If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NPR)   Republicans block Democratic infrastructure bill. Democrats block Republican infrastructure bill. Both sides are bad, so avoid bridges   (npr.org) divider line 40
    More: Obvious, Republican Block, Senate GOP, President Obama, republicans, Democrats, bridges, surcharges, small-business owners  
•       •       •

566 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 Nov 2011 at 11:31 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



40 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread
 
2011-11-04 11:01:55 AM
the president's Democratic allies immediately turned to kill a competing GOP infrastructure plan that would have extended existing highway and transit spending programs and paid for the spending with a $40 billion cut in unspent funding for other domestic programs.

How are you pretend you're putting forward a new plan when you're "plan" involves just moving money around without actually doing anything? That's the Republican plan, as opposed to the Democratic plan that actually does something?

Yeah, both sides are really equally bad you Republican apologist.
 
2011-11-04 11:30:35 AM

GAT_00: Yeah, both sides are really equally bad you Republican apologist.


But perhaps you might still agree that the "avoid bridges" is potentially sound advice?
 
2011-11-04 11:31:53 AM
BSABSAB
 
2011-11-04 11:32:44 AM
I hope they all farking choke to death. I'm sick of it.
 
2011-11-04 11:33:16 AM

tricycleracer: BSABSAB


An acronym America can believe in.
 
2011-11-04 11:33:35 AM
"The truth is, Democrats are more interested in building a campaign message than in rebuilding roads and bridges," said Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. "And frankly, the American people deserve a lot better than that."

Hypocrisy, thy name is McConnell, and you look like a turtle, too.
 
2011-11-04 11:34:31 AM

tricycleracer: BSABSAB


Yes, that was approximately the sputtering noise that emerged from my mouth.
 
2011-11-04 11:36:54 AM
We just need to cut taxes on the Bridge Creators, and kill all the road-killing regulations. Then parts of their bridges will trickle down on everything below them, and we'll be set.
 
2011-11-04 11:37:40 AM
7/10ths of a farking percent on millionaires versus removing environmental protections.

Sorry assholes, you're losing. People have woken up, and when they find out you stopped a program designed to fix bridges because you objected to a 7/10ths of a percent increase on taxes for those that can afford it most, well, fark you.
 
2011-11-04 11:37:41 AM
Being a journalist these days means writing anything -- anything at all -- that will shield you from accusations of liberal bias.

No other logic need apply.
 
2011-11-04 11:38:24 AM

DarwiOdrade: "The truth is, Democrats are more interested in building a campaign message than in rebuilding roads and bridges," said Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. "And frankly, the American people deserve a lot better than that."

Hypocrisy, thy name is McConnell, and you look like a turtle, too.


I was gonna say, isn't this the same guy that said their number one priority is ensuring Obama is a one term President?
 
2011-11-04 11:38:32 AM

abb3w: GAT_00: Yeah, both sides are really equally bad you Republican apologist.

But perhaps you might still agree that the "avoid bridges" is potentially sound advice?


1 in 3 brides are structurally unsafe to drive on. Avoid bridges isn't the worst advice.
 
2011-11-04 11:44:54 AM

GAT_00: the president's Democratic allies immediately turned to kill a competing GOP infrastructure plan that would have extended existing highway and transit spending programs and paid for the spending with a $40 billion cut in unspent funding for other domestic programs.

How are you pretend you're putting forward a new plan when you're "plan" involves just moving money around without actually doing anything? That's the Republican plan, as opposed to the Democratic plan that actually does something?

Yeah, both sides are really equally bad you Republican apologist.


Oh, and:

Republicans countered with a bill that would provide highway funding, but cut $40 billion in discretionary funds for federal programs, and that included legislation called the REINS act, which would give Congress an effective veto over executive branch regulations like worker and environmental protections.

I am SHOCKED.
 
2011-11-04 11:46:09 AM

GAT_00: 1 in 3 brides are structurally unsafe to drive on.


Wow, obesity has become an even bigger problem than I thought.
 
2011-11-04 11:47:02 AM
I often wonder if they view future accidents and possible massive environmental disasters as actual potential revenue opportunities.

