Jump to content

Here Are the First 12 Actions the GOP Should Take Once Taking Control of the US House!


Reagan

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

She's right... The deficit an annual number that shows how much we've spent OVER what we collected, and Obama's deficits WERE lower in his later years vs the first ones.

The debt is the running total of debt that we've racked up as a nation over time.  But, the deficits generated in '09 was substantial as a result of the financial meltdown at the end of Bush's terms.  Kinda like Biden will show smaller deficits by the time he leaves office unless we have another event like the mortgage meltdown or pandemic. 

 

Fun fact...the last time we ran a surplus (we collected more than we spent in a single year, hence no deficit) Bill Clinton was in office and the Rs held congress.

Another fun fact, your hero Clinton also gutted the military before Gingrich came in, look it up.

That sure helps to lessen the deficit.

Also, welfare reform was put in place, which Clinton always claimed as his, even though he was dragged kicking and screaming into the "compromise" by the Republicans.

This was in his spare time when not spending time with Monica.

Funny how some folks still put this pathetic pedophile on a pedestal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

First off, the Republicans can't even get a speaker seated... What makes you think they're going to accomplish a single meaningful thing when the entire party is held captive by wingnuts on the far right?  Kinda like NOT repealing and replacing Obamacare (which you all seem to hate so much) even though they had both houses and the Presidency?  That's a fail.

Those same type of knuckleheads with 12 step programs to persecute, prosecute, and other badger Dems instead of doing the work of the country is exactly why I cant stand the Republican Party, even though I'm a conservative.  At least the Dems can all get on the same page when it matters.  Republicans can't or won't.  

Gridlock due to differing ideology, I love it.

I guess the Republicans need to work on their mindless lockstep mentality like the democrats practice so well, lol.

Great point!!!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somebody needs to give some of that infrastructure money to the bridge people on Hwy 365. A little boost in money could hire more people and get that 3 year job done already. How much was spent again on infrastructure? It’s just a little old bridge. Probably getting internet service for people in the Idaho mountains or more charging stations for the EVs.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

She's right... The deficit an annual number that shows how much we've spent OVER what we collected, and Obama's deficits WERE lower in his later years vs the first ones.

The debt is the running total of debt that we've racked up as a nation over time.  But, the deficits generated in '09 was substantial as a result of the financial meltdown at the end of Bush's terms.  Kinda like Biden will show smaller deficits by the time he leaves office unless we have another event like the mortgage meltdown or pandemic. 

 

Fun fact...the last time we ran a surplus (we collected more than we spent in a single year, hence no deficit) Bill Clinton was in office and the Rs held congress.

That was some Awesome Word Salad, fact is he added 8.6 Trillion to the deficit. I am not a Republican Worshipper but it’s what I am stuck with unfortunately till a real alternative comes along which may be never.  As for as the Unaffordable Crap Care Act, at least the Republicans got rid of the mandate that made you buy that Turd Obama Care. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Unwoke said:

That was some Awesome Word Salad, fact is he added 8.6 Trillion to the deficit. I am not a Republican Worshipper but it’s what I am stuck with unfortunately till a real alternative comes along which may be never. 

Gotta love the critics that try to demean voters that obviously made the best choice of those presented.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, baddog said:

Somebody needs to give some of that infrastructure money to the bridge people on Hwy 365. A little boost in money could hire more people and get that 3 year job done already. How much was spent again on infrastructure? It’s just a little old bridge. Probably getting internet service for people in the Idaho mountains or more charging stations for the EVs.  

Shovel ready jobs, lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, baddog said:

For every person you listed, you have an opposite who could be brought up on the same charges but won’t be touched due to corruption. Funny how those don’t bother you. Tells me all I need to know.

Could be shmould be. I’m talking about court proceedings that actually happened for real, not coulda mighta woulda. You sound like little tucker carlson.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Unwoke said:

That was some Awesome Word Salad, fact is he added 8.6 Trillion to the deficit. I am not a Republican Worshipper but it’s what I am stuck with unfortunately till a real alternative comes along which may be never.  As for as the Unaffordable Crap Care Act, at least the Republicans got rid of the mandate that made you buy that Turd Obama Care. 

He added about 9 Trillion to our accumulated DEBT, but the yearly deficits shrank while he was in office.  Don't get me wrong, we were still spending Trillions during his presidency, just not spending at as fast of a rate as when he started.  It's also honest to point out that the deficit (and debt) grew every year that Trump was in office... even before the pandemic. 

