RE: What you DIDN'T vote for...

RE: What you DIDN'T vote for... (Full Version)

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

Message

pahunkboy -> RE: What you DIDN'T vote for... (11/3/2010 8:25:44 PM)
I must of missed the part of ending the fed. Why would the states borrow money when they can simply coin the money? Nothing- will change until monetary policy is fixed. We do not need investment banks. In regards to hope and change. I guess not.

Musicmystery -> RE: What you DIDN'T vote for... (11/3/2010 8:31:27 PM)
quote: total bs Yeah...fer sure the Teas went to Washington to continue stimulus spending. And Issa's probably just funnin' us. Yeah. That's it.

TheHeretic -> RE: What you DIDN'T vote for... (11/3/2010 8:36:55 PM)
No! No hits for you! You get nothing but the shallowest of sit-coms, and more Law & Order clones! We are going to throw Jerry in a room with the public employee unions he signed into legality. He's not available.

Malkinius -> RE: What you DIDN'T vote for... (11/4/2010 2:37:45 AM)
Greetings Ken.... quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen You should read some more of those links. Issa has promised dozens of investigations and hundreds of subpoenas quote: http://news.google.com/news/search?pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en&q=darrell+issa+subpoena I did. He didn't. Lots of links of people saying what he would do and almost nothing from him saying he would do that. Some of those links were written before the election saying what a monster he would be with no proof other than that he is a Republican who doesn't like Obama. Now....will he issue some? No question about it. Did he say he would be looking into certain areas? Yes. There were some quotes from Issa that said that. Dozens of areas? No. I think the quote mentioned three or four. Hundreds of subpoenas? No. Giving more power to agencies Attorneys General, yes. Nothing quoted backed up your claims. Other people saying he would do that wasn't even there to any great extent. It was just general fear mongering in most cases. Sorry....but your claim doesn't match your own sources. Provide a findable source of him quoted as saying dozens of investigations and hundreds of subpoenas, let alone blizzards of them and you might redeem yourself. Otherwise you just fail. Be well..... Malkinius

thishereboi -> RE: What you DIDN'T vote for... (11/4/2010 5:13:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Another poster who has absolutely no respect for the office of the Presidency. You forgot unoriginal. I remember people calling Bush "blowboy" to imply he was a coke head. You would think willby could come up with something new. If there is anything worse than a hater, it's a hater who has to resort to stealing other peoples lines.

truckinslave -> RE: What you DIDN'T vote for... (11/4/2010 5:27:03 AM)
quote: when Brown left office he left a FIVE BILLION DOLLAR surplus. Excellent. Yet another reason the greta state of California will not need federal assistance. Sorry I didn't make it clear that imo Christie is part of the solution, not part of the problem. Hope you find help with the anger issues.

truckinslave -> RE: What you DIDN'T vote for... (11/4/2010 5:31:30 AM)
quote: Another poster who has absolutely no respect for the office of the Presidency. I just wish we had a President with respect for the office.

DomKen -> RE: What you DIDN'T vote for... (11/4/2010 6:02:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Malkinius Greetings Ken.... quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen You should read some more of those links. Issa has promised dozens of investigations and hundreds of subpoenas quote: http://news.google.com/news/search?pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en&q=darrell+issa+subpoena I did. He didn't. Lots of links of people saying what he would do and almost nothing from him saying he would do that. Some of those links were written before the election saying what a monster he would be with no proof other than that he is a Republican who doesn't like Obama. Now....will he issue some? No question about it. Did he say he would be looking into certain areas? Yes. There were some quotes from Issa that said that. Dozens of areas? No. I think the quote mentioned three or four. Hundreds of subpoenas? No. Giving more power to agencies Attorneys General, yes. Nothing quoted backed up your claims. Other people saying he would do that wasn't even there to any great extent. It was just general fear mongering in most cases. Sorry....but your claim doesn't match your own sources. Provide a findable source of him quoted as saying dozens of investigations and hundreds of subpoenas, let alone blizzards of them and you might redeem yourself. Otherwise you just fail. Be well..... Malkinius What do you think he means by 'looking into certain areas' that means subpoenas and hearings. Why is he requesting an expanded budget for his committees legal staff if not for endless hearings and subpoenas? http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0610/38697.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/04/AR2010060404446.html http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0910/Boehner_backs_Issa_on_subpoena_promises.html

FirmhandKY -> RE: What you DIDN'T vote for... (11/4/2010 6:28:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen What do you think he means by 'looking into certain areas' that means subpoenas and hearings. Why is he requesting an expanded budget for his committees legal staff if not for endless hearings and subpoenas? Let's just cut all the horse crap right here and now. I'm not "final" on this thought, but I've been deliberating this about a day. I think a lot of investigations and subpoenas may be a good thing, and entirely appropriate, and may even be political advantageous, depending on how the House goes about doing it. So I don't accept your unstated premise that it will be somehow wrong for the House to do so. Live by the subpoena, die by the subpoena. What does Obama and the Democrats have to hide, that you are afraid that the disinfectant of light will reveal? Firm