As in, "Building shoddy pipelines over massive reserviours has an inherent danger of one problem leading to catastrophic environmental damage, and that damage will require cleanup, and I might own a sanitation company at that point or at the very least might want to get in bed with one, so let's cut regulations and cheap out on everything" as an actual sort of strategy, rather than just being short-term greedy and unbelievably short-sighted.
 
2011-11-04 11:50:42 AM
*In this case, it's more of a "I want the democrats to get hurt, and while this may lead to horrendous disasters and loss of life in the future, it might be profitable anyways" form of justification/thought process, rather than just "fark you" and nothing else.
 
2011-11-04 11:51:05 AM

GAT_00: Yeah, both sides are really equally bad you Republican apologist.


Lets see. Are both sides proposing bills that they know the other side won't vote for? Are both sides doing nothing but trying to make the other side look bad? Are both sides simply pandering to their base with no real intentions of getting anything done?

If you can't answer YES! to all three of those statements than your a hyper-partisan hack, and you are part of why this nation is going to come crashing down. Both sides are only interested in gaining power for their respective party; the country be damned. So yes, both sides are horribly bad, and the whole lot of them should be sent home.

Of course far too many Americans have been radicalized to one side or the other for that to happen. So I hope your happy when the inevitable violence results. Hopefully it won't result in an all out civil war or balkanization. But mark my words, this hyper-partisan schism will end in bloodshed; and maybe allot of it.
 
2011-11-04 11:56:02 AM

BigBooper: Lets see. Are both sides proposing bills that they know the other side won't vote for?


So if one side decided that they wouldn't vote for any bill that didn't include legalizing lynching minorities as a requirement, and the other proposed reasonable bills that didn't include lynching minorities, they're both at fault?
Really?

You're insisting that the Democrats' bill is entirely for the point of making the Republicans look bad, that they're not doing that on their own, and that the Democrats' bill isn't aimed at actually doing something? Really?

And finally, you're saying that by putting forward a reasonable measure that is supposed to improve something (i.e. make peoples' lives better, thus pandering to the base known as Americans), they're merely "pandering to their base"? Isn't that what any and every progressive bill is, even if the public disagrees in the short term?

Things are hyper-partisan, sure, but the problem is that they're both on the same damn side of the spectrum. You have right-wing Democrats and extremely right-wing Republicans. If the Democrats actually were as left-wing as Republicans make them out to be, and were staunchly so, then the actual compromises that came out would be centrist and beneficial to both sides, or nothing would get done and a third party would easily sweep in.
 
2011-11-04 11:58:39 AM

BigBooper: GAT_00: Yeah, both sides are really equally bad you Republican apologist.

Lets see. Are both sides proposing bills that they know the other side won't vote for? Are both sides doing nothing but trying to make the other side look bad? Are both sides simply pandering to their base with no real intentions of getting anything done?

If you can't answer YES! to all three of those statements than your a hyper-partisan hack, and you are part of why this nation is going to come crashing down. Both sides are only interested in gaining power for their respective party; the country be damned. So yes, both sides are horribly bad, and the whole lot of them should be sent home.

Of course far too many Americans have been radicalized to one side or the other for that to happen. So I hope your happy when the inevitable violence results. Hopefully it won't result in an all out civil war or balkanization. But mark my words, this hyper-partisan schism will end in bloodshed; and maybe allot of it.


Here's the thing, Republicans won't vote for anything because they are steadfastly against letting Obama improve the economy with bills economists surveyed by Bloomberg News say would help avoid a return to recession by maintaining growth and pushing down the unemployment rate next year.

Democrats won't vote for any Republican bills because they are dangerous to our country and the economy. Such as this bill that would allow Congress to remove worker and environmental protections. Or how about this bill pushed through by conservatives that cost the economy 370,000 jobs.

So yea, continue your smug, self satisfying "both sides are equally bad, and if you can't see that, you're a hyper partisan" bullshiat. Thanks for letting the GOP continue their narrative of "government can't do anything right!" We all really appreciate it.
 
2011-11-04 12:00:08 PM

BigBooper: Are both sides proposing bills that they know the other side won't vote for?


