Tell me how they have obstructed anything this year. The democrats have the votes in the House, Senate and the White House, no more blaming the minority party for the failures of the majority.

You have distention within the ranks, deal with it.

 

Every attempt

to produce a genuinely fair health insurance bill has been blocked by Republican amendments or simple Republican nay-saying. Then the Republican arseholes and the teabaggers say, "Show us what he's accomplished!"

 

How have they blocked it, I am curious how this is even possible.

Stop with the phony bullshit, cite the facts, Rico.

 

Yes, but the topic of this thread I was focusing on was the NPP part. At the time of his nomination, he did nothing to deserve the nomination, He had done not a single thing. I'm not saying he won't do them, but I'm saying he never did them at the time and thus should not have recieved recognition for doing nothing, only talking about doing something.

And it's not premature to say he never did the things he says he may do, because I was referring to what he's done in the past, which was nothing. If I said that i'm going to stop as many military conflicts in Africa as I can, I'm going to end corruption from local governments around the world, I'm going to save the whales that will bring two nations together because it's something they have in common being their national animal, at the same time saying I'm going to improve economics problems in my, and the global community, and to top it off I know a way to get out of the middle east while giving everyone all the rice they could eat, would you consider nominating me for the NPP just because I say I'll do that? No, At the very least you'd ask for some proof that I would, that I could. And that's what my problem with his nomination was. Where's the proof at the time of his nomination, that said he will, not that he'll try to?

I never said he never will not do them, he just hasn't yet.

And again, if he was given the prize because he may do them, to me, that's like putting a large sum of money on a horse that's never raced before, or how about just investing in a fledgling company in hopes it will turn over a profit.

I was just saying he did nothing to even deserve the nomination by the time the nomination deadline was due.

 

I am not doggin you....That said.

I find it funny like yourself the only thing people caught out all that was said was a nobel peace prize...funny...what about this....don't you see anything wrong with this?? There are bigger issues then wheather or not he deserved a nobel peace price...



The same Republicans cheered when the United States lost its bid to host the 2016 Olympic Games sought by Obama despite the economic bonanza the world event could have brought to Chicago, Milwaukee and the financially stressed Midwest.

The angry opposition of Republicans to President Barack Obama now has deteriorated into opposition to anything that is good for their own country under Obama’s leadership.






During the 1995-1996 legislative years, radical, right-wing Republican Members of Congress engaged in subversive, anti-American actions that shut down the U.S. Government.




The anti-American actions included failure--or refusal--to provide timely appropriations for national programs established by Congress resulting in:

• Obstructing administration of programs established by law for national defense, citizen-service, and national well-being programs
• Denial of right-to-work and other human rights for millions of Americans
• Jeopardy of benefits and services--often life-critical--for citizens, such as social security, Medicare, veterans benefits, food and nutrition, anti-poverty, and other programs
• Subversive undermining of confidence of the American people in their Government
• Anti-American damaging of reputation and stature of the United States in the eyes of the world

If the involved Members of Congress had engaged in military power--rather than political subversion--to shut down the Government, the act would have been treason.

Under the existing Constitution, Amendment XIV, Section 3, reads:
"No person shall be a Senator or Representativein Congress…who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress…to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same…."

Logically and unequivocally, shutting down the U.S. Government represents "…insurrection or rebellion…." against the United States of America.


http://www.rules.house.gov/archives/98-844.pdf
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/cha...nts_11-27.html

Republicans, if you dont think this is true. please explain why LOGICALLY. Don't just yell out obama a socialist.

 

Was just wondering the same thing myself 2feathers.

and why attack Obama for recieving the peace prize, why not go after the givers of the prize.

 

TY, I also wonder why the other information was not seen...There are bigger issues then the prize. The mentally of some in America is utterly selfish and childish...(this remark is not intended for anyone one the forum directly).

 

As Obama done enough to deserve the Nobel Peace Prize, as of now I doubt it, in the future possibly. Our opinions count for little as he as already been awarded it.

A few points I would like to put forward.

1. Will he attend the award ceremony himself, if so who will pay the costs for this trip, the Nobel Commitee or the US tax payer and what will the final bill be.? Or will he send a staffer to collect ut for him in the manner of an Oscar award.

