Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(Politico)   GOP's new plan, in lieu of passing a CR, is to pass small, individual bills funding one program at a time, and they just won't pass one for Obamacare   (politico.com ) divider line
    More: Followup, House GOP, obamacare, GOP, White House, Senate, farm bills, House Majority Leader, House Republican Conference  
•       •       •

2378 clicks; posted to Politics » on 01 Oct 2013 at 3:22 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



381 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-10-01 05:25:32 PM  

DamnYankees: Just read this:

 Republican leaders intend to bring their minibills  to the floor under a suspension of the rules. To pass, they need a two-thirds majority vote, and to reach that two-thirds, they'll need Democratic votes.

So this shiat won't even get out of the House.


It's like they're climbing a mountain of fail. For fun. At the expense of our country.
 
2013-10-01 05:26:56 PM  
I love the idea that the GOP is going to try to pry something like 60 votes away from the Dem caucus to vote for this pile of this. Have they not met Nancy Pelosi? She'll farking destroy you.
 
2013-10-01 05:27:45 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Heliovdrake: I think everyone in this thread needs to go ahead and use the report function at the bottom of the page to report skinnyhead for trolling.
No,  really... or put him on ignore...

What do you think he is doing that is Trolling?


Larding his comments with statements that have no purpose other than to aggravate his fellow Farkers is trolling.

Do I need to explain how you're being disingenuous?
 
2013-10-01 05:27:50 PM  
Pelosi just urged House Dems to vote no on bits and pieces of the CR.  It's DOA, not that it ever stood a chance in the House.  Republicans just want to try to turn this back around so that they aren't the ones causing the shutdown when everyone knows they are.
 
2013-10-01 05:29:00 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: DamnYankees: Just read this:

 Republican leaders intend to bring their minibills  to the floor under a suspension of the rules. To pass, they need a two-thirds majority vote, and to reach that two-thirds, they'll need Democratic votes.

So this shiat won't even get out of the House.

Haha really? Oh wow. Each GOP plan gets worse.


At this point - I think that a secession bill would go unchallenged in the Senate.

The House could pass a CR with a single amendment announcing their request to separate.
 
2013-10-01 05:29:35 PM  
Slimedown?
 
2013-10-01 05:29:37 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: DamnYankees: Just read this:

 Republican leaders intend to bring their minibills  to the floor under a suspension of the rules. To pass, they need a two-thirds majority vote, and to reach that two-thirds, they'll need Democratic votes.

So this shiat won't even get out of the House.

Haha really? Oh wow. Each GOP plan gets worse.


Looks like it's on to plan Q, boys.
 
2013-10-01 05:29:39 PM  

TuteTibiImperes: TuteTibiImperes: The Senate should return each individual funding bill back to the senate House with a rider that would eliminate the need for a debt ceiling vote.

FTFM


and a provision that says if the government shuts down all of Congress and the president and VP forfeit their remaining pay for their current term in office effective imediately.
 
2013-10-01 05:30:23 PM  

DamnYankees: I love the idea that the GOP is going to try to pry something like 60 votes away from the Dem caucus to vote for this pile of this. Have they not met Nancy Pelosi? She'll farking destroy you.


i.imgur.com

A dramatic reenactment of Nancy Pelosi's couple of days. Hopefully we're nearing the inevitable conclusion:

i.imgur.com
 
2013-10-01 05:30:44 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Shrugging Atlas: 'Republicans are now trying to cherry-pick a few parts of the government to keep open. We won't pick and choose. We must re-open all of govt.'From Reid's twitter feed.

Glad to see Reid is as open to discussion as always. Unsurprising but still disappointing. Reid has plenty of blood on his hands in this.


The discussion has happened. ACA passed the House, passed the Senate, was upheld by the Supreme Court. It's final test was that if the public really hated it Romney would have won and it would be being repealed right now. It is literally impossible for the american political system to more completely approve of a bill.

It's over. The hardliners are owed nothing.
 
2013-10-01 05:31:49 PM  

Shrugging Atlas: DamnYankees: Has Reid announced he'll reject these smaller bills?

Here's your answer:

'Republicans are now trying to cherry-pick a few parts of the government to keep open. We won't pick and choose. We must re-open all of govt.'From Reid's twitter feed.


Yeah, about an hour. ago, Reid and Durbin were tag-teaming the "arrogant" junior senator from texas, e.g., `so, you want to help the disabled vets (who happen to be government employees) working in the VA, but you don't want to help out the disabled vets working in other agencies?'... etc.
 
