RE: the most important 19 min you will spend

RE: the most important 19 min you will spend (Full Version)

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

Message

Musicmystery -> RE: the most important 19 min you will spend (10/31/2010 11:27:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: cuckoldmepls Well the fact is, if we had true conservatives running this country there would be no National debt... No shit? You mean the national debt that doubled under Reagan and doubled again under Dubya? You mean under the Democratically controlled House, during those times, doncha? [8D][:)] Firm I doubt it. Are you aware there's a Senate?

flcouple2009 -> RE: the most important 19 min you will spend (10/31/2010 11:49:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife You guys just crack me up. When the debt goes up it is blamed on the Democratic Congress and not the Republican President. When a Democratic President creates a budget surplus to reduce the debt the credit is given to to the Republican Congress. Then a Republican President comes in and pisses away the surplus. Ahh, but rml, most of Clinton's second term he had a Republican Congress to control his spending. Just like it was a Democratic Congress that couldn't control spending under Reagan and Bush. You know it is the Congress that controls the purse strings, under our Constitution, doncha? Firm You mean the Congress which was controlled by the Republicans and the "Regan Democrats"? The ones who danced to what ever tune Regan sang. As for working to gather it was nice for the Republican controlled congress to pass Clinton's budget

FirmhandKY -> RE: the most important 19 min you will spend (10/31/2010 12:39:09 PM)
To MM and FLC US Constitution Section. 7. Clause 1: All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills. If you want a little more analysis and history go here. A graphic showing the control of the House since Carter: Control of US House of Representatives 1855-2010 A description of that control: Carter - Democrats the entire time Reagen - Democrats the entire time Bush I - Democrats the entire time Clinton - Democrats the first two years, Republicans the remaining 6 years Bush II - Republicans the first 6 years, Democrats the last 2 years Obama - Democrats the first two years. And, since I'm sure it will come up: Control of US Senate 1855-2010 Carter - Democrats the entire time Reagen - Republicans the First 6 years, Democrats the last 2 years Bush I - Democrats the entire time Clinton - Democrats the first two years, Republicans the remaining 6 years Bush II - Democrats the first 2 years, Republicans the last 6 years Obama - Democrats the first two years. Again, the House reserves the right to control the Federal Budget . In fact, it was the Democratic Congress that prevented Reagan - by law - from exercising the equivalent of a "line item veto" in order to force him to actually spend all the funds that they appropriated. Now, flc, if you want to start changing the terms of the debate, let me start whining about RINO's, to balance out your "Blue Dogs". Firm

DomKen -> RE: the most important 19 min you will spend (10/31/2010 12:43:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY In fact, it was the Democratic Congress that prevented Reagan - by law - from exercising the equivalent of a "line item veto" in order to force him to actually spend all the funds that they appropriated. Actually the US Supreme Court has ruled that the line item veto is unconstitutional and it wasn't even implemented until after Reagan was no longer sentient.

FirmhandKY -> RE: the most important 19 min you will spend (10/31/2010 1:51:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY In fact, it was the Democratic Congress that prevented Reagan - by law - from exercising the equivalent of a "line item veto" in order to force him to actually spend all the funds that they appropriated. Actually the US Supreme Court has ruled that the line item veto is unconstitutional and it wasn't even implemented until after Reagan was no longer sentient. I guess you didn't note the scare quotes, nor consider the time frame: the Supreme Court ruling involved a law passed in 1996. Well after Reagan. Firm edited to add: It's earlier than Reagan, even, and goes back to Nixon. Its the Budget Act of 1974, that requires that the President actually spend money that Congress has allocated. Prior to that, the President could (and sometimes did) choose not to spend money that Congress gave him the authority to spend, therefore the equivalent to a line item veto.

FirmhandKY -> RE: the most important 19 min you will spend (10/31/2010 2:04:24 PM)
2. Impoundment Title X of the law, also known as the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, specifies that the President may propose to Congress that funds be rescinded. If both the Senate and the House of Representatives have not approved a rescission proposal (by passing legislation) within 45 days of continuous session, any funds being withheld must be made available for obligation. Congress is not required to vote on such a proposal and has ignored most Presidential requests. In response, some have called for a line item veto to strengthen the rescission power and force Congress to vote on the disputed funds. The Act was passed in response to Congressional feelings that President Nixon was abusing his ability to impound the funding of programs he opposed, and effectively removed the historical Presidential power of impoundment.