So because Republicans refuse to vote for anything but tax cuts, Democrats are trying to destroy the country for not including tax cuts in every bill.

Farking retarded logic is farking retarded, Republican apologist.
 
2011-11-04 12:01:15 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2011-11-04 12:37:50 PM
Best use of this cliche yet.
 
2011-11-04 01:29:13 PM

GAT_00: BigBooper: Are both sides proposing bills that they know the other side won't vote for?

So because Republicans refuse to vote for anything but tax cuts, Democrats are trying to destroy the country for not including tax cuts in every bill.

Farking retarded logic is farking retarded, Republican apologist.


I thought I made my position pretty clear on how I feel about Republicans. But let me rephrase it for you: Republicans are scum, Fark'em in the ass, Fark'em hard, and don't use any lube.

I just happen to feel the same way about Democrats. If you think I'm a republican apologist than I don't think you understand my seething hatred of politicians.

But you go on blindly cheering on your side. It must be nice to live in a world that's as black and white as yours.
 
2011-11-04 01:29:31 PM
Another political flash point is the way Democrats have sought to pay for Obama's jobs measures a surcharge on income exceeding $1 million. The idea enjoys wide backing in opinion polls but is stoutly opposed by Republicans, who say it would hit small business owners and therefore threaten job growth.

All of the small business owners that I know have well over $1 million in person income every year. Oh wait, NO THEY FARKING DON'T, YOU RETARDED DOUCHENOZZLES!! Do they even try to make sense anymore, or do they just string together random buzzwords until something sticks?
 
2011-11-04 01:37:37 PM

BigBooper: But you go on blindly cheering on your side. It must be nice to live in a world that's as black and white as yours.


It is GAT. No need to expect any more.
 
2011-11-04 01:39:24 PM

HeadLever: BigBooper: But you go on blindly cheering on your side. It must be nice to live in a world that's as black and white as yours.

It is GAT. No need to expect any more.


Yea, because GAT never complains about Obama and the Democrats. *rolls eyes*

Look, when one side promotes bills that economists say will prevent another recession, and the other side promotes bills that limit worker and environmental protections, as well as cuts hundreds of thousands of jobs, how can you proclaim both sides are equally bad?
 
2011-11-04 01:52:10 PM

Car_Ramrod: HeadLever: BigBooper: But you go on blindly cheering on your side. It must be nice to live in a world that's as black and white as yours.

It is GAT. No need to expect any more.

Yea, because GAT never complains about Obama and the Democrats. *rolls eyes*

Look, when one side promotes bills that economists say will prevent another recession, and the other side promotes bills that limit worker and environmental protections, as well as cuts hundreds of thousands of jobs, how can you proclaim both sides are equally bad?


Dishonestly.
 
2011-11-04 02:00:38 PM

Car_Ramrod: Yea, because GAT never complains about Obama and the Democrats. *rolls eyes*


I haven't had much to biatch about lately except for the whole bombing thing. I don't think people really notice when I do it.
 
2011-11-04 02:06:42 PM

GAT_00: Car_Ramrod: Yea, because GAT never complains about Obama and the Democrats. *rolls eyes*

I haven't had much to biatch about lately except for the whole bombing thing. I don't think people really notice when I do it.


It's like when people never notice that Jon Stewart mocks Obama or the Democrats. Yea, the ratio is a lot lower, but it still happens.
 
2011-11-04 02:11:03 PM

Car_Ramrod: GAT_00: the president's Democratic allies immediately turned to kill a competing GOP infrastructure plan that would have extended existing highway and transit spending programs and paid for the spending with a $40 billion cut in unspent funding for other domestic programs.

How are you pretend you're putting forward a new plan when you're "plan" involves just moving money around without actually doing anything? That's the Republican plan, as opposed to the Democratic plan that actually does something?

Yeah, both sides are really equally bad you Republican apologist.

Oh, and:

Republicans countered with a bill that would provide highway funding, but cut $40 billion in discretionary funds for federal programs, and that included legislation called the REINS act, which would give Congress an effective veto over executive branch regulations like worker and environmental protections.

I am SHOCKED.


