RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria

RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (Full Version)

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

Message

Lucylastic -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/3/2013 11:52:31 AM)
heh

Yachtie -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/3/2013 12:43:50 PM)
FR - Democratic Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton said Tuesday that at the current time, the only reason she would vote in favor of an attack on Syria was out of loyalty to Barack Obama. Appearing on radio's Bill Press Show, the non-voting delegate from the District of Columbia also said if the President actually gets the votes he needs, "it’ll be because of loyalty of Democrats. They just don’t want to see him shamed and humiliated on the national stage" (video follows with transcript and commentary): Now that's what I call a considered reason[8\|]

mnottertail -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/3/2013 12:46:30 PM)
I doubt the shame and humiliation of Obama regardless of which way the vote would go. I do find that if that is the impetus that she would do that (and by her extension the democrats) that they could have voted in his budgets in that same vein. Talking heads, talking shit.

Lucylastic -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/3/2013 12:58:20 PM)
What was actually said................... Del. ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON (D-DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA): I happen to believe there has to be a response. I do, I do believe in crimes against humanity need to be addressed, and I am, I can’t believe that the only way to address it is a slight bombing which will somehow punish somebody or deter somebody. I don’t know if there’s some way other than a military way to address this. BILL PRESS, HOST: You’re kind to join us this morning, Congresswoman. Let me just ask you one final question before we let you go. If, as you said, if the vote were held today, the president would probably not win it. If he doesn’t win it, a week from now, do you think the president will be justified in taking action on his own, you know, unilaterally with Congress having voted against it? HOLMES NORTON: No, oh boy, no. I think it’ll be like the red line trap. He said if the red line you cross it. I think once you say, "I’m going to Congress," you can’t say, “Okay, I’m going to do it anyway.” PRESS: Yeah, yeah, I don’t… HOLMES NORTON: So I think he’ll be in real trouble if he then does it anyway. No president has done that. PRESS: It’s not an easy decision for any of you, Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton. HOLMES NORTON: Oh, and I’d like to say, Bill, that if he gets saved at all, I think it’ll be because, it’ll be because of loyalty of Democrats. They just don’t want to see him shamed and humiliated on the national stage. PRESS: Yeah, right. HOLMES NORTON: At the, at the moment, that’s the only reason I would vote for it if I could vote on it.

mnottertail -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/3/2013 12:59:53 PM)
And there is a reason she cant vote for it. They dont need a great deal of intellect in people in congress from dc.

Lucylastic -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/3/2013 1:14:34 PM)
You mean like posting links from newsbusters?

mnottertail -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/3/2013 1:17:20 PM)
Well, DC is non-voting, they get to show up and say things, and newsbusters gets to provide spin for those who can't get all their spin from Brietbart, Boortz.....and so on, there needs to be lots of spin out there.

Yachtie -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/3/2013 1:28:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Well, DC is non-voting, they get to show up and say things, and newsbusters gets to provide spin for those who can't get all their spin from Brietbart, Boortz.....and so on, there needs to be lots of spin out there. As to spin, you're just upset when it's not left spin[:D]

DesideriScuri -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/3/2013 1:34:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri This was in my FB feed just now... http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/where-lawmakers-stand-on-syria/ Mouse over the dots and the Rep's/Sen's name shows up, including a quote, if applicable. Senate: Against Military action: 4 (4 R's) Lean No: 17 (5 D's, 11 R's, 1 I) Undecided: 59 (36 D's, 22 R's, 1 I) For Military Action: 20 (11 D's, 9 R's) House (only 211 out of 435 shown): Against: 36 (14 D's, 22 R's) Lean no: 67 (19 D's, 48 R's) Undecided: 91 (55 D's, 36 R's) For: 17 (9 D's, 8 R's) Initially, it looks bipartisan with only a small amount of partisan politics. Against: 40 (14 D's, 26 R's) For: 37 (20 D's, 17 R's) The majority of Senators (76 total) have not decided yet, regardless of for/against leanings. Of the 211 Representatives shown, 158 of them have not yet decided their support/lack of support. This is good, imo. It looks as if there may actually be bipartisan discussion going on in both chambers. I just tried your link, DS, and there wasn't any data. Either it's being changed or I'm missing something. I had to refresh the first time I tried it (from the FB post), but it came up no problem when I tried it just now. It has been updated, though. 212 Representatives are now listed (1 more than before) with there being two changes. One Republican went from "For" to "Undecided" and the one "new" addition is a Republican in the "Undecided" list. So, refresh it and give it some time. It didn't come up for me the very first time I went there, but I haven't had a problem since. Since the graphic isn't simply a picture, but an interactive graphic, I can't simply post it here (or, if I can, I don't know how).