DomKen -> RE: the most important 19 min you will spend (10/31/2010 2:32:33 PM)
Impoundment isn't a line item veto. Impoundment was a unilateral action by the POTUS which allowed no recourse to congress (which is pretty clearly a violation of checks and balance and seperation of powers).

EternalHoH -> RE: the most important 19 min you will spend (10/31/2010 2:32:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Control of US House of Representatives 1855-2010 ...... Clinton - Democrats the first two years, Republicans the remaining 6 years Bush II - Republicans the first 6 years, Democrats the last 2 years ...... Control of US Senate 1855-2010 ....... Clinton - Democrats the first two years, Republicans the remaining 6 years Bush II - Democrats the first 2 years, Republicans the last 6 years ....... Firm Republicans controlled the house from 1994 to 2006 Republicans controlled the senate from 1994 to 2000 The years when the most legislative damage happened to our banking system, de-leashing Wall St to build its $700 trillion insurance ponzi scheme, happened in 1998, 1999, and 2000. All of that legislation was designed and passed by Republicans, and signed by Clinton. I know, I know, why bother dealing with that 10-year-old, $700 trillion private sector Genie that was let out of the bottle during those years when we can piss away our time on issues of an irresponsible spendaholic government that built $15 trillion in debt in 234 years. Way to sweat the small stuff, in an election landscape that is all about sweating the small stuff..... Big government is nowhere near the size of the threat that Big Money represents.

flcouple2009 -> RE: the most important 19 min you will spend (10/31/2010 2:42:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Now, flc, if you want to start changing the terms of the debate, let me start whining about RINO's, to balance out your "Blue Dogs". Firm Your on one of your comedic kicks I see. Under Regan the House was controlled by the Republicans and what was known then as the "Regan Democrats". They pretty much served as rubber stamps for whatever Regan wanted to do. Regan was responsible was the budget, spending, and deficits, followed closely by the Republican party and the enablers known as the Democrats. Everyone involved at the time had dirty hands. Now, which part of this is incorrect?

willbeurdaddy -> RE: the most important 19 min you will spend (10/31/2010 2:56:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster Nobody's going to read all that crap. Do you know what the words concise, brief, and pithy mean? Use yer frakkin' head, Fred. Nobody reads your brief and pithy bullshit without laughing, at least he added some content.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: the most important 19 min you will spend (10/31/2010 2:58:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: cuckoldmepls Well the fact is, if we had true conservatives running this country there would be no National debt... No shit? You mean the national debt that doubled under Reagan and doubled again under Dubya? You mean under the Democratically controlled House, during those times, doncha? [8D][:)] Firm I doubt it. Are you aware there's a Senate? Are you aware that the Senate cannot appropriate money?

FirmhandKY -> RE: the most important 19 min you will spend (10/31/2010 5:30:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: flcouple2009 quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Now, flc, if you want to start changing the terms of the debate, let me start whining about RINO's, to balance out your "Blue Dogs" Your on one of your comedic kicks I see. Under Regan the House was controlled by the Republicans and what was known then as the "Regan Democrats". They pretty much served as rubber stamps for whatever Regan wanted to do. Regan was responsible was the budget, spending, and deficits, followed closely by the Republican party and the enablers known as the Democrats. Everyone involved at the time had dirty hands. Now, which part of this is incorrect? What you are doing here is historical reconstruction. Alternate history (fiction) is something else it could also be called. Oh, btw, it's spelled "R-E-A-G-A-N" Firm

FirmhandKY -> RE: the most important 19 min you will spend (10/31/2010 5:38:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Impoundment isn't a line item veto. Impoundment was a unilateral action by the POTUS which allowed no recourse to congress (which is pretty clearly a violation of checks and balance and seperation of powers). Either you haven't read anything I wrote, or you are just attempting to yank my chain. Firm

flcouple2009 -> RE: the most important 19 min you will spend (10/31/2010 5:47:54 PM)
lol, I wondered how long it would take for you to comment on that. Please explain dear Firm which part is revisionist? Which part is incorrect? The republicans and what was known as the Regan Democrats didn't control the house? Those weren't the budgets of old Ronnie they were passing?