2013-10-01 05:32:08 PM  

Soup4Bonnie: House Republicans are trying to pressure Democrats on their side of the dome. The bills will come up undersuspension of the rules , which means they must garner two-thirds of the chamber for passage.


Ain't gonna happen.

The Senate is clearly going to shiatcan any of these bills that pass, so there's no point in breaking ranks when the only benefit to be gained is to try and avoid the inevitable and predictable "Congressman X voted against our Veterans" ads.  With all the damage the GOP is doing to themselves there's absolutely no reason for Democrats to change course because a hundred of those ads aren't going to be worth squat in comparison.
 
2013-10-01 05:32:50 PM  
I'd like to hire a film crew to give us live coverage. Of everything.
 
2013-10-01 05:37:54 PM  

sdd2000: Each of the CR's with the poison TeaBagger pills has in fact been voted down in the full senate (via tabling), not in a committee. A budget bill was passed by the senate and the TeaBaggers in the senate (AKA Cruz and Lee especially) as well as the house GOP prevented a conference committee to be appointed to work out the differences.


"Tabling" it is exactly the kind of procedural blocking I am talking about. It is Reid saying "My party can kill it dead, and kill it dead we will." No debate on the floor. They announced that they were rejecting it even before they did the roll call vote, and it was just a procedural formality.
 
2013-10-01 05:50:22 PM  
Doesn't matter.. CNN says there is plenty of blame to go around.
 
2013-10-01 05:51:03 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: sdd2000: Each of the CR's with the poison TeaBagger pills has in fact been voted down in the full senate (via tabling), not in a committee. A budget bill was passed by the senate and the TeaBaggers in the senate (AKA Cruz and Lee especially) as well as the house GOP prevented a conference committee to be appointed to work out the differences.

"Tabling" it is exactly the kind of procedural blocking I am talking about. It is Reid saying "My party can kill it dead, and kill it dead we will." No debate on the floor. They announced that they were rejecting it even before they did the roll call vote, and it was just a procedural formality.


A motion to table requires a vote (or unanimous consent, which was not the case here) and any senator can ask for a recorded roll call vote. In fact they did a roll call vote on that motion by a 54-46 vote.
 
2013-10-01 05:52:34 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: acchief: That's exactly what makes it so appealing.

Personally, I think all budget resolutions should be clean, department by department bills.

But DURING a shut-down is not the time to be doing it.


Is this like how it's never the appropriate time to talk about gun control?
 
2013-10-01 05:54:07 PM  
At the risk of putting logic into a Fark Politics thread...

This basically comes down to Boehner not being willing to stand up to the Tea Party caucus. If he put the Senate bill up for a vote, or a clean CR, then only 32 of the Republican Representatives would have to vote for it to pass. He won't do that, because he's sticking by the "Hastert Rule", which says that the speaker won't put a bill up for a vote unless the majority of the Majority is for it. This basically destroys moderate compromises if the radical end of the Majority is strong enough to carry just half the party. The thing about this is, it's not a law, it's a moral stand. As a matter of law and procedure, he can break it whenever he wants. If he did throw out the Hastert rule, he would deal with a primary challenger, and he would lose his Speakership at the next opportunity. On the other hand if he did what would be best for the economy, and he could get at least 50 to come with him, we might see some actual progress in the remainder of this Congress. And maybe the Tea Party organizations would be stretched to thin to primary all of them - and that might change things for the next Congress.

The President should not, in my opinion, deal with the GOP. They have shown several times during his administration that they cannot be expected to stand by a negotiated compromise or negotiate in good faith.
 
2013-10-01 05:56:19 PM  
Dumbass Republicans. For all this trouble, you'd think they fighting for the right of a small minority to deny health insurance for those who can't afford it or have pre-existing conditions.
 
2013-10-01 06:00:39 PM  

AirForceVet: Dumbass Republicans. For all this trouble, you'd think they fighting for the right of a small minority to deny health insurance for those who can't afford it or have pre-existing conditions.


You forgot, they are really fighting the Blah Man from having a victory
 
2013-10-01 06:01:46 PM  
m.huffpost.com/us/entry/4025437?1380662812

For those of you hoping to get back pay because you've been furloughed ...
 
2013-10-01 06:04:22 PM  
Do it! Repeal the individual mandate and sit back and watch the insurance companies implode because their business model now sucks balls.

Make that your compromise, Mr. President.

Then bring on Medicare For All.
 
2013-10-01 06:05:17 PM  

shifty lookin bleeder: HotWingConspiracy: What the fark is the end game?

I don't think they have a clue how this ends.


