We had a balanced budget, until Bush showed up.

#27 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

That is true. Under Obama the government doesn't even produce a budget which is a violation of law.

Obama compromises constantly. Reid passed over a chance to weaken the filibuster, and the republicans continue to filibuster at record levels. One party tries to comproiose to the point of standing for nothing, the other refuses to compromise at all.

Danni is right. You kind of live in a bubble.

#49 | Posted by Alexandrite

Reid has 'filled the tree' more than the 7 previous majority leaders combined. The GOP are jerks, but so are the Dems. It takes 2 to tango.

Also, Obama has comprimised on VERY little. The 2-year extension of the Bush tax rates is about the only thing I can recall him comprimising on.

Yeah, good thing obama went for single payer right? He could have totally compromised and used a heritage foundation idea from the 90's for his health care system.

Oh, wait...

#53 | Posted by Alexandrite

He wanted single-payer. He just couldn't get enough support from within his own party to get it. We got the abomination known as Obamacare instead.

Jeez, you act as if not getting single-payer was actually a comprimise with the GOP. That's factually inaccurate.

Obama could have gotten single payer if he had actually tried.

You're delusional if you believe that. He pushed hard for a public option, which would have been a stepping-stone to single-payer. He didn't have enough party support for THAT, much less single-payer. Also, he DID try really hard. My gosh, how many fricking speeches did he deliver on the subject during the legislative process? I think it exceeded 100.

If you really want to argue that the republicans don't just filibuster things because Obama wants them, I'll have to use chuck hagel as an example. Republicans filibustered a moderate republican!

That is probably true in some instances. Other instances they filibuster because Reid fills the tree on just about everything he introduces to the floor. Again, it takes 2 to tango. You seem to be taking the Danni tack that GOP=bad Dem=good. You are usually more realistic than that.

Boehner said he got 95% of what he wanted, as you may recall.

Boner got 95% of the bells and whistles of a car he didn't want.

Obama: You are going to buy a Ford Raptor.

Boner: I don't want a Raptor I want a Boss Mustang.

Obama: I have the power, you're buying the Raptor but I'll let you pick the color and interior options.

Boner: I got 95% of what I asked for in a car I don't want.

Alex,

I have no doubt that some of these filibusters are out of petty spite and that it's childish. Having said that Obama (and Reid) have done plenty toward the GOP out of petty spite. It works both ways.

So please don't pretend that I'm anywhere near danni in D partisan hackery.

#63 | Posted by Alexandrite

Which is why I used the words "seem" here:

You seem to be taking the Danni tack that GOP=bad Dem=good. You are usually more realistic than that.

That is how you were coming accross and it surprised me, particularly in light of your recent, scathing criticisms of Obama's record on Civil Liberties. Obviously I misconstrued your point.

"We believe that this law is going to collapse under its own weight… This to us is something that we're not going to give up on, because we're not going to give up on destroying the health care system for the American people," he said during a news conference to unveil his latest budget plan. "We want to prevent this law, which we really do believe will do great damage to families and the health care system in America."

Hahaha my arse.

It's very obvious what he was attempting to convey. Context matters.

Stiff 1-eye,

My car analogy was for Obamacare, not Sequester.

PS - No insult intended with the nickname.

Not that it matters. Ryan is almost out of his 15 minutes.

#68 | Posted by Alexandrite

If that's true then the GOP is doomed as they have ceded Ryan the lead on budgetary, entitlement and healthcare issues and are clearly poised to follow said lead.

a bad slip of the tongue at best.

Just curious - how did you personally characterize Obama's "you didn't build that" comment?

I am not looking for a 'gotcha' and I don't plan on challenging your assesment of Obama's comment because it can reasonably be construed in a number of different ways.

Stiff 1-eye,

This is what I was responding to:

Yeah, good thing obama went for single payer right? He could have totally compromised and used a heritage foundation idea from the 90's for his health care system.

Oh, wait...