FirmhandKY -> RE: the most important 19 min you will spend (10/31/2010 6:46:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: flcouple2009 lol, I wondered how long it would take for you to comment on that. Please explain dear Firm which part is revisionist? Which part is incorrect? The republicans and what was known as the Regan Democrats didn't control the house? Those weren't the budgets of old Ronnie they were passing? First, all of it is wrong. Second, if you can't even spell the name of the President correctly, any other "fact" you present is automatically suspect as well. Third, according to this, Reagan had "0" actual years "in control" of the House during his eight years. You claim that he was able to control the House, and therefore his budget due to "Blue Dog" Democrats, but a bald assertion is ineffective. Fourth, you seem to fail to understand that while the President can propose a budget, it is the Congress that must approve AND fund it. Many times, a Presidential budget has been passed, but Congress (the House, primarily) would then not allocate funds to specific programs. On the other hand, as I have shown earlier in this thread, if the House funds something, and allocates funds for it, they force the President to actually spend the money. A President bears some responsibility for his budget, but in the final analysis, it is the Congress - and the House specifically - that bears the burden of approval. The actual spending, however, is more the responsibility of the House, as it has the greatest ability to spend funds. Firm

FirmhandKY -> RE: the most important 19 min you will spend (10/31/2010 6:59:24 PM)
Here is a chart of the deficits. Compare them to the control of the House by party. The only outlier is in 2001, when the 9/11 attacks sent the economy into a downspin, and then the cost of the wars kicked in as well. Notice however, the generally downward slope of the deficits after the spike, during Bush's second term. Not that Bush was a conservative, when it came to funding government. I have never had that position. [image]local://upfiles/51927/656CC3F9F9BC49F1BA9BE87DF794ABDD.jpg[/image]

FirmhandKY -> RE: the most important 19 min you will spend (10/31/2010 7:14:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EternalHoH Republicans controlled the house from 1994 to 2006 Republicans controlled the senate from 1994 to 2000 The years when the most legislative damage happened to our banking system, de-leashing Wall St to build its $700 trillion insurance ponzi scheme, happened in 1998, 1999, and 2000. All of that legislation was designed and passed by Republicans, and signed by Clinton. I know, I know, why bother dealing with that 10-year-old, $700 trillion private sector Genie that was let out of the bottle during those years when we can piss away our time on issues of an irresponsible spendaholic government that built $15 trillion in debt in 234 years. Way to sweat the small stuff, in an election landscape that is all about sweating the small stuff..... Big government is nowhere near the size of the threat that Big Money represents. If you wish to argue the causes of the current economy, feel free to start another thread, like you did on David Stockman. I may or may not participate. Firm

flcouple2009 -> RE: the most important 19 min you will spend (10/31/2010 7:20:22 PM)
I see your developing a second occupation writing alternate history. You can count the number of Democrats in office and the number of Republicans in office and make whatever claims you wish. The fact is that Regan (and yes I am gonna spell it wrong as long as it bugs you, that was the original intent) had a friendly congress the entire time. Between the Republicans and what was known even then as the Regan Democrats he got pretty much whatever he wanted. You can quote all of the ways it is set up to work that you wish. Doesn't change the fact that the House happily rubber stamped Old Ronnie's budgets. Much in the same manner as when those on the right get their panties in a bunch about how we don't negotiate with terrorist. Ignoring all the way that Old Ronnie was the one who set the standard for negotiation. Yep there has been a lot of "alternate history" tossed about.

FirmhandKY -> RE: the most important 19 min you will spend (10/31/2010 7:25:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: flcouple2009 I see your developing a second occupation writing alternate history. You can count the number of Democrats in office and the number of Republicans in office and make whatever claims you wish. The fact is that Regan (and yes I am gonna spell it wrong as long as it bugs you, that was the original intent) had a friendly congress the entire time. Between the Republicans and what was known even then as the Regan Democrats he got pretty much whatever he wanted. You can quote all of the ways it is set up to work that you wish. Doesn't change the fact that the House happily rubber stamped Old Ronnie's budgets. Much in the same manner as when those on the right get their panties in a bunch about how we don't negotiate with terrorist. Ignoring all the way that Old Ronnie was the one who set the standard for negotiation. Yep there has been a lot of "alternate history" tossed about. You have presented nothing but your opinion. You have presented no facts. You childishly believe that your constant misspellings cause me anguish, when they don't. Actually, it just illustrates either your childishness or your lack of accuracy in the presentation of facts. Either way, the reflection is on you, and not me. fertig Firm

Real0ne -> RE: the most important 19 min you will spend (10/31/2010 7:39:19 PM)
tea baggers? they would rather listen to confirmed lunatics like peloski reid ohaha etc etc its already a full house!

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

3.222656E-02