2012-2021 Budget

• majorspark

  

  believer;845767 wrote:Sort of "Obama Lite" eh? I held my nose when I pulled the lever in 2008.

  A lot of Hobbits did. Now get back to the Shire.
• coyotes22

  

  
• coyotes22

  

  Boehner just told the Dems, to put something on the table! That he has stuck his neck out a mile, with no help.
• majorspark

  

  House debt bill passes the house. Its a small little turd nugget. Now it goes to the senate where Reid will add more turds and make it a full fledged pile of shit.
• majorspark

  

  Get your ass in line Hobbits.
• coyotes22

  

  majorspark;846028 wrote:House debt bill passes the house. Its a small little turd nugget. Now it goes to the senate where Reid will add more turds and make it a full fledged pile of shit.

  
  Stop the bullship politics!!!
• BGFalcons82

  

  Hey Harry...tabling yet ANOTHER Republican Bill??? How many is that sine January?? 3?? You are the most worthless motherfucker in the history of the Senate. Where's your fuckin plan to reduce debt??? You got nuthin. Nothing. Get in the game or get the fuck out.
• gut

  Will be interesting to see how the MSM spins this. House passed a bill, that compromised more than many Repubs care to support, and the Senate rejected it almost instantaneously.
  
  At the heart of this matter is Boehner's bill basically said if you want to spend another $900B you don't have, commit to offset it with future cuts. And Harry Reid's Senate rejected that. Now if Reid can't get something thru the Senate there's really any one person/party to point the finger at. Desperate times - was there really anything about the Boehner bill so unfair or objectiionable? I mean, really, you're going to reject it because it forces people to work on a long-term solution in the near future rather than kick the can down the road two more years?
  
  Who's the terrorist now?
• coyotes22

  

  Harry said it was dead two days ago, before it even got to the Senate.
• gut

  coyotes22;846166 wrote:Harry said it was dead two days ago, before it even got to the Senate.

  
  If this is how they want to play, I'd make a minor change and send it back to the Senate on Monday. If Reid can't get something thru the Senate, then there's one bill to consider - a solution on the table they'd be rejecting.
• coyotes22

  

  gut;846167 wrote:If this is how they want to play, I'd make a minor change and send it back to the Senate on Monday. If Reid can't get something thru the Senate, then there's one bill to consider - a solution on the table they'd be rejecting.

  
  The Senate is sending one to the House, this should be good.
• coyotes22

  

  Senate adjourns till 1pm tomorrow. SMDH
• majorspark

  

  Time to send the senate a bill prioritizing spending underneath the debt ceiling after August 2nd.
• coyotes22

  

  coyotes22;845955 wrote:Boehner just told the Dems, to put something on the table! That he has stuck his neck out a mile, with no help.

  
  see if i can get this to work:
  
  http://redwhitebluenews.com/?p=21812
• stlouiedipalma

  majorspark;846188 wrote:Time to send the senate a bill prioritizing spending underneath the debt ceiling after August 2nd.

  
  Actually it's time for Obama to tell all the idiots "Fuck you, I'm invoking the 14th, deal with it".
• majorspark

  

  stlouiedipalma;846319 wrote:Actually it's time for Obama to tell all the idiots "Fuck you, I'm invoking the 14th, deal with it".

  My suggestion is constituional. Yours is not. Don't get hoodwinked into this folly. It would add a constutional crises on top of the debt crisis. It would pour gasoline on the fire.
  
  The main body of the constitution is clear. The executive branch has no authority to decide how federal funds are allocated. When it comes to the allocations of federal funds the executive can only execute the will of the legislature. The power to allocate federal revenues lies in the legislature. The constitution gives the House specific power concerning the generation and allocation of federal revenue. It must originate in the House. The 14th reverses none of this. In fact it affirms it.
  
  First off when determining the intent of the 14th we need to look at context. The context was the aftermath of the civil war. Many issues had to be settled. Its quite clear when you read the text its intent. Certain clauses in the 14th do not even apply today because those participating in the insurrection under qualifying circumstances or holding its debts are dead. It could be used to govern any future insurrections but none exist today. This is specific to section 3 and partial to seciton 4.
  
  Here is the text:

  Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
  
  Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
  
  Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
  
  Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
  
  Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

  Section 4 is where some are claiming the president can find a power for the executive to order a raise in the debt ceiling or direct funds to pay debts outside of the will of congress. So lets take a closer look at section 4. In the context of the civil war its clear purpose was to separate federal debt from confederate debt. In other words if you invested in the confederacy or the institution of slavery you are shit out of luck. The federal government is not picking up your bill nor any states under its jurisdiction. If you invested in the federal government your debts will be honored with consitutional law. This clause was so necessary because those that held investments in the confederacy or the instituion of slavery were looking for legal means to recover their cash. Its not that hard to understand. Dont't listen to the talking heads. Read it for yourself.
  
  If you are left with any doubt as to who has the power to enforce this amendment. Section 5 makes it quite clear. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. Not the executive, not the judicial, the Congress. Only Congress can enforce it. Any branch of the federal government that usurps congressional authority in this matter is in direct violation of the constitution.
  