FirmhandKY -> RE: What you DIDN'T vote for... (11/4/2010 6:36:25 AM)
GOP likely to urge Obama officials not to shred documents By Jordy Yager and Bob Cusack - 11/03/10 10:32 AM ET Republicans are likely to urge the Obama administration not to shred documents as they transition to the House majority.    Before the election, GOP officials on Capitol Hill privately discussed the issue but refrained from publicly tackling it, not wanting to assume what would happen on Election Day.   Now that Republicans will control the House, the shredding matter will move front and center.    I'll bet the shredding has already begun ... Firm

mnottertail -> RE: What you DIDN'T vote for... (11/4/2010 8:01:51 AM)
LOL. I remember Oliver North testifiying before congress and he said something very akin to ...The US Government spends alot of money on paper shredders, and Senator, they expect us to use them.

popeye1250 -> RE: What you DIDN'T vote for... (11/4/2010 10:26:49 AM)
Everyone in here has to live on a budget. Why should cities, towns, states or the feds be any differant?

DomKen -> RE: What you DIDN'T vote for... (11/4/2010 10:42:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen What do you think he means by 'looking into certain areas' that means subpoenas and hearings. Why is he requesting an expanded budget for his committees legal staff if not for endless hearings and subpoenas? Let's just cut all the horse crap right here and now. I'm not "final" on this thought, but I've been deliberating this about a day. I think a lot of investigations and subpoenas may be a good thing, and entirely appropriate, and may even be political advantageous, depending on how the House goes about doing it. So I don't accept your unstated premise that it will be somehow wrong for the House to do so. Live by the subpoena, die by the subpoena. What does Obama and the Democrats have to hide, that you are afraid that the disinfectant of light will reveal? Firm Do you not remember 1995 through 2000? I don't care about legitimate oversight and don't care about the occasional hearing or round of subpoenas. What I, and I think most Americans, don't want is another utterly pointless waste of money and effort over something akin to whitewater. Previous chair's of the Government Oversight commitee have made do with 40 staff attorneys and investigators (including Democratic chairmen overseeing Republican Presidents) so why does Issa need to double the staff?

Musicmystery -> RE: What you DIDN'T vote for... (11/4/2010 2:39:56 PM)
quote: Live by the subpoena, die by the subpoena. What does Obama and the Democrats have to hide, that you are afraid that the disinfectant of light will reveal? WTF? This isn't even a fishing expedition---it's 2012 theater. One of the best decisions Obama made, though he took flack for it, was to drop the Bush/Cheney stuff (where there IS plenty of indication of problems and clearly years of poor/no oversight) and move forward. Finance your own election campaigning. I thought you guys were tired of government waste?

DomKen -> RE: What you DIDN'T vote for... (11/5/2010 9:36:26 AM)
Yet more proof the GOP is going to do nothing but investigate Obama http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/45000.html

Musicmystery -> RE: What you DIDN'T vote for... (11/5/2010 12:23:05 PM)
They have nothing else to do. They don't even pretend to want anything else to do.

FirmhandKY -> RE: What you DIDN'T vote for... (11/5/2010 3:46:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: Live by the subpoena, die by the subpoena. What does Obama and the Democrats have to hide, that you are afraid that the disinfectant of light will reveal? WTF? This isn't even a fishing expedition---it's 2012 theater. One of the best decisions Obama made, though he took flack for it, was to drop the Bush/Cheney stuff (where there IS plenty of indication of problems and clearly years of poor/no oversight) and move forward. Finance your own election campaigning. I thought you guys were tired of government waste? I think that there is a major difference between the things that the Democrats wanted to "investigate" Bush about, and what I'm (and I hope) the House Republicans are talking about. Notice my conditions in my original post. Firm

DomKen -> RE: What you DIDN'T vote for... (11/5/2010 4:21:26 PM)
You mean things like breaking the law and degrading the countries founding principles? As much as I agree it was the right thing to do to not investigate Bush et al I find it hard to believe that anyone would claim that the complaints against Bush were minor or irrelevant.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: What you DIDN'T vote for... (11/5/2010 5:38:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen You mean things like breaking the law and degrading the countries founding principles? As much as I agree it was the right thing to do to not investigate Bush et al I find it hard to believe that anyone would claim that the complaints against Bush were minor or irrelevant. How about "total bullshit", cuz thats what they were.

slvemike4u -> RE: What you DIDN'T vote for... (11/5/2010 7:12:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Everyone in here has to live on a budget. Why should cities, towns, states or the feds be any differant? Thats simple Pops,and I know this might be tough for you to wrap your head around....but the feds,states,cities and towns at times need to build,establish and create things,infrastructure and programs that have a shelf life and benifits that stretch beyond the next paycheck. So at times the cost of these things will in large part be borne by the next generation.....which in turn will build,cunstruct or create things or infrastucture that will benifit suceeding generations. Government is not like running your household....and it is simplistic to the nth dehree to suggest that it should be done so as if it is.

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875