Dexter's writers are clearly pulling the gig for the TP caucus.
 
2013-10-01 06:08:45 PM  

hackalope: At the risk of putting logic into a Fark Politics thread...

This basically comes down to Boehner not being willing to stand up to the Tea Party caucus. If he put the Senate bill up for a vote, or a clean CR, then only 32 of the Republican Representatives would have to vote for it to pass. He won't do that, because he's sticking by the "Hastert Rule", which says that the speaker won't put a bill up for a vote unless the majority of the Majority is for it. This basically destroys moderate compromises if the radical end of the Majority is strong enough to carry just half the party. The thing about this is, it's not a law, it's a moral stand. As a matter of law and procedure, he can break it whenever he wants. If he did throw out the Hastert rule, he would deal with a primary challenger, and he would lose his Speakership at the next opportunity. On the other hand if he did what would be best for the economy, and he could get at least 50 to come with him, we might see some actual progress in the remainder of this Congress. And maybe the Tea Party organizations would be stretched to thin to primary all of them - and that might change things for the next Congress.

The President should not, in my opinion, deal with the GOP. They have shown several times during his administration that they cannot be expected to stand by a negotiated compromise or negotiate in good faith.


Which is kind of poetic, since Boehner was one of the coup members who attempted to knock Gingrich out back in the nineties.

He's going cling to his throne of king fark of shiat island while the country burns because his ego was bruised decades ago.
 
2013-10-01 06:09:04 PM  

serial_crusher: Is this like how it's never the appropriate time to talk about gun control?


Not really no, since they are radically different issues.

Though in the sense that rushed legislation passed in crisis mode is almost invariably bad, I suppose so.
 
2013-10-01 06:11:40 PM  

The_Six_Fingered_Man: Do it! Repeal the individual mandate and sit back and watch the insurance companies implode because their business model now sucks balls.

Make that your compromise, Mr. President.

Then bring on Medicare For All.


The Senate could just create a bill for Medicare for all. They're not really doing much right now anyway.

They should start carving out their Christmas list.
 
2013-10-01 06:12:01 PM  

sdd2000: A motion to table requires a vote (or unanimous consent, which was not the case here) and any senator can ask for a recorded roll call vote. In fact they did a roll call vote on that motion by a 54-46 vote.


Yes. And it is not the same thing as passing a bill by vote. It is a resolution to decide whether to hear the bill, which As Reid has demonstrated any number of times before, is a procedural way to prevent any HR legislation he does not pre-approve from ever being passed because he has the 51 votes to keep it from getting to that point.

Don't kid yourselves. Reid is being every bit a obstructionist as the teabaggers. He is a huge part of the problem.
 
2013-10-01 06:14:38 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: sdd2000: A motion to table requires a vote (or unanimous consent, which was not the case here) and any senator can ask for a recorded roll call vote. In fact they did a roll call vote on that motion by a 54-46 vote.

Yes. And it is not the same thing as passing a bill by vote. It is a resolution to decide whether to hear the bill, which As Reid has demonstrated any number of times before, is a procedural way to prevent any HR legislation he does not pre-approve from ever being passed because he has the 51 votes to keep it from getting to that point.

Don't kid yourselves. Reid is being every bit a obstructionist as the teabaggers. He is a huge part of the problem.


LOL
 
2013-10-01 06:16:27 PM  
Right, this is all Reid's doing. Sure.

Yes, both sides are bad, just like it's bad to stub your toe, and bad to get killed by a cement truck.
 
2013-10-01 06:17:01 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: sdd2000: A motion to table requires a vote (or unanimous consent, which was not the case here) and any senator can ask for a recorded roll call vote. In fact they did a roll call vote on that motion by a 54-46 vote.

Yes. And it is not the same thing as passing a bill by vote. It is a resolution to decide whether to hear the bill, which As Reid has demonstrated any number of times before, is a procedural way to prevent any HR legislation he does not pre-approve from ever being passed because he has the 51 votes to keep it from getting to that point.

Don't kid yourselves. Reid is being every bit a obstructionist as the teabaggers. He is a huge part of the problem.


Key difference

Reid is not willing to debate a topic that has already passed the House, the Senate, been upheld by the Supreme Court and bears the name of the guy we just reelected to the presidency in a landslide. There is literally no way a bill can have passed more tests than this one has: Legislative, Judicial and Executive branches.

By contrast Boehner refuses to table a clean CR bill that would pass that would simply preserve the status quo. Instead he wants the Senate to agree to remove funding for a bill that has already passed even though there's only a minority in the House who want to do that because that minority will likely fire him if he does.

