H.R.5859 highlights the sickness of US government

a reply to: Clairaudience

And America is all freedom loving, liberty giving and 'democracy' toting group?
Really man?

Why cant people just live in peace, Killing and all this other crap is so last century.. And we are civilized eh? Prove it.

originally posted by: 8675309jenny

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: 8675309jenny

I don't see the comparison in that analogy.

My analogy was, someone who wants into Harvard, but doesn't want to take the SAT for fear of failure.

They didn't want to risk anyone saying "I object", so they went the backdoor route. You may think it would have passed all 425 members approval, but prove it. They never bothered to put it the test; disgusting, slimy cheaters.

Wrong. As I have pointed out, we are going in to an election cycle. No-one wanted to be identified with legislation that will certainly become a controversial campaign issue. It was cowardly, yes, but at least three quarter of them were in favor or the law would risk being overturned when the President signed it.

originally posted by: DJW001


Why is my post off topic and this one isn't?

Just trying to avoid this turning into a debate about Crimea like the other thread. The other thread is still going on about that topic though.

I understand the issues are linked, but this thread is about the broken way our congress passed this bill and how they are planning to take Ukraine, put a big red bow on it, and hand it to corporate interests as a nice lil Christmas present.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: DJW001

Even if I agree with you on that, which I do partly, do you think that makes it ok to fund a corporate takeover of Ukraine & to run a propaganda campaign in former Soviet countries?


If the shoe was on the other foot and Putin did that you'd be calling it for what it is, I'm sure.

It is up to Ukraine to decide which foreign corporations they partner with or permit to operate there. As for Russia funding NGOs in America, I would welcome it, as I welcomed RT until it started telling outright lies. In fact, I hope that Russia eventually comes to its senses and funds a Goethe Institut or Confucius Institute style operation so I can brush up on my Russian and talk politics over a game of chess!

a reply to: 8675309jenny

I have a solution to this mess that will save us $510M.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: 8675309jenny

So Putin invades his neighbors, threatens NATO and boasts that he is not afraid to use nuclear weapons, and it is three US Congressmen who have started a new Cold War. I get where you're coming from.

Don't forget the Russian bombers violating American airspace recently.

And 'we' started it ?

What a load of rubbish.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

I have a solution that will kill the Fed defense spending alot..

Its called leave people tf alone..

originally posted by: TrueAmerican
Well folks, bad news. While it has been much speculated that we seriously have a bunch of psychos running this place, now

LET THERE BE NO DOUBT.

Yup, you're right. Getting nuked is a WHOLE lot easier than another civil war. Just sit back, watch the fireworks, and hope the pain isn't too bad when the flash comes.

Ahhhh, yes. Mr. Death. So NICE to finally see you. Better than repeating all the blood and gore of the civil war. We were couch potatoes all the way until the bitter end. How proud our forefathers must be.

Nobody wants that. Not the poor, the elites...no one wants the end of everything.
What those in the upper echelons do want is for their populaces to live in a perpetual state of fear to keep them in line during this time of incredible disparity of wealth distribution. There has never been a better tool than threat of war. Destroy the world and you have no servants, no lavish lifestyle, no beaches or mountains or anywhere except a hole you will die in with the guilt of having destroyed almost all life on earth.

originally posted by: 8675309jenny

originally posted by: DJW001


Why is my post off topic and this one isn't?

Just trying to avoid this turning into a debate about Crimea like the other thread. The other thread is still going on about that topic though.

I understand the issues are linked, but this thread is about the broken way our congress passed this bill and how they are planning to take Ukraine, put a big red bow on it, and hand it to corporate interests as a nice lil Christmas present.

Which is it? Is it about how our Congress passed this bill, which is a question of electoral politics, or is it about whether American corporate interests are being served in Ukraine. If it's the former, Ukraine is not the issue and should be left out of the conversation. If it is the latter, it all goes back to whether or not you believe Russian lies about Maidan.

a reply to: ThichHeaded

Same page, you and I.

Whose sickness?

Russian bombers penetrated U.S. airspace at least 16 times in past 10 days

NATO Tracks Large-Scale Russian Air Activity in Europe

originally posted by: 8675309jenny

My analogy was, someone who wants into Harvard, but doesn't want to take the SAT for fear of failure.

