No, you are reaching. - Edit 1
Before modification by Joel at 02/08/2011 12:41:44 PM
I'm not gonna criticize you on form because that's just sophistry in which I don't engage, but it does seem like a Freudian slip. 
no it looks like I hit the space bar a second to early and spell checker doesn't check the subject. But hey it is all about perspective.
Like I said, it's not a reflection on your argument either way, I just found it ironic.
I do have to say though, I wish you'd type a little more slowly 'cos I frequently find myself having to decipher what you mean. I know you've got other stuff going on so I haven't mentioned it in a while, but there's got to be a happy medium between your volume of typos and the embarrassing amount of time I spend online.Maybe we should ask John Boehner....
I did he and he said that the republicans in the house have managed to pass to bills that would save us from defaulting while the other side continues to posture and offer nothing.
Cute. Bottom line remains that the only to get his own bill through the House was to make it a copy of the Tea Partys; nice "alternative", Mr. Speaker.
Step back from the rhetoric. The Tea party doesn't like his bill. I know that doesn't make a great bumper sticker but reality is stubborn that way.
The Tea Party likes his bill fine now that it the balanced budget amendment that makes it a copy of theirs; the Senate just didn't like it. The current question is whether the rest of House Republicans will like Reids bill now that it has ALSO has a balanced budget amendment that makes it little more than CC&B Mark III, and whether Pelosi can sell the SS and Medicare cuts if they don't. I suspect what Boehner will find is that the Tea Party is so committed to a balanced budget amendment, spending cuts and no tax hikes that they'll vote for it even if it includes defence cuts many of them regard as wasteful spending in the first place.
Why all the hysterics about a balance a balanced budget amendment?
Because it went from:
1) Tea Party notion the House Speaker rejected and the Senate Majority Leader ridiculed, to
2) Tea Party notion the House Speaker adopted to get them to pass his "alternative" bill, to
3) Tea Party notion the Senate Majority Leader also adopted to pass the final bill.
That's a pretty stunning Tea Party victory, but also a sign the lunatics are running the asylum.
If it is such a horrid thing and the country is so oppossed it will never go anywhere.
Exactly: A bill that simply raises the debt ceiling in exchange for a Constitutional Amendment the states won't ratify doesn't solve our budget problem. Again, not only did we punt, we took a safety to avoid punting out of our own end zone, which is a sorry way to lead a comeback. As to whether it would be horrid, we could theoretically end up caught between a new Constitutional Amendment and the 14th (which would incidentally mean the Republican Party made two mutually exclusive demands part of the US Constitution). We didn't raise the debt ceiling to cover new spending, but spending already "authorized by law"; a balanced budget amendment would simply give us a choice between which part of the Constitution to violate. As if our self created crisis weren't already bad enough. The REALLY important thing, of which we mustn't lose sight, is that we avoid a tax hike.
Is purely principle that you don't like the tea party so want them to fail no matter the cost? I am not even sure you know who or what the tea party even is. It seems to have become your blanket term for conservative you don't like. I think you may be spending to much time on nut jobs far left web pages again.
The Tea Party doesn't need my help to fail, clearly. And that "you spend too much time on far left web pages" crack is beyond lame at this point; you know full well it's BS, and if KNOWINGLY false accusations are your only defence for GOP radicalism that should tell you just how radical the Tea Party is.
as to the rest you really need to look at more polls. Republicans are doing pretty well in the Midwest and yes you can win the oval office without New England and the left coast. 2008 was an aberration not the new norm. Oh and you are on crack if you think 40% of the country is liberal and the tea party which had not even been formed yet sneered at Hatboy and flip fop the sailor man.
Yeah, Republicans are doing GREAT in the Mid-West; WI is about to recall half a dozen GOP state senators and probably their governor, while the Republican governor of OH (home of "Mr. Republican" Robert Taft) has an approval rating just under 35% less than a year after he took office. 2010 was an aberration, not the new norm, but if Republicans want to take it as a mandate they are welcome to do so with my blessing. I have no idea who "Hatboy and flip flop the sailorman" are, but right now Obama looks to be in the same place Bush was in '03: No one really likes him, but he's got charisma and the oppositions best choice to run against him is a guy who endorsed all the same policies. I mean, let's face it, Romneys whole professional life boils down to government subsidies to private industry and laws forcing people to buy insurance; instead of running against him, Obama should put him on the ticket.
