GOP votes NO for 9/11 1St responders

GOP votes NO for 9/11 1St responders (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

housesub4you -> GOP votes NO for 9/11 1St responders (7/31/2010 7:04:37 AM)
I use to volunteer for the Red Cross, until a few years ago. Many people think that people who offer aid as responders are covered by insurance if they are injured. Well most are not, which is why I stopped. My insurance company denied my claim when I was injured offering assistance through the RC during the wild fires in LA a few years back. This week the House voted on a bill to offer aid to the First responders to 9/11 because many are sick (I know 5 who have died because of problems caused by all the crap in the air when the towers fell) and they are not being covered by their insurance companies. So the GOP tried to bog down the bill with amendments so it would not come up for a vote, but it did come up for a vote and almost along party lines it was defeated. With a few GOP members voting yes. So now the GOP is saying NO to the people who risked their own lives in 9/11 to help others. Wow what a great party. http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0710/House_GOP_leaders_911_first_responders_aid_bill_a_massive_new_entitlement_program.html?showall You GOP supporters can spin this anyway you want, but their NO VOTES speak for themselves, they even managed to screw small businesses this week with a NO vote on loans to small businesses to help create jobs.

RacerJim -> RE: GOP votes NO for 9/11 1St responders (7/31/2010 7:39:54 AM)
The Democrats brought this bill up for vote under suspension of normal House rules; a proceedure which limits/prohibits debate, prohibits amendments, and requires a two-thirds majority to pass. You Democrat supporters can spin it anyway you want, but this was yet another example of the Democrats saying "NO" to Republican debate and/or ammendments like they have everything else.

mnottertail -> RE: GOP votes NO for 9/11 1St responders (7/31/2010 7:53:16 AM)
Absolute falsehood, that suspension says that you cannot offer any 'UNRELATED AMENDMENTS' (say something stupid like; illegal immigration tied to that bill.)

flcouple2009 -> RE: GOP votes NO for 9/11 1St responders (7/31/2010 7:57:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RacerJim The Democrats brought this bill up for vote under suspension of normal House rules; a proceedure which limits/prohibits debate, prohibits amendments, and requires a two-thirds majority to pass. You Democrat supporters can spin it anyway you want, but this was yet another example of the Democrats saying "NO" to Republican debate and/or ammendments like they have everything else. "prohibits amendments", exactly bobble head. We're voting on this and nothing else.

mnottertail -> RE: GOP votes NO for 9/11 1St responders (7/31/2010 8:02:48 AM)
Yes, if they had wanted to add republican pork and neo-con emotional issue idiology (NOINERS!!!!) sorta shit, they would have run it normally requiring simple majority, or 218 yeas, as it was they had 255, so they could have passed it. But then the bill would have been loaded with idiotic pork and perks. So, great spin for the neo-con machinery, but like everything else they spin, when you actually see the FACT instead of the EMOTION, they lay on the wrong side of the bed.

Jeffff -> RE: GOP votes NO for 9/11 1St responders (7/31/2010 8:11:44 AM)
I blame the black guy in office. It makes my life so much easier.

subrob1967 -> RE: GOP votes NO for 9/11 1St responders (7/31/2010 9:57:16 AM)
Yeah, keep printing that money, none of us will live long enough to have to worry about paying it back.[8\|]

Jeffff -> RE: GOP votes NO for 9/11 1St responders (7/31/2010 10:13:01 AM)
The War on Terror makes no allowances for the folks at home.

Musicmystery -> RE: GOP votes NO for 9/11 1St responders (7/31/2010 10:48:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RacerJim The Democrats brought this bill up for vote under suspension of normal House rules; a proceedure which limits/prohibits debate, prohibits amendments, and requires a two-thirds majority to pass. You Democrat supporters can spin it anyway you want, but this was yet another example of the Democrats saying "NO" to Republican debate and/or ammendments like they have everything else. Wow. A spin like that is gonna cause injury. I hope you at least stretch first. Oh wait, that was a stretch.

tazzygirl -> RE: GOP votes NO for 9/11 1St responders (7/31/2010 10:37:41 PM)
~FR Anyone else getting the impression elections are deliberately being thrown?

AQuietSimpleMan -> RE: GOP votes NO for 9/11 1St responders (7/31/2010 10:48:29 PM)
If I understand what I have read here and in related stories.... The big issue is how it would be regulated and the idea that just about anyone between the ages of 18 and 80 could walk in and claim that the "Aided" in ANYWAY and they could receive just about any possible related medical service which would be paid for out of a tax increase for the nation. I would have voted no too. the Potential for this to be abused is Enormous. The current claims that are standing are filled with law suits and claims that cannot possibly be substantiated. There are people who were not even in the City at the time who have put claims in, and they aren’t being denied due to the fact that there is no statute for payout… because of this to say Yes would be to agree to pay people who already attempted to defraud the tragedy. It’s an Article 99 only in reverse… I do not see a way to help anyone without paying out everyone… we are NOT talking about Medical Care here, we are talking Money and everyone has a hand out. QSM

Owner59 -> RE: GOP votes NO for 9/11 1St responders (7/31/2010 11:16:02 PM)
The degree of ambivalence seems directly proportional to the distance from ground zero. The farther away,the less people care.Guess that "we`re all New Yorkers" thing was all talk. Rep.Weiner shares my outrage at the con-cowards. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4zwCMf8dsc

Politesub53 -> RE: GOP votes NO for 9/11 1St responders (8/1/2010 3:47:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 Yeah, keep printing that money, none of us will live long enough to have to worry about paying it back.[8\|] Another laughable post. If the Republicans had introduced this bill you would have been singing its praises.

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875