They didn't want to risk anyone saying "I object", so they went the backdoor route. You may think it would have passed all 425 members approval, but prove it. They never bothered to put it the test; disgusting, slimy cheaters.

originally posted by: DJW001

Wrong. As I have pointed out, we are going in to an election cycle. No-one wanted to be identified with legislation that will certainly become a controversial campaign issue. It was cowardly, yes, but at least three quarter of them were in favor or the law would risk being overturned when the President signed it.

Did you quote the wrong post ? There was nothing incorrect about my statement you quoted.

Furthermore, do you mean when the president doesn't sign it? I think Obama is unlikely to sign it, and since Congress remains in session, it won't be a default veto, so that's when it will go back to Congress for the 3/4 vote.



.

originally posted by: 8675309jenny

I understand the issues are linked, but this thread is about the broken way our congress passed this bill and how they are planning to take Ukraine, put a big red bow on it, and hand it to corporate interests as a nice lil Christmas present.

originally posted by: DJW001
Which is it? Is it about how our Congress passed this bill, which is a question of electoral politics, or is it about whether American corporate interests are being served in Ukraine. If it's the former, Ukraine is not the issue and should be left out of the conversation. If it is the latter, it all goes back to whether or not you believe Russian lies about Maidan.

Why are you asking WHICH is it?? Read my damn post!



.

originally posted by: neo96
Whose sickness?

Russian bombers penetrated U.S. airspace at least 16 times in past 10 days

NATO Tracks Large-Scale Russian Air Activity in Europe

BOTH sides. Don't kid yourself.

Look, I've said it in every thread on the subject: Russia aren't angels and neither are WE.

This posturing and escalation from both sides is unnecessary bullsh't.

Well, Obama signed it and said he wouldn't impose further sanctions for now. What about the rest of the provisions? So now it's four people create a law.

a reply to: TrueAmerican

Yup, it's coming. The Russians aren't increasing their long range bombing run missions for nothing.

Do you really think that if something was to happen those long range bombers wouldn't make it close to the US, and when the first NATO country is hit...Putin wouldn't be able handle the response.

Meet the new government of the Ukraine...

Foreign Bankers Rape Ukraine

Now, with a new parliament that is controlled by the Petro Poroshenko bloc as largest party and the boyish-looking former Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk, who is also new Prime Minister as head of the second largest party, the way was clear to get on with the rape of Ukraine. What shocked some is the blatant foreign takeover that followed, like a Wall Street vulture fund raid on a distressed debtor country of the Third World.

Source

What gets me, is there are a lot of bills that are passed in which the public is never informed of before hand. A lot of them are disguised with legalize wording, and the meat and potatoes of the bill is hidden in the middle of hundreds of pages of B.S. The media seldom covers it, and the government wouldn't dare put out a simply summary of the bill online or in the media. The last thing they want is for the American people to know what's in the bill.

I don't like the idea that we can have 3 congressman who have their own agenda on foreign policy, be able to manipulate the system and get a bill passed because they waited until nobody was present to vote. If this is legal, it's alarming! It's bad enough to have a congress full of rich morons, warmongers, obstructionists, politically biased finger pointers and haters, and corporate and banking lap dogs voting on bills that affect every American.

originally posted by: 8675309jenny

originally posted by: 8675309jenny

My analogy was, someone who wants into Harvard, but doesn't want to take the SAT for fear of failure.

They didn't want to risk anyone saying "I object", so they went the backdoor route. You may think it would have passed all 425 members approval, but prove it. They never bothered to put it the test; disgusting, slimy cheaters.

originally posted by: DJW001

Wrong. As I have pointed out, we are going in to an election cycle. No-one wanted to be identified with legislation that will certainly become a controversial campaign issue. It was cowardly, yes, but at least three quarter of them were in favor or the law would risk being overturned when the President signed it.

Did you quote the wrong post ? There was nothing incorrect about my statement you quoted.

Furthermore, do you mean when the president doesn't sign it? I think Obama is unlikely to sign it, and since Congress remains in session, it won't be a default veto, so that's when it will go back to Congress for the 3/4 vote..

You are implying that three people were afraid that someone would object to the bill. In fact, the overwhelming majority supported the bill but were afraid to vote for it openly for fear of creating divisions within their party during an election primary. Not at all the same thing.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Here, let's fix that:

Now, with a newly elected parliament that is jointly controlled by the Petro Poroshenko bloc as largest party and the boyish-looking former Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk, who is also new Prime Minister as head of the second largest party, the way was clear to get on with the economic renewal of Ukraine. What delighted some is the generous foreign investment that followed, like a shower of wealth for the Ukrainian people.