 

  • FY 2010: Obama's first budget created a deficit of just under $1.3 trillion.4
  • FY 2011: This budget deficit was $1.3 trillion.5
  • FY 2012: The deficit was $1.1 trillion.6
  • FY 2013: This was the first Obama budget where the deficit, $680 billion, was less than $1 trillion.7
  • FY 2014: The deficit was $483 billion.8 Tax revenue rose to $3.02 trillion.9
  • FY 2015: The deficit fell further to $439 billion.10
  • FY 2016: The deficit rose to $587 billion.11
  • FY 2017: The deficit was $665 billion.12 It was $162 billion more than the $503 billion deficit estimated in Obama's budget request
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CardinalBacker said:

That's what amazes me... these people claim to be conservative when it comes time to cut taxes but get all liberal when it's time to spend money.  It's been going on for years.  I guess these "conservatives" are okay with deficit spending as long as it's on things that THEY want.  

New term, kinda like RINOs.

Conservative Until (I) Need Things.... you know. 


As Baddog (Traitordog who supports Jan 6th) said.. stop being negative! His precious feelings were hurt with hard facts..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

He added about 9 Trillion to our accumulated DEBT, but the yearly deficits shrank while he was in office.  Don't get me wrong, we were still spending Trillions during his presidency, just not spending at as fast of a rate as when he started.  It's also honest to point out that the deficit (and debt) grew every year that Trump was in office... even before the pandemic. 

 

  • FY 2010: Obama's first budget created a deficit of just under $1.3 trillion.4
  • FY 2011: This budget deficit was $1.3 trillion.5
  • FY 2012: The deficit was $1.1 trillion.6
  • FY 2013: This was the first Obama budget where the deficit, $680 billion, was less than $1 trillion.7
  • FY 2014: The deficit was $483 billion.8 Tax revenue rose to $3.02 trillion.9
  • FY 2015: The deficit fell further to $439 billion.10
  • FY 2016: The deficit rose to $587 billion.11
  • FY 2017: The deficit was $665 billion.12 It was $162 billion more than the $503 billion deficit estimated in Obama's budget request

Again, revenue bills can be only originated in the House, spending bills can come from either house of the legislative branch. If history serves me, Republicans controlled the tax/spend levers for six of Obama’s eight year presidency. They had it for half of he who I shall not mention’s term. If you were to start blaming politicians and not parties, things might start happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, UT alum said:

Again, revenue bills can be only originated in the House, spending bills can come from either house of the legislative branch. If history serves me, Republicans controlled the tax/spend levers for six of Obama’s eight year presidency. They had it for half of he who I shall not mention’s term. If you were to start blaming politicians and not parties, things might start happening.

So should it be Congresscare instead of Obamacare?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, UT alum said:

Again, revenue bills can be only originated in the House, spending bills can come from either house of the legislative branch. If history serves me, Republicans controlled the tax/spend levers for six of Obama’s eight year presidency. They had it for half of he who I shall not mention’s term. If you were to start blaming politicians and not parties, things might start happening.

There’s not a lot of difference in the spending habits of the two parties since the late 90s… there are no fiscal conservatives in Washington.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Unwoke said:

Basic Civics, the President can veto the Bill if he’s not happy with it. If he signs it, then he approves of the spending which means he’s spending. That’s a Fact! I am aware that the house controls the purse strings but the President can still veto it. So your statement is Fake News.😂

Signature does not always mean approval. Spending bills are compromises, and have to be enacted to continue government operations. The veto can also be overridden, so it is not an absolute power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

So should it be Congresscare instead of Obamacare?

It is the Affordable Care Act. All the little political names given it are talking head gibberish. Sure would be nice if we could call those things which are by their official names. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, UT alum said:

Signature does not always mean approval. Spending bills are compromises, and have to be enacted to continue government operations. The veto can also be overridden, so it is not an absolute power.

You can do all the mental gymnastics you want but he still added 8.6 trillion dollars to the deficit. That’s trillion with a T. I think you’re eating that Trump Toilet Paper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, UT alum said:

It is the Affordable Care Act. All the little political names given it are talking head gibberish. Sure would be nice if we could call those things which are by their official names. 

And this was all Congress, you're telling me that Obama had nothing to do with it right?

I love how you point out parties and not politicians should be blamed but can't stop talking about Trump.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

There’s not a lot of difference in the spending habits of the two parties since the late 90s… there are no fiscal conservatives in Washington.  

There are, but they get hammered every time they want to cut (actually, just not increase) a program or cut taxes all we here is that we're taking food out of kid's mouths and wanting to throw Grandma over the cliff.

You cannot be a fiscal conservative and still believe that federal entitlements should exist,  They cannot be managed from the federal level.

And, I agree, there is not much difference in how much the parties spend but there is a big difference in how they spend it.

