It is crap if he can't get a single person to vote for it.

Obama is a joke. Some great uniter that is so far from reality that even his own party won't touch his budget.

I didn't miss a filibuster on this and you know it.

Edited by mpl_35 on 10/14/2012 18:43:44 MDT.

Hmmmm

Is there some cosmic message with the spamster chiming in?

Probably. ;)

Mail ballot off! Romney Ryan vote cast....

Mailing my ballot off for Jill Stein!

Threads like this give our Shadow Government a BIG HARD-ON. All they are doing is dividing and conquering us. As George Washing warned... “political parties serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community (resulting in) ill-concerted and incongruous projects ... they are likely ... to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government.”

That sounds reasonable to me, Lawson.

What is "our shadow government"?

What do we do about it?

The "shadow govt" goes by many names, such as "The Powers that Be". If you look at the controlling directors of the world's largest corporations, the Council on Foreign Relations, the high positions in our govt, the same names keep appearing again and again. A good example would be the race between Bush and Kerry in which out of a nation of 300 million, we get two admitted members of Skull and Bones fraternity at Yale. What are the odds of that? Unfortunately, this conflicts with the warm fuzzy narrative we are fed as schoolchildren.
The Story of your Enslavement

Super Corporation

The biggest news in my neck of the woods is Romney's continued endorsement of Mourdock.

Most of my contractor friends and all of our local hill-jacks favor Ron Paul.
California may be a "blue" state by city population but country and mountain folks have a totally different stance.

Of the few of my friends that are planning to vote, most were on the fence as to wether to back Romney, instead of a write-in for Paul, in order to eject Obummer.

After this ridiculous and obscene statement regarding rape and right to life by Mourdock ,and Romney's contiued support of this creep, we find ourselves even more steadfast on a write in for Paul.

What is Romney thinking?!
It is like the Republican party deliberately shot themselves in the foot.

I really think it is over for Mitt after this.

You should hear the girlfriends and wives around here... Yikes!
I can guarantee there wont be a single female voting for Mitt in the Santa Cruz mountains unless he distances himself from Mourdock and quickly... no, actually it is too late.

"It is like the Republican party deliberately shot themselves in the foot."

"You should hear the girlfriends and wives around here... Yikes!
I can guarantee there wont be a single female voting for Mitt in the Santa Cruz mountains unless he distances himself from Mourdock and quickly... no, actually it is too late."


If your girlfriends' and wives' reactions are indicative of country women elsewhere, I think the Republicans may have shot themselves a little higher up than the foot. ;0) This is almost too good to be true.

It is just another case of rich white men telling all women what to do with their bodies.

Yes, that is an accurate statement.

In fact, that is exactly what Lydia, Alana, Miranda, et all will tell you.

You know what? I believe they are right.

We, as men of any color, have NO right to pass laws regarding the reproduction of women.

According to Mourdock, and approved by Romney, If a woman gets raped and becomes pregnant, she should bear that child regardless of her wishes.

This is NOT our decision.

I am totally disgusted with the repulican party.

The funny thing is y'all thought Ron Paul was crazy for wanting to get rid of the Fed and return to the gold standard.
He never would have gotten those things as president.. he might have gotten some common sense though. He certainly would not tell a fellow human being what to do with their own body.

I have registered Libertarian.
despite the shortcommings of their philosophy it is the only thing close to the constitution of the United States of America.

If you are reading this Mitt.. You totally blew it my man.
To be president you have to follow your own initiative even when it is against the party.
Obama = fail.
Romney = Fail.

It won't happen this time around... probably not in 2016 either.
There will come a day when the people at last tire of the old boy network and lobbyist corruption in Washington to vote you bastids out.

I am writing in Ron Paul and voting NO on every single tax measure in my state.

I am not drunk on the "credit card purchasing" and pay it later politics of the present.

If i can live on cash the gorenment should too.

Jerry brown, you can stick prop 30 and 38 where the sun don't shine.
Threatening us with cuts to education first is childish.

Both parties stink and we are fed up and our numbers are growing.
I have convinced three friends of the necessity of voting and had them register before the deadline last week.
It might be 16 years hence but.. We are coming.

Let's say a politician got disgusted and decided to go against the lobbyist corruption

That politician would have a huge campaign financed by the lobbyist corruptors in the next election and would lose

We need a constitutional ammendment that limits political contributions, doesn't allow corporations to contribute anything, if you buy ads directly it's the same as contributing,...

Maybe it's dreaming to think that would ever happen. We are in a hole that seems hopeless to get out of. Maybe if people got p...ed off enough...

movetoammend.org is one group

If you have a system that allows unlimited money to be spent on the result, then the result is that unlimited money wins.

It doesn't matter who the figurehead is.

Edited by MikefaeDundee on 10/27/2012 10:16:55 MDT.

The shadow government is the group of people that show the newly elected president ten new photo angles of the Kennedy assignation before their inauguration speech.

"I didn't miss a filibuster on this and you know it."

Here are the numbers on filibusters by year, Michael. Are you sure you didn't miss any?

http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/cloture_motions/clotureCounts.htm

As for Obama's budget, McConnell's "dead on arrival" comment in September, 2011, made an actual filibuster unnecessary. Given the record number of filibusters since Obama took office, even the threat was enough. Don't bother telling me his own party wouldn't support it. We'll never know, given it didn't have a chance to be voted on.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/09/mcconnell-on-obamas-jobs-plan-hodgepodge-of-retread-ideas/

And here's a pointer to a partial list of bills your guys filibustered. So much for Obama not being able to work with Congress. Who is there to work with, when the Senate Minority leader states publically that his number one priority is to make Obama a one term president? And the entire Republican legislative contingent follows thru on it in lockstep?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-cesca/republicans-filibuster-ev_b_2018663.html

For shame, Michael.