If you can't see how these aren't equivalent then I'm afraid you deserve your reputation
 
2013-10-01 06:17:55 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Don't kid yourselves. Reid is being every bit a obstructionist as the teabaggers. He is a huge part of the problem.


Really?  How so?  I thought we didn't negotiate with terrorists here in the USA.
 
2013-10-01 06:25:11 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Don't kid yourselves. Reid is being every bit a obstructionist as the teabaggers. He is a huge part of the problem.


I was confused, it isn't that you are a partisan hack. It is just that you regularly say things like this that are just plain incorrect.
 
2013-10-01 06:27:09 PM  

jst3p: BojanglesPaladin: Don't kid yourselves. Reid is being every bit a obstructionist as the teabaggers. He is a huge part of the problem.

I was confused, it isn't that you are a partisan hack. It is just that you regularly say things like this that are just plain incorrect.


Call it what they are,

Lies.
 
2013-10-01 06:30:54 PM  

Evil High Priest: Right, this is all Reid's doing. Sure.


Not hardly. The teabaggers are definitely a huge part of the problem.

Tigger: Key difference...Reid is not willing to debate a topic that has already passed....


I am not speaking of Reid's actions only in this specific instance. I disagree with the teabaggers. But I also think it is worth noting that they aren't the only ones acting in bad faith by leveraging procedural technicalities, and when Reid has effectively nixed any and all bills out of the HR he doesn't like for years, it should not surprise anyone that the teabaggers so desperately jump on ways to get what they want by going around the normal processes.

Dwight_Yeast: I thought we didn't negotiate with terrorists here in the USA.


I don't think either Reid or Obama or the Teabaggers are "terrorists" and people who use that kind of rhetoric are just letting everyone know what binary partisan simpletons they really are.
 
2013-10-01 06:30:58 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: acchief: I only wish the Dems had been half as forceful as this when they controlled Congress during Bush's term. What a Bunch of Milquetoaste pantywaists. But alas, at least somebody's got some balls.

The side that has balls sadly lacks brains.


It's not courage if you are doing it no goal in mind, no plan in hand, and at 90mph.
 
2013-10-01 06:38:09 PM  

jst3p: I was confused, it isn't that you are a partisan hack. It is just that you regularly say things like this that are just plain incorrect.


This is not incorrect, this is just outside your conceptual framework to accept, because it requires that you accept that someone of "your team" may not be acting in the best interests of the country either.

We can pointlessly argue over who is "more bad", (the teabaggers) but there should not be a dispute over the simple fact that Harry Reid is and has been able to quash pretty much anything he wants in the Democratic Senate?

Do you NOT know that Reid has effectively put a moratorium on all legislation he doesn't like? Have you missed this in the last 8 or more years? Refresh my memory, how many HR bills that he opposed have gone to the floor for an up or down vote? And how many have been quashed procedurally?

Even if you think he SHOULD be doing it, anyone who is following things can see that he is doing it. It's why we K-N-O-W that the four hundred and eighty seven defund Obamacare bills the House passes will ever even see the light of day in the Senate. Reid has the Senate locked down.
 
2013-10-01 06:40:39 PM  

Heliovdrake: Call it what they are, Lies.


I think I recognize your style. Whose alt are you?
 
2013-10-01 06:52:37 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Don't kid yourselves. Reid is being every bit a obstructionist as the teabaggers. He is a huge part of the problem.


It is now considered obstructionist to not give the teabaggers (70 members of the House) everything they want.

Give me a freaking break.
 
2013-10-01 07:21:08 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: jst3p: I was confused, it isn't that you are a partisan hack. It is just that you regularly say things like this that are just plain incorrect.

Do you NOT know that Reid has effectively put a moratorium on all legislation he doesn't like? Have you missed this in the last 8 or more years? Refresh my memory, how many HR bills that he opposed have gone to the floor for an up or down vote? And how many have been quashed procedurally?


I don't care, at this point, if Reid was farking entombed in the bowels of Yucca Mountain (and I'd charge his family rent on that plot, in perpetuity).  Only procedure that would clear the decks is Boehner giving Hastert the boot and bringing a clean CR to the floor; apologists for slithering prevaricators and panderers need not bother beyond attempting to bolster the derp for the depredator's dummies.
 
2013-10-01 07:21:23 PM  

heap: all it takes is a drudge link saying the national park system benefits abortions


As a private contractor in a national recreation area, I can attest to the veracity of this assertion. Difficulty; all of the abortions are post-natal so there is no disconnect with an anti-abortion stance; wide though it may be.
 