#53 | Posted by Alexandrite

He wanted single-payer. He just couldn't get enough support from within his own party to get it. We got the abomination known as Obamacare instead.

Jeez, you act as if not getting single-payer was actually a comprimise with the GOP. That's factually inaccurate.

#56 | Posted by JeffJ at 2013-03-12 07:05 PMFlag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

He SAID he wanted single payer, he ACTED as though he did not.
I tend to not pay attention to what pols say and what they actually do. Obama could have gotten single payer if he had actually tried.

If you really want to argue that the republicans don't just filibuster things because Obama wants them, I'll have to use chuck hagel as an example. Republicans filibustered a moderate republican!

#57 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2013-03-12 07:09 PMFlag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

Boehner said he got 95% of what he wanted, as you may recall.

#58 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2013-03-12 07:10 PMFlag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

Obama could have gotten single payer if he had actually tried.

You're delusional if you believe that. He pushed hard for a public option, which would have been a stepping-stone to single-payer. He didn't have enough party support for THAT, much less single-payer. Also, he DID try really hard. My gosh, how many fricking speeches did he deliver on the subject during the legislative process? I think it exceeded 100.

If you really want to argue that the republicans don't just filibuster things because Obama wants them, I'll have to use chuck hagel as an example. Republicans filibustered a moderate republican!

That is probably true in some instances. Other instances they filibuster because Reid fills the tree on just about everything he introduces to the floor. Again, it takes 2 to tango. You seem to be taking the Danni tack that GOP=bad Dem=good. You are usually more realistic than that.

#60 | Posted by JeffJ at 2013-03-12 07:17 PMFlag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

Boehner said he got 95% of what he wanted, as you may recall.

Boner got 95% of the bells and whistles of a car he didn't want.

Obama: You are going to buy a Ford Raptor.

Boner: I don't want a Raptor I want a Boss Mustang.

Obama: I have the power, you're buying the Raptor but I'll let you pick the color and interior options.

Boner: I got 95% of what I asked for in a car I don't want.

#61 | Posted by JeffJ at 2013-03-12 07:21 PM | Reply

Alex and I were discussing Obamacare not the sequester. If Alex was referencing the sequester when he made his Boner getting 95% comment then he moved the goalposts...no....he went to a completely different arena.

My car analogy was tied to Obamacare, not sequester.

"You didn't build that ALONE, you reaped the benefits of society to achieve success, now pay it forward" is how I would characterize it. Anyone trying to make more of that comment than that just doesn't like Obama to an unhealthy degree.

#74 | Posted by Alexandrite

That's a fair interpretation.

As for Ryan's comment...I see it as a mis-speak. He's clearly talking about Obamacare being ruinous to our healthcare system and he won't give up on pursuing its repeal and replacement. Normally the MSM would crucify Ryan for this mis-speak but Ryan actually has earned a lot of respect within the MSM. He was a go-to guy for his opinions quite a long time on budgetary, entitlement and healthcare issues when he was relatively unknown. He usually comported himself very well. He's no longer on the veep ticket and seems to generally be liked and respected by most MSM outlets. This little mis-speak will probably not gain traction.

His awful and cruel budget on the other hand...

#79 | Posted by Alexandrite

That is debatable. The fact is if Medicare, SS and Medicaid aren't structurally changed these 3 programs will bury this country if left alone. Even the absurdly biased MSM gave him props for touching the 3rd rail in 2010 by addressing the elephant in the room with his first budget.

Remember, using current outlays as the baseline his budget increases annual federal spending by 3.6%. This rapid accumulation of debt can't go on much longer. It must be turned around. Unfortunately, the Dems are offering nada to address this and instead choose to demagogue the Ryan-budget for short-term political gain, and offer zero counter-proposals, at least to date. Hopefully that will soon change.

This country is imploding fiscally and the longer we wait to act the worse it gets.

VMA,

What Ryan is proposing is to change Medicare to mirror the health-care that Congress enjoys. At least to a point.