Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Seriously. Did all Republicans suddenly come down with a very convenient case of amnesia? A majority of them pass it into law...and now they're all like "Sequester? What sequester? We didn't vote for any....oh, you mean that sequester?"
Let's rejoin the real world, where the facts obviously show that both Democrats AND Republicans voted for it. Gene Sperling, Obama's National Economic Council Director, came up with the idea, but it would not have become law had Boehner, McConnell, and a majority of other Republicans supported it into law.
So let's stop with the bull****. Being an adult starts with taking accountability for what you voted for. That goes for both political parties. If we can't even be collectively honest about who supported it into law, then we probably can't have the integrity to actually solve the underlying problems that led to the sequester in the first place.
UMMMM...
You left out one minor little item...
WHO had the choice to sign the bill into law, or veto it? WHO chose to sign it into law?
Only one person has/had that power...
I believe his name was barack hussein obama.
Seems to me his job title is President of The United States of America.
Regardless of what Congress did, once he signed the bill into law it is HIS responsibility!
UMMMM...
You left out one minor little item...
WHO had the choice to sign the bill into law, or veto it? WHO chose to sign it into law?
Only one person has/had that power...
I believe his name was barack hussein obama.
Seems to me his job title is President of The United States of America.
Regardless of what Congress did, once he signed the bill into law it is HIS responsibility!
Republicans had the choice to veto the bill or sign it into law, too.
They could have not let it pass the house.
But they let it pass the house - KNOWING that Obama would sign it into law if they did so.
Ergo, they share the responsibility for it, too - for better or for worse.
This is exactly how I feel about "Bush's wars" and "Bush's recession". Liberals constantly refer to both, completely ignoring all the Democrats who supported the housing bubble fully and supported Iraq and Afghanistan.
** Bush's wars: they were indeed Bush's wars (and Cheney's) and nobody else's - and people supported them based on the trumped-up phony intelligence delivered by the duped but honorable Colin Powell. Bush used his "man of integrity" to deliver the message, and consequently killed almost 5000 Americans and untold innocent Iraqis while taking out Al Qaeda's biggest enemy - all for political capital.
He failed to get Bin Laden, seeming to keep him at large as the right wing's media bogeyman to trot out on occasion in order to frighten Americans.
** Bush's recession: the recession is indeed the obstructionist republican trickle-down economics recession, and nobody else's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient
Seriously. Did all Republicans suddenly come down with a very convenient case of amnesia? A majority of them pass it into law...and now they're all like "Sequester? What sequester? We didn't vote for any....oh, you mean that sequester?"
Let's rejoin the real world, where the facts obviously show that both Democrats AND Republicans voted for it. Gene Sperling, Obama's National Economic Council Director, came up with the idea, but it would not have become law had Boehner, McConnell, and a majority of other Republicans supported it into law.
So let's stop with the bull****. Being an adult starts with taking accountability for what you voted for. That goes for both political parties. If we can't even be collectively honest about who supported it into law, then we probably can't have the integrity to actually solve the underlying problems that led to the sequester in the first place.
You are right. The republicans are cornered rats and they have nothing to lose. They have a chance in 2014 if they can get the corporate media to blame Obama, and they are attempting this as we speak. Fox is the leader in this effort, and the other mainstream media are following along by ignoring the very facts you mention.
The Sunday morning "discussion" shows, Stephanopoulos, Gregory, who pander to the likes of Rove, Norquist, and Ailes, are cruel jokes on the American people who should get some balance.
Watch for this - Wall Street will continue to rebound and perturbed republicans will credit "their sequester cuts" with either having no effect or even enabling it - even though the inflicted distress will be out of sight on the lower classes.
Of course, at the same time, they moan about the "awful economy" under Obama, in denial that Congress has anything to do with it.
Taxpayer handouts to ten of America's big banks totals $83 billion, and this is a minor portion of all corporate welfare to Big Oil, Big Agra, and others in the republican base.
The fact is that he is 1/3rd of the government leadership. Just as Bush owned the economy then Obama owns it now.One only has to look at Reagan and Clinton. Politcs is often seen as the art of compromise. Looking at Reagan who worked withI TIp ONeil and Clinton who worked with Gingrich on budgets and other things;shows that. But no one now associated the budget with Oneil or Gingrich. They are associated with Reagan and Clinton as their economies.Just as Bush Iraq and afganistan are seen as Bush's wars altho democarts largely approved it even after leadership say same intelligents as Bush did.Can't have it both ways and president's won the ecomy altho that is not really true. Its because they are the leader and are expected to provide leadership over hundreds of senators and congressman;who all represent sections of the country. Only the president represnts and is elected by the entire country afterall.
The fact is that he is 1/3rd of the government leadership. Just as Bush owned the economy then Obama owns it now.One only has to look at Reagan and Clinton. Politcs is often seen as the art of compromise. Looking at Reagan who worked withI TIp ONeil and Clinton who worked with Gingrich on budgets and other things;shows that. But no one now associated the budget with Oneil or Gingrich. They are associated with Reagan and Clinton as their economies.Just as Bush Iraq and afganistan are seen as Bush's wars altho democarts largely approved it even after leadership say same intelligents as Bush did.Can't have it both ways and president's won the ecomy altho that is not really true. Its because they are the leader and are expected to provide leadership over hundreds of senators and congressman;who all represent sections of the country. Only the president represnts and is elected by the entire country afterall.
Republicans owned the crash of 2008 because they had control of the House, Senate, and Presidency.
Obama does not control the republican House which, for political capital in 2014, is sabotaging his and the democrats' every effort.
The wars were based on counterfeit intelligence drummed up by the Bush administration which many people trusted - and which killed 4500 young Americans.
One wonders where you are getting your information.
The Democratic Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995. Although the Democrats held fewer than 50 Senate seats, they had an operational majority because the two independent senators caucused with the Democrats for organizational purposes. No Democratic-held seats had fallen to the Republican Party in the 2006 elections.
Quote:
Originally Posted by detwahDJ
Obama does not control the republican House which, for political capital in 2014, is sabotaging his and the democrats' every effort.
Then by the logic of your claim it was the Democrats responsible for the crash in 2008.
Quote:
Originally Posted by detwahDJ
The wars were based on counterfeit intelligence drummed up by the Bush administration which many people trusted - and which killed 4500 young Americans.
One wonders where you are getting your information.
One should wonder where you get your information since all of it is factually incorrect.
Last edited by Liquid Reigns; 03-06-2013 at 03:10 PM..
I dont have a problem with sequester, in fact, I want major, major cuts and I want every government agency to have to follow a very strict budget.
The problem is Obama called for it, then was against it. As usual. Now he actually wants to make it as painful as possible when it doesnt need to be. He is a man against the people
Last I checked, sequestration was a result of President Obama being concerned about federal spending and his demand for drastic cuts. Republicans want to spend, spend, spend and given their whims, there would be no need for these cuts that President Obama guarantees via sequestration.
Isn't that true, right wing drama queens?
No it is not true. Last I checked it was Obama going around the country complaining about a sequester that he threatened to veto getting around and now blames Republicans for not getting around.
The drama queen here is Obama.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A majority of them pass it into law...and now they're all like "Sequester? What sequester? We didn't vote for any....oh, you mean that sequester?" 