2013-10-01 07:25:43 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Do you NOT know that Reid has effectively put a moratorium on all legislation he doesn't like?


In other words, Democrats are voting down bills they don't want to pass. Shocking.
 
2013-10-01 07:28:36 PM  

DamnYankees: In other words, Democrats are voting down bills they don't want to pass. Shocking.


Show me where in the Constitution it says that Democrats are allowed to vote no on bills.
 
2013-10-01 07:29:03 PM  

DamnYankees: BojanglesPaladin: Do you NOT know that Reid has effectively put a moratorium on all legislation he doesn't like?

In other words, Democrats are voting down bills they don't want to pass. Shocking.


Which is in stark contrast to the House, that doesn't even bring a bill they know will pass up for a vote because there are not enough Republicans willing to vote for it.
 
2013-10-01 07:33:24 PM  

sprawl15: DamnYankees: In other words, Democrats are voting down bills they don't want to pass. Shocking.

Show me where in the Constitution it says that Democrats are allowed to vote no on bills.


t.qkme.me
 
2013-10-01 07:36:28 PM  

DamnYankees: In other words, Democrats are voting down bills they don't want to pass. Shocking.


Not really, no.

But I think you are missing the point. It's not that these poor teabaggers can't win a vote, (in many instances they would lose). It's that Reid consistently blocks them procedurally from ever coming up for an open floor up or down vote. He's killing them in private before they can die in public,

Frankly, I think he is subverting the free functioning of the representative democracy in favor of partisan gamesmanship. It is better to let this stuff go to the 100 senators and let them vote on it, good or bad. Only someone afraid of what the results might be would oppose that, and I think he's afraid that some of these bills might damage his parties reputation or appearance just by hitting the floor publicly. Maybe he's right, maybe not, but I favor open air sunlight politics.

The unfortunate result of this complete stoppage is that the "only recourse" for the Teabaggers is out of procedural stunts like this. I would prefer they have the fights by everyone voting BEFORE it gets to this.
 
2013-10-01 07:37:57 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: DamnYankees: In other words, Democrats are voting down bills they don't want to pass. Shocking.

Not really, no.

But I think you are missing the point. It's not that these poor teabaggers can't win a vote, (in many instances they would lose). It's that Reid consistently blocks them procedurally from ever coming up for an open floor up or down vote. He's killing them in private before they can die in public,

Frankly, I think he is subverting the free functioning of the representative democracy in favor of partisan gamesmanship. It is better to let this stuff go to the 100 senators and let them vote on it, good or bad. Only someone afraid of what the results might be would oppose that, and I think he's afraid that some of these bills might damage his parties reputation or appearance just by hitting the floor publicly. Maybe he's right, maybe not, but I favor open air sunlight politics.

The unfortunate result of this complete stoppage is that the "only recourse" for the Teabaggers is out of procedural stunts like this. I would prefer they have the fights by everyone voting BEFORE it gets to this.


I think you are confusing Harry Reid with the Hastert Rule and Boehner in the House.
 
2013-10-01 07:38:40 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: He's killing them in private before they can die in public,


What are you talking about. Every single CR the House has passed has been voted on by the Senate. What's the substantive difference between a vote to table and a vote to pass? It's the same thing in terms of rejecting the bills. Both votes let the entire Senate vote whether or not they want the bill to become law.
 
2013-10-01 07:42:09 PM  
...and the House has officially voted this tactic down. Dems needs 142 no votes, they are already at 158.
 
2013-10-01 07:45:34 PM  
I thought there were 3 parts to the US federal government, the Presidency, the Senate, and the Congress, but apparently there is only one, their Congress, and they can simply choose what to fund without consulting the other 2. This kind of shakes up my view of the USA.
 
2013-10-01 07:50:37 PM  

meat0918: I think you are confusing Harry Reid with the Hastert Rule and Boehner in the House.


I am not, but that is also bullshiat.

DamnYankees: What's the substantive difference between a vote to table and a vote to pass? It's the same thing in terms of rejecting the bills.


Floor debate among other things. A vote to table is a vote against taking it for general consideration. The problem is that any party with just ONE vote over 50 can effectively veto anything, and do it in a way that no one is on record for voting against the bill, just voting for a procedural question of whether to consider the bill. That's not democracy, that is a tyranny of the narrow majority. Reid didn't invent the tactic, but he has been excessively *ahem* liberal in his use of it as a means of quashing unwanted legislation.
 
Displayed 50 of 381 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report