  Obama swore an oath to uphold the constitution. There are reasonable differences in the interpretation of the constitution. You can't argue away Congress's authority under section 5. If Obama wants to take that authority from congress he should be impeached. And I would support it.
• stlouiedipalma

  Whether or not he has this power is a moot point right now. If I were in his shoes I would invoke it and immediately raise the debt ceiling. If it wound up in the courts, so be it. At least he would have acted on this "crisis" instead of blowing up the economy for political leverage, which is all the Republicans are doing. I really believe now more than ever that they are willing to put our country at risk for the opportunity to regain the White House, and your comment about supporting impeachment is further testimony of what you really want, and at what price you are willing to pay in order to achieve your goals.
• Skyhook79

  

  stlouiedipalma;846319 wrote:Actually it's time for Obama to tell all the idiots "Fuck you, I'm invoking the 14th, deal with it".

  
  You mean the guy who said this should just raise it on his own?
  
  Senator Barack Obama Explaining his 2006 Vote Against Raising the Debt Limit
  January 4, 2011 11:49 A.M.
  By Andrew C. McCarthy
  From Sen. Obama’s Floor Speech, March 20, 2006:
  
  The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that “the buck stops here.” Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.
  
  
  Now give me the standard response that it is all Bush's fault.
• Writerbuckeye

  

  stlouiedipalma;846463 wrote:Whether or not he has this power is a moot point right now. If I were in his shoes I would invoke it and immediately raise the debt ceiling. If it wound up in the courts, so be it. At least he would have acted on this "crisis" instead of blowing up the economy for political leverage, which is all the Republicans are doing. I really believe now more than ever that they are willing to put our country at risk for the opportunity to regain the White House, and your comment about supporting impeachment is further testimony of what you really want, and at what price you are willing to pay in order to achieve your goals.

  
  I see you got your talking points from the Democrats.
  
  Let's see...the Republicans have passed what...three bills now dealing with this "crisis" -- and the Democrats haven't passed even one. This is the same group that hasn't been able to pass a budget in over 800 days.
  
  Yet it's the Republicans who are not doing their jobs or just being political?
  
  Uh huh.
  
  Keep sucking down that kool aid. I'm sure they have barrels of it waiting for you and the media, so you keep spinning this as being all the fault of the Republicans.
  
  Which party is it that has two of the three main seats of power again?
• BGFalcons82

  

  Congrats to Obama. He has now usurped all input he had into the debt bebate over to Moody's and Standard & Poor's. Now, any legislation must get their approval instead of Barry's. Obama has clearly become a eunuch of a President. Congrats again.
• coyotes22

  

  stlouiedipalma;846319 wrote:Actually it's time for Obama to tell all the idiots "Fuck you, I'm invoking the 14th, deal with it".

  stlouiedipalma;846463 wrote:Whether or not he has this power is a moot point right now. If I were in his shoes I would invoke it and immediately raise the debt ceiling. If it wound up in the courts, so be it. At least he would have acted on this "crisis" instead of blowing up the economy for political leverage, which is all the Republicans are doing. I really believe now more than ever that they are willing to put our country at risk for the opportunity to regain the White House, and your comment about supporting impeachment is further testimony of what you really want, and at what price you are willing to pay in order to achieve your goals.

  
  
• Cleveland Buck

  

  stlouiedipalma;846463 wrote:Whether or not he has this power is a moot point right now. If I were in his shoes I would invoke it and immediately raise the debt ceiling.

  He could stand up and proclaim himself King of America while he's at it. It doesn't make either claim legitimate.
• Footwedge

  Let the stalemate run it's course...and let's see what happens. As for the economy totally collapsing, I doubt it. Some people wpn't get paid....so what. Welcome to the real world. Some Fed Reserve banks won't get paid. So what. Welcome to the real world. Maybe Brown, Kellogg and Root won't get paid. So what. Maybe General Dynamics won't get paid. I could not care less.
  
  Government workers will be laid off. Well, welcome to the real world, federal workers. Your group is the most highly coddled, collectively overpaid, stress free livers on the planet. Lose a few nights of sleep like the rest of main stream America does.
  
  It has been proven that you fed woekers have a better chance of dying, then being fired. And that is a pile of crap.
  
  Again...KEEP THE PRESENT CEILING. I'm in your corner, Mr. Boehner, on this one. Forced fiscal responsibility is exactly what is needed. The government will be forced to prioritize....and maybe, just maybe, it will end up showing that living on a tighter budget is not only doable, but doable without the perceived imminent collapse.
• fish82

  

  Dude!!!! Well said!!
• believer

  

  Footwedge;846519 wrote:Let the stalemate run it's course...and let's see what happens. As for the economy totally collapsing, I doubt it. Some people won't get paid....so what. Welcome to the real world. Some Fed Reserve banks won't get paid. So what. Welcome to the real world. Maybe Brown, Kellogg and Root won't get paid. So what. Maybe General Dynamics won't get paid. I could not care less.
  
  Government workers will be laid off. Well, welcome to the real world, federal workers. Your group is the most highly coddled, collectively overpaid, stress free livers on the planet. Lose a few nights of sleep like the rest of main stream America does.
  
  It has been proven that you fed workers have a better chance of dying, then being fired. And that is a pile of crap.
  
  Again...KEEP THE PRESENT CEILING. I'm in your corner, Mr. Boehner, on this one. Forced fiscal responsibility is exactly what is needed. The government will be forced to prioritize....and maybe, just maybe, it will end up showing that living on a tighter budget is not only doable, but doable without the perceived imminent collapse.

  Footie,
  
  Sometimes I get confused which side of the political fence you're on. I actually agree with much of what you've said! lol