Yeah, it's not like the two bills were in any way comparable, as some people here have tried to portray them. The GOP bill would have basically returned us to the pre-NEPA days (look it up yourself) when no environmental legislation existed at all.
 
2011-11-04 02:18:36 PM
Republicans have the psycho-ex GF mentality of 'I burned your house down because I love you'.
 
2011-11-04 02:19:17 PM
Democrats also voted against their mosiah's bill...Ouch.
 
2011-11-04 02:20:22 PM

Car_Ramrod: Yea, because GAT never complains about Obama and the Democrats. *rolls eyes*


Only when they cave into what the Republicans want.

Look, when one side promotes bills that economists say will prevent another recession, and the other side promotes bills that limit worker and environmental protections, as well as cuts hundreds of thousands of jobs, how can you proclaim both sides are equally bad?

Because one proposal deepens our debt and the other proposal at least tries to keep spending on a level playing field. Not saying one side is necessarily good or bad because both have advantages and disadvantages. The problem is not so much with the actual plans, but the dishonest rhetoric that goes along with it. At this time, no one is willing to admit the other may have a good idea.

However, saying all of that, I will agree that the democrats have a better overall argument. The republicans have painted themselves into a corner and are unwilling to move from it.
 
2011-11-04 02:29:06 PM

Car_Ramrod: Oh, and:

Republicans countered with a bill that would provide highway funding, but cut $40 billion in discretionary funds for federal programs, and that included legislation called the REINS act, which would give Congress an effective veto over executive branch regulations like worker and environmental protections.

I am SHOCKED.


Both sides are the same!
 
2011-11-04 02:38:02 PM

AntiNerd: Being a journalist these days means writing anything -- anything at all -- that will shield you from accusations of liberal bias.

No other logic need apply.


Bears repeating.
 
2011-11-04 02:45:42 PM
It's a good thing the Republicans are protecting themselves and their ultra-wealthy constituents from a 0.7% tax on every dollar they earn over $1 Million per year. What kind of country would want a rich guy making $2 Million/year paying an extra $7000? That's just absurd.

shiatty infrastructure, high unemployment (especially in the construction sector,) and a historically embarrassing Congress is MUCH better than making the rich pay that extra 0.7%. Vote Republican!
 
2011-11-04 03:32:06 PM

Car_Ramrod: Republicans countered with a bill that would provide highway funding, but cut $40 billion in discretionary funds for federal programs, and that included legislation called the REINS act, which would give Congress an effective veto over executive branch regulations like worker and environmental protections.


BOTH SIDES ARE SAME.
 
2011-11-04 04:02:32 PM

abb3w: GAT_00: Yeah, both sides are really equally bad you Republican apologist.

But perhaps you might still agree that the "avoid bridges" is potentially sound advice?


You should also avoid tunnels, overpasses, dams, levies and the like. An while it might not necessarily be government owned or maintained infrastructure you should also give a thought to how dependent you are on receiving running water and electricity from utilities who labor under the belief that any sort of investment into infrastructure would go against their sword duty of maximizing short term profits for the benefit of their shareholders.
 
2011-11-04 04:42:17 PM
Sounds like someone needs to build a bridge and get over it.
 
2011-11-04 04:43:05 PM

Alphax: Car_Ramrod: HeadLever: BigBooper: But you go on blindly cheering on your side. It must be nice to live in a world that's as black and white as yours.

It is GAT. No need to expect any more.

Yea, because GAT never complains about Obama and the Democrats. *rolls eyes*

Look, when one side promotes bills that economists say will prevent another recession, and the other side promotes bills that limit worker and environmental protections, as well as cuts hundreds of thousands of jobs, how can you proclaim both sides are equally bad?

Dishonestly.


Could also be laziness. I can understand being happy/frustrated with both sides, but I think you have to judge each instance on the facts, I think some people are genuinely unhappy with both sides and just default to the very lazy "both sides are bad" argument. I can't see how anybody can look at these things with any kind of scrutiny and actually conclude both sides are equally bad.

I don't really like cannolis very much and I'm pretty sure I don't like turds, but they are NOT equally unappetizing to me.

/yes, Republicans are the turds
 
Displayed 40 of 40 comments



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report