Romney’s World

[xr7g428]

That's not exactly what he said on February 2, 2009 (13 days after he took office).

 

Here's the actual quote:

 

“A year from now, I think people are going to see that we’re starting to make some progress,” Obama says. “If I don’t have this done in three years, then there’s going to be a one-term proposition.”

 

He didn't say he shouldn't get a second term as you stated.

 

 

Brought to you by the people who helped Bill Clinton with this great statement:

 

"It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the--if he--if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not--that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement....Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true."

[rn4]

Ah yes, took what he said out of context. Seems to happen a lot from a guy who supposedly did very well in school (keep asking for those Romney tax returns guys, while Obama fights tooth and nail to keep all his records sealed)

 

Good to know that you didn't decide to fail just one history lesson today. Tell me, didn't Obama and the Democrats have full control on the Federal Government following the 2008 election? So why is it that it's the fault of those "obstructing" Republicans? Ah yes, because for Liberals, it's always easier to blame someone else than accept responsibility. And speaking of those awful Tea Party members. What did they campaign on again? I know this might be difficult for you to remember, since you clearly have forgotten what Obama campaigned on. Or maybe you do remember what he promised, but since you're so use to your party's politicians lying to you, you assume everyone else must be the same (kinda like how your ilk thinks the Right listens to everything Fox says, because after all, they themselves listen to everything Left Wing media spins). The TP have done what their constituents asked them to do; stop the socialist agenda.

 

The voters will decide (including the illegal ones the Left is bound and determined to keep), I just pray they are smart enough to see what has happened the last 4 years. And unfortunately, you have proven you are not.

 

Go look up filibuster and the number of times the Republicans have used it and get back to us.

[TomServo92]

Go look up filibuster and the number of times the Republicans have used it and get back to us.

 

The Democrats have no problem using it when it suits them. Hypocrisy at it's finest.

[cal50]

The Democrats have no problem using it when it suits them. Hypocrisy at it's finest.

 

 

.......or skipping state in Wisconsin.

[Mark B. Morrow]

The Democrats have no problem using it when it suits them. Hypocrisy at it's finest.

 

The use of the filibuster exploded after 2009. The dems used it sparingly during the Bush Administration, primarily for judicial nominees, as evidenced by the fact that it didn't take 60 votes to pass everything in the Senate from 2001-2007.

 

Since the Democrats gained control of the Senate in 2007, the number of motions to end debate, known as cloture, has more than doubled to 276 in 2007-10 from 130 in 2003-06, when Republicans were in the majority, according to the Senate Historical Office. In the current Congress, 84 motions have been filed to date. http://www.bloomberg...filibuster.html

Edited August 3, 2012 by Mark B. Morrow

[TomServo92]

The use of the filibuster exploded after 2009. The dems used it sparingly during the Bush Administration, primarily for judicial nominees, as evidenced by the fact that it didn't take 60 votes to pass everything in the Senate from 2001-2007.

 

Since the Democrats gained control of the Senate in 2007, the number of motions to end debate, known as cloture, has more than doubled to 276 in 2007-10 from 130 in 2003-06, when Republicans were in the majority, according to the Senate Historical Office. In the current Congress, 84 motions have been filed to date. http://www.bloomberg...filibuster.html

 

Question: Yes or no, has the Democratic Party used filibuster or not?

[TomServo92]

Furthermore, the record for the longest filibuster of all time is held by Democrats when they opposed the The Civil Rights Act of 1957.

 

Just admit it's hypocrisy. The truth is both parties use it to stall legislation they oppose. I will bet you $1,000 that if Romney wins the election and the Republicans win the Senate, the "Abolish the filibuster" Democratic rallying cry will turn into dead silence.

[Mark B. Morrow]

Furthermore, the record for the longest filibuster of all time is held by Democrats when they opposed the The Civil Rights Act of 1957.

 

Just admit it's hypocrisy. The truth is both parties use it to stall legislation they oppose. I will bet you $1,000 that if Romney wins the election and the Republicans win the Senate, the "Abolish the filibuster" Democratic rallying cry will turn into dead silence.

 

Of course those Dixiecrats became Republicans.

[Mark B. Morrow]

Question: Yes or no, has the Democratic Party used filibuster or not?

 

I never said they didn't use it. No Congress in history has used it as often as the Republicans have since Obama was elected.

 

Personally, I think the filibuster ought to revert to the practice that was in place in 1957 where the Senator had to keep talking.

[TomServo92]

 

 

I never said they didn't use it. No Congress in history has used it as often as the Republicans have since Obama was elected.

 

Personally, I think the filibuster ought to revert to the practice that was in place in 1957 where the Senator had to keep talking.

 

Like I said, if the roles were reversed, the democrats would be doing the same thing.

[TomServo92]

 

 

Of course those Dixiecrats became Republicans.

 

Pure myth.

[retro-man]

Sorry, but Americans won't pay the price GM would need to charge for the Sonic to be profitable under the standard UAW contract.

