectual interest to look at his own plan and become informed about it; if just to be able to speak to people in terms they can relate to.

He just didn't care, because as one the hosts noted, he was one of the "haves", the details don't matter as it was just on tap for him and that makes him out of touch in my opinion.
 
Not to say that some Democrats don't also have problems keeping their parts inside their pants around inappropriate persons, but please don't talk about it in front of a live mike. Especially when you've staked your reputation on being a "family values" candidate. I mean, really -- not just cheating on your wife, but cheating on your mistress, too? I also love how his public "apology" apologizes only for the comments, not for the affairs.

The really serious thing about this one isn't that he cheated on his wife (and mistress). The really serious (and probably illegal) thing about this is that both of his mistresses were lobbyists and he was apparently exchanging legislative favors for sex.
 
"Not subject to the jurisdiction of" - I don't think this means what they think it means. :p



Of course, if I was an illegal immigrant, I might love such a concept. "Hey, you can't arrest me! I'm not subject to your jurisdiction!!" :smack:

IANALawyer, and my first thought was... then how do aliens get arrested and deported?

So, as an ACTUAL twisty-brained attorney, DS, can you construe some interpretation of what they MIGHT mean that could be legally defensible?
 
Huge gamble on the part of the Republicans. I hope it blows up in their faces.
 
I don't feel like starting a new thread, but apparently CBS golf analyst David Feherty decided to slur our military by claiming: "if you gave any U.S. soldier a gun with two bullets in it, and he found himself in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Osama bin Laden, there's a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would get shot twice, and Harry Reid and bin Laden would be strangled to death." See here for Media Matters link.

Seriously, WTF? Why would anyone in the public eye think it is acceptable to accuse our military of being traitors?
 
Until I see some proof you're Jewish or not a Republican, I can't take your word on any of this.
You want me to prove I'm not a Republican before you'll accept my contention that something a Republican said was offensive?

Er... okay. See my posting history. I think that ought to spell it out fairly clearly.

I'm not Jewish, incidentally, though I fail to see what that has to do with anything either.
 
1. A recent national poll reported that nearly 25% of Americans want the government to pass more socialism. Do you agree or disagree?
Do I agree that a national poll reported nearly 25% of Americans want more socialism?

Do I agree that nearly 25% of Americans want more socialism?

Do I agree with the nearly 25% of Americans who want more socialism?

I'm so confused.
 
Back
Top