2. If he attends how much will his personal carbon footprint grow if he does attend.

3. Is it only me that considers the Nobel Prize to be cheap and tawdry after being awarded to the jihadist Yasser Arafat.

Only a few thoughts but feel free to hit me with a broadside if you disagree.

Peace Out.
Rich

 

You are accusing Republican's of doing the same thing the Dems have done under a Republican admin. This just more of the same with the sides reversed.

What we need here is a different party ( or path) to bring the country together.

 

Naturally I'm partisan but I not only have to agree with the sentiments of the OP of this thread, I have to register shock and dismay at the opposition and the lows they are willing to sink to.

President Obama and the democrats stepped into one of the most troubled times our country has faced and I've yet to see any constructive efforts on the part of Republicans to actually help solve these problems.

To me that is actually treasonous because the Republicans instead of working to solve problems, are actually trying to block all solutions and facilitate failure at the expense of the American people.

And why? That is a critical question. Because they lost an election and out of petty resentments are like spoiled children perfectly willing to cut off the nose of the American people to spite the new face of politics.

Hypocrites. False Patriots. Spiteful Destroyers.

 

Damn Stumbler for a minute i thought you were describing what's happening down here in Oz.

The opposition down here have control of the senate and they're also acting like children, and at the moment they're trying to disrupt what australia will put on the table in Copenhagen. Lots of the opposition don't give a shit about what happens to the health of the planet, all they care about is how many votes they get.....Pricks

 

And Magpie I'm willing to crawl out on a very long thin limb here and say that in my experience on this forum this is not the way liberals behaved when the Republicans were in power. We did not try to bash Bush by starting a critical thread on every possible occasion. And we did not resort to using nothing more than nonsense, misrepresentation, and propaganda.

That's the way I remember it at least. And while I doubt anyone can prove me wrong about that they are more than welcome to try.

 

The only thing i remember W got nailed on a regular basis was his speech faux pas......and i reckon sometimes he even played to them to distract people from the important things that were happening.

 

I think we may have had comments or threads about President Bush from time to time. And there may have even been a thread calling for his impeachment. But we did not engage in the steady stream of ideological propaganda which is so prevalent on the forum now.

 

Consider yourself proven wrong. And this was just a few of the search results that came up when I searched.

https://forum.xnxx.com/showthread.php?t=19257&highlight=Bush

https://forum.xnxx.com/showthread.php?t=19540&highlight=Bush

https://forum.xnxx.com/showthread.php?t=19695&highlight=Bush

https://forum.xnxx.com/showthread.php?t=33303&highlight=Bush

https://forum.xnxx.com/showthread.php?t=28735&highlight=Bush

https://forum.xnxx.com/showthread.php?t=42195&highlight=Bush

 

Affluent Republicans think they can ride out the recession, or at least hold on until Republicans return to power in 2012, as they hope. They know that if the economy gets better President Obama will get the credit, and he will have the political capital to expand the public sector of the economy, and to pay for it by raising their taxes. Affluent Republicans want millions more Americans to lose their jobs and homes, so that their taxes will remain low.

Democrats enjoyed laughing at Bush's faux pas, and his misuse of the English language. I cannot imagine very many Democrats celebrating a failure by Bush to bring the Olympics to the United States.

 

I, for one, am prepared to plead guilty. I opposed almost everything George Bush ever did, or ever thought of doing. With the possible exception of the initial war in Afghanistan. I was glad that he never found WMDs, because I was convinced he was lying about it from the start. And I never rooted for the economy to go in the tank. I just noticed that it did, and blamed him for it.

I absolutely loath him. And I'm proud of it. He not only should have been impeached, he should have been imprisoned and tortured.

 

So according to this thread, you would be considered an Anti-American Democrat.

And I respect your honesty.

 

A massive step back from your ideals Kimmie, very sad to see you stating this.

 

OK El Casanova let's see what you came up with here. We've got six threads that are about Bush. Now, I contend those threads are about actual issues and actions that were in the news at the time.

But none the less, we've got six articles about Bush in around two years time.

You lose El Casanova. Without even counting them I can safely say that we've had more anti-Obama threads THIS MONTH ALONE than what you came up with covering two years.