mnottertail -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/3/2013 1:45:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Well, DC is non-voting, they get to show up and say things, and newsbusters gets to provide spin for those who can't get all their spin from Brietbart, Boortz.....and so on, there needs to be lots of spin out there. As to spin, you're just upset when it's not left spin[:D] Nah, the overwhelming lies and spin from the right dont leave much need for the left to spin much. This is typical shit though: Obama is a socialist, spend, spend spend. (there is the rightist lie and the spin) The house of representitives are the 'source' of all spending and revenue bills, per our constitution. (there is the leftist statement of facts)

MyPleasureSir -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/3/2013 2:06:10 PM)
Oops

Politesub53 -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/3/2013 4:49:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail I think there will be a lot of reconsideration if the us congress backs an Obama syrian attack. Bradshaw is Labour, and the government is Tory, and Tories helped hand Cameron his ass, last vote. There would have to be a significant change in circumstances. Tory viewpoint would be Polite. Labour viewpoint would be Peon. Bomb Throwing Anarchist (with a dash of Tory) viewpoint would be Moon. Well stated old bean. Bradshaws claim that Labour didnt know what they were voting for doesnt hold water. As an aside, Bradshaw is a Blairite, Milliband was one of Browns right hand men. This could be little more than Bradshaw trying to garner support for any Labour leadership election. And there is sure to be one if Labour dont win the general election next year.

FatDomDaddy -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/3/2013 4:58:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic You mean like posting links from newsbusters? OK... Loose... So what if it was on Newsbusters? Does that mean she didn't say it?

Lucylastic -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/3/2013 5:06:37 PM)
I already posted what she actually said...and took it from newsbusters...I even listend to the clip.... the spin is what makes it funny

Politesub53 -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/3/2013 5:13:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic I already posted what she actually said...and took it from newsbusters...I even listend to the clip.... the spin is what makes it funny One would have thought your bolding of the relevant statement would have been enough. Apparently not. [;)]

BislaveHaylee -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/3/2013 5:19:38 PM)
You guys want the war in Syria so much go fight it your damned selves, don't waste our troops on another countries bullshit, that's supposed to be for our protection, the UN is backing out and Russia along with China have made some very serious threats against us if we try to get involved, I prefer us not have our asses kicked by the communist so I say we mind our own business for once and set this one out <_<.

RottenJohnny -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/3/2013 6:13:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BislaveHaylee You guys want the war in Syria so much go fight it your damned selves, don't waste our troops on another countries bullshit, that's supposed to be for our protection, the UN is backing out and Russia along with China have made some very serious threats against us if we try to get involved, I prefer us not have our asses kicked by the communist so I say we mind our own business for once and set this one out <_<. I'm not sure who you are specifically talking about, Haylee, but as far as I can tell, there isn't anyone here from another country advocating the US go into Syria...but I may have missed a posting or two. As far as Russia or China is concerned, I don't think you need to worry about them. Most of what they say is political bluster. Neither one is in a good position to attack the US if we decide to go in except with nukes. This situation doesn't warrant that level of response. They may go for economic disruption or limited military support of Assad but we're not an easy target for direct military action. It's too easy for us to retaliate and we have allies of our own.

RottenJohnny -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/3/2013 6:19:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail I think there will be a lot of reconsideration if the us congress backs an Obama syrian attack. Bradshaw is Labour, and the government is Tory, and Tories helped hand Cameron his ass, last vote. There would have to be a significant change in circumstances. Tory viewpoint would be Polite. Labour viewpoint would be Peon. Bomb Throwing Anarchist (with a dash of Tory) viewpoint would be Moon. Well stated old bean. Bradshaws claim that Labour didnt know what they were voting for doesnt hold water. As an aside, Bradshaw is a Blairite, Milliband was one of Browns right hand men. This could be little more than Bradshaw trying to garner support for any Labour leadership election. And there is sure to be one if Labour dont win the general election next year. I figured there was more to it but I don't really follow British politics. I appreciate the input.

Politesub53 -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/4/2013 3:07:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny I figured there was more to it but I don't really follow British politics. I appreciate the input. You`re welcome..... Any more questions just fire away.

mnottertail -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/4/2013 7:01:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 And there is sure to be one if Labour dont win the general election next year. Until this very instant, I always thought you a native born son of England. Now I feel you are at least half American on your mother's side, as old Winnie was. Labor dont win? Hie thee back to third form, my non-native speaker.

Page: << < prev 4 5 6 [7] 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.711914E-02