Americans have ruined their own domestic economy by shopping at WalMart too.

 

That is why there isn't a 2012 Crosley. That has nothing to do with globalization or any misdeeds of the financial sector. Blame low gas prices and greater distances between towns and cities than in Japan or Europe, which have shaped American tastes in cars since the 1930s.

Oh but there is a 2012 Crosley - only now it's called "Cruze" (they just switched a few letters). If we're all about the open spaces, then why are small cars grabbing a record share of what remains of the market all of a sudden? (I'll answer: because we're on a small car budget now. We're no longer prosperous. 30 years of making nothing but speculative bubbles, of continually running a trade deficit, and of forcing our workforce to compete with slave-wages in third world countries, and with mechanized substitutes here at home, have collapsed the American consumer base down to a dark, miserable little black hole that has sucked the entire global economy in with it.)

[retro-man]

"And the only one."

 

King Midget

 

Very hip!

[rn4]

Like I said, if the roles were reversed, the democrats would be doing the same thing.

 

They have never used like the Republicans are using it now. I believe they have filibustered 16 job bills so far. This is what Bitch McConnell meant when he said his top priority was to make President Obama a 1 term president. The Republicans want to make sure that the economy stays in the shitter so they can regain power, pretty pathetic.

[cal50]

If we're all about the open spaces, then why are small cars grabbing a record share of what remains of the market all of a sudden? (I'll answer: because we're on a small car budget now. We're no longer prosperous. 30 years of making nothing but speculative bubbles, of continually running a trade deficit, and of forcing our workforce to compete with slave-wages in third world countries, and with mechanized substitutes here at home, have collapsed the American consumer base down to a dark, miserable little black hole that has sucked the entire global economy in with it.)

 

The small and un-safer car kick is partly economic (gasoline prices) and the "go green" bullshit. When your monthly fuel bill is the same or higher than your car payment most people can not afford to operate that vehicle. Take a look around the European countryside and count the F150's you see. The save the planet types poo-poo anyone driving a bigger vehicle "than they need". Good luck hauling anything or pulling your camper or boat with a hybrid.

 

People that can afford the larger vehicles still buy them, its the fixed income and reduced wage workers that have to buy something they can afford to own and operate. Buying a puddle jumper saves on your fuel bill but is often offset in higher insurance costs because of personal injury or death in in the tin can Vs an SUV.

 

There is no competing with slave labor wages in manufacturing or engineering unless you want to race to the bottom.

[TomServo92]

 

 

They have never used like the Republicans are using it now. I believe they have filibustered 16 job bills so far. This is what Bitch MIcConnell meant when he said his top priority was to make President Obama a 1 term president. The Republicans want to make sure that the economy stays in the shitter so they can regain power, pretty pathetic.

 

The Democrats have used it as an obstructionist tool also. You know it's the truth but won't admit it.

[Edstock]

The Democrats have used it as an obstructionist tool also. You know it's the truth but won't admit it.

 

Do you have a reading comprehension problem? RM4 said "I believe they have filibustered 16 job bills so far". Now, maybe your brain is a little "literal", but the statement "have filibustered" implies that, by definition of "filibuster", that the Democrats have used it as an obstructionist tool also and is also an admission of its use. Please keep up, thanks.

[TomServo92]

 

 

Do you have a reading comprehension problem? RM4 said "I believe they have filibustered 16 job bills so far". Now, maybe your brain is a little "literal", but the statement "have filibustered" implies that, by definition of "filibuster", that the Democrats have used it as an obstructionist tool also and is also an admission of its use. Please keep up, thanks.

 

You must be pretty sore from doing that stretch.

[Edstock]

You must be pretty sore from doing that stretch.

 

Naw, I just get frustrated when it seems that people can't get the little colored beads on the string in the right sequence . . .

[TomServo92]

 

 

Naw, I just get frustrated when it seems that people can't get the little colored beads on the string in the right sequence . . .

 

I understood perfectly what he said and my reply still stands despite your unnecessarily snarky attempt to "translate".

[rn4]

The Democrats have used it as an obstructionist tool also. You know it's the truth but won't admit it.

 

I never said the dems didn't use it, but the republicans have put a who new meaning in the use of it to obstuct anything the senate has tried to do. Can you admit this is the most the filibuster has ever been used.

[TomServo92]

 

 

I never said the dems didn't use it, but the republicans have put a who new meaning in the use of it to obstuct anything the senate has tried to do. Can you admit this is the most the filibuster has ever been used.

 

I don't recall denying it in any of my posts.

[rn4]

I don't recall denying it in any of my posts.

 

No all you have tried to do is deflect away from what the current republican regime in the senate is trying to do.

[TomServo92]

 

 

No all you have tried to do is deflect away from what the current republican regime in the senate is trying to do.

 

Right. That must be why I have stated in several posts that both sides have used it. :rolleyes:

[Langston Hughes]

Great, now that we've finally gotten that out the way, what's the next semantical issue we can beat to death?