Edited by ouzel on 10/27/2012 19:59:35 MDT.

Shadow government?? Haha. Yea lay off the X-Files guys.

It does sound like a crazy conspiracy theory, Jonathan, but it's not that shadowy

Grover Norquist goes onto 60 Minutes and brags about how he has millions of dollars from anonymous donors and any Republican congressman or senator that votes to close any tax loophole (or "raise taxes" as he calls it) has had large sums of money against him in the next primary which he then lost.

Or Karl Rove has millions of dollars from anonymous donors that he uses to fund candidates that he thinks has a chance to win. A lot of the 2010 "Tea Party" success was due to this.

Or each of the Republican President nominees had a billionaire benefactor that was giving him millions - Sheldon Addleson, The Koch brothers, I forget the others but they were in the news.

And Sheldon Addleson was backing Gingrich, but after he lost, Sheldon switched to Romney. It's not that Addleson thought Gingrich was good and Romney bad, Addleson just wants to invest in whoever wins.

And the Democrats also get lots of money from big benefactors, but they're a little shadowier.

Shame on you Tom. Your twisting of my post is insulting.

First my comment to not missing a filibuster on this was quite obvious specific to the budget. So dragging out filibusters on other topics is pointless.

Second votes on cloture circumvent debate on a subject. Also they don't necessarily indicate a fillibuster was even in effect. Just that the party with power wants to move to a vote without any more discussion. So nice try but misleading.

Third, the votes on cloture and fillibusters for that matter have been on the rise for decades. So it is no surprise there has been a record number of them.

Also note that the fillibuster has become more common but less effective.

Fourth the dead on arrival is no problem. If you saw an imbecile leading you to ruination you would do all you can to stop it. Thats what I see.

But you are dead wrong on seeing his budget voted on. It was voted down 99-0 and 97-0 in the senate. Also in the house 414-0. Not real meaningful but to deny it was voted on is a lie.

Also the left had both houses and the presidency and refused to pass a budget. They where fillibuster proof and refused.

Please stick to the truth from now on Tom.

I think there was a period of about one month when the Democrats had a fillibuster proof majority.

Another thing is the Democrats have more diversity - harder to get them all to vote the same. I would consider this an advantage, but it does make it harder to get anything done.

"First my comment to not missing a filibuster on this was quite obvious specific to the budget. So dragging out filibusters on other topics is pointless."

As I said, the mere threat of a filibuster from the current crowd is as good as the real thing. As for bringing in the excess of filibusters initiated by the GOP, it merely reinforces the point that the whole process is out of control and rendering the Senate incapable of dealing with pressing problems.

"Second votes on cloture circumvent debate on a subject. Also they don't necessarily indicate a fillibuster was even in effect. Just that the party with power wants to move to a vote without any more discussion. So nice try but misleading."

The kind of "debate" the GOP indulges in is with the intention of preventing action on a bill. They have employed it excessively with the intention of preventing any of Obama's legislative proposals from coming to a simple majority vote and becoming law. You know that as well as I do. The same technique has been employed to prevent confirmation of judges to the point where Chief Justice John Roberts, no fan of President Obama, to call for action on judicial appointments to address a near crisis number of vacancies on the bench at the district level. They have done the same with executive branch appointments to the CFPB and the NLRB. This is not the way the system was intended to work. If that is misleading, I plead guilty.

"Third, the votes on cloture and fillibusters for that matter have been on the rise for decades. So it is no surprise there has been a record number of them."

The number of filibusters since Obama came into office is not an incremental record, but a record by far. Enough to make a reasonable case that the Republicans are trying to sabotage the Obama administration, at the expense of the American People. They have, after all, proclaimed that their number one prority is to make Obama a one term president. Apparently by any means possible.

"Also note that the fillibuster has become more common but less effective."

Given 17 district judgeships currently on hold after clearing the Senate Judicial Committee, 2 vacant seats on the NLRB, and the CFPB run by a recess appointment after the Republicans declared that they would oppose not only Elizabeth Warren, but ANY nominee, I'd say the technique is very effective from a Republican point of view.

"Fourth the dead on arrival is no problem. If you saw an imbecile leading you to ruination you would do all you can to stop it. Thats what I see."

Sad, Michael, sad. I truly feel sorry for you.

"But you are dead wrong on seeing his budget voted on. It was voted down 99-0 and 97-0 in the senate. Also in the house 414-0. Not real meaningful but to deny it was voted on is a lie."

As you said, not meaningful. The 414-0 vote was when it was introduced by a first term Republican as an amendment to another version already under consideration. Ditto the 97-0 vote. In both cases the Democrats were trying to avoid being put on record in a doomed bill as voting for cuts to entitlements, which would have given the Republicans all sorts of material to twist in sounds bites during the uncoming elections.

I'm not sure what this has to do with our discussion, but it does make one wonder how they could have voted unanimously against the President in 2011. The Democrats have always had trouble achieving unanimity. They are just too diverse.

"Please stick to the truth from now on Tom."

"but to deny it was voted on is a lie."

"If you saw an imbecile leading you to ruination you would do all you can to stop it. Thats what I see.

It is difficult to carry on a civil conversation with a person who calls his interlocutor a liar and his President an imbecile. Not to mention frequently referring to anything he disagrees with as "crap" or "bs". This is my last response to anything you post, as I am getting sorely tempted to reply in kind, and we have had far too much of that in the forums of late. Across the entire country for that matter. It is a sad state of affairs.