I get tired of hearing about the deficit being called out like that's the ultimate indicator on how well an administration is doing,  I could cut all entitlements, gut the military, and increase the tax rate to 75% and the deficit would look great.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Unwoke said:

You can do all the mental gymnastics you want but he still added 8.6 trillion dollars to the deficit. That’s trillion with a T. I think you’re eating that Trump Toilet Paper.

I get it…. Most of this is going over your head. It’s obvious that you don’t even understand the terms that apply to the issues at hand. 
 

That’s the problem with most of trumps diehards… they don’t even know what they’re talking about, they’re just sure that Trump was the best!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Another fun fact, your hero Clinton also gutted the military before Gingrich came in, look it up.

That sure helps to lessen the deficit.

Also, welfare reform was put in place, which Clinton always claimed as his, even though he was dragged kicking and screaming into the "compromise" by the Republicans.

This was in his spare time when not spending time with Monica.

Funny how some folks still put this pathetic pedophile on a pedestal.

Monica was 21. That doesn't make him a pedophile

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, UT alum said:

It is the Affordable Care Act. All the little political names given it are talking head gibberish. Sure would be nice if we could call those things which are by their official names. 

So, if it was so good and affordable -- then why did Congress "exempt" themselves from it?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,977
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    cfbswami
    Newest Member
    cfbswami
    Joined



  • Posts

    • No offense, but both sides do it.  The Rs in Texas want to do away with decades of precedent and demand that Dems are no longer given chair positions on any committees in the Tx House. It sounds reasonable enough, until you arrive at a point when the Ds enjoy a single seat majority in the house, select the most leftist speaker of all times, and the refuse to give Rs any say in the legislative process by refusing to give them any committee chairs.     Experience has shown me that any time a party seeks to consolidate power in a legislative body, it backfires.    What I don’t like is a world where we cheer for Manchin for doing his own thing, but also re-elect guys like Paxton and Patrick when they make threats to R Legislators if they don’t do exactly what the Radical Right demands. Our Rep here in Hardin County lost his spot for voting against private school vouchers-his wife is a teacher. He also voted his conscience on the Paxton impeachment.  It cost him his seat…. Not because of the will of the voters in his district, but because if millions of outside dollars pumped into the race from outside the district and even an endorsement of his unknown challenger by Donald Trump himself.    Why do people like you applaud Manchin for being his own man and then vote against Phelan for doing the same thing?
    • We'll see. I don't trust us. 
    • Starting pitching has been shaky the last few weeks due to some injuries outside of Hagen Smith.  He goes tomorrow, so y’all should be fine 
    • Manchin may get it but any mention of the radical left that wanted to get rid of the filibuster and end almost 220 years of history because the Democrats are mad?  The House and Senate are obviously different legislative bodies with entirely different election processes and rules for a reason. The House can vote on laws with a simple majority vote. The Senate put rules in place that it would make it much tougher to pass laws. Laws should be difficult to pass. The Senate is often the holdup of the right and left. It takes 60 votes to break the filibuster so any law will almost certainly require agreement at least in part, from opposing sides of an issue. Because they can’t get laws passed, the radical left is like a baby having a tantrum and wants to change over 200 years of history and make it potentially ridiculously easy to pass laws. I have seen current poll maps and it is possible for the Republicans to sweep into complete power in November but by the tiniest margin. That would possibly mean that a single vote margin in both houses could enact what you might call the radical right laws. There would be nothing that the Democrats could do to stop any legislation whatsoever if the left (they are all radical, minus Manchin) got their filibuster rule changed.  That is where the current filibuster comes into play as any new law would require several Democrats to agree with the majority Republicans and vice versa.  Do you want the potential for your radical right to have free rein as the radical left wants by killing the filibuster or is the radical left just as (if not more) dangerous? Let’s see if we have a history in this area? Oh yeah, the Democrats changed the rules in the Senate to allow federal judges to not have to overcome the filibuster. Obama was not getting his federal judge nominations passed and being angry, they changed the rules instead of nominating more moderate justices. They were warned that it would come back to bite them. They didn’t care and chose the nuclear option to change the rules. Oops! Any guess how Trump got all of his Supreme Court nominees passed against strong Democrat opposition? The Democrats got rid of the filibuster for federal judges after another tantrum   So when you are so worried about the radical right, are you equally concerned in what the radical left is always doing by changing rules and history which were put into place just for situations like we are in? So while Manchin gets it, what about his other 50 colleagues (49 + Harris)?  What concerns you more, Abbott and Paxton or the Democrats who want to make it to where if the Republicans do take over, they can go wild… at least in your mind? 
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...