Courageous Rep. Anthony Weiner slams Republicans, page 1
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 38 times
Topic started on 30-7-2010 @ 10:38 AM by Misoir


I wish he was my Congressman, he would get my vote for sure. He is standing up for the people in his District and all 9/11 Rescue workers who are dying from the materials in their lungs. The Republicans don't want them to receive guaranteed Healthcare because they say it will hurt jobs.

These people risked their lives to save thousands of innocent Americans from a terrorist attack or a government massacre on its' own citizens and the Republicans said JUST DIE!!

[edit on 7/30/2010 by Misoir]


reply posted on 30-7-2010 @ 11:03 AM by astrogolf
reply to post by Misoir


You may not have noticed, but the "progressives", or as you know them, marxists, have spent us into a state of immenent collapse. You see, he's simply run out of other peoples money to spend. The folks you mentioned are already very well covered. There is, in this country.....or used to be....such a thing called risk. It works like this. I risk my capital to start a business. I employ people. I spend my own money to make it work. If I fail, I lose my home. So I work really hard. I succeed. But now, to cover their irresponsible spending, they hack into about two thirds of the profits, using the power of police. Funny, it's a certainty that they wouldn't have bailed me out had I failed. In other words, they didn't share the risk. In fact, they like to buy votes by removing risk. In the same breath, they also remove freedom and choice. It's called communism.
If I took a position as a firefighter, I'd expect a slightly greater risk of being injured on the job. I'd look at the healthcare plan in place and make a decision if the reward was worth the risk. Then make a decision. So now we change the rules. The other problem you aren't speaking of, would be that the marxists have a bad habit of taking a peice of legislation, take war funding for example, then tripling the cost by adding things like social programs for illegals, or any other vote buying scheme you can imagine to the legislation. Fortunately, it was blocked. But it just goes to show you what an disengenuous prick Weiner really is. And how very gullable liberals really are. You guys never smell the coffee and realize that we inevitably will become a third world country if this is not only stopped, but reversed.


reply posted on 30-7-2010 @ 11:08 AM by Blackmarketeer
reply to post by astrogolf


You may not have noticed, but the "progressives", or as you know them, marxists, have spent us into a state of immenent collapse.


You got it all wrong, that would be BUSH and the GOP that spent us into near collapse. Remember: Clinton (surplus) - Bush (record deficits).

TARP, to the tune of a 700 billion bailout to the greedy bankers that started the financial collapse? That was Bush, too.

Sorry, but it was the GOP under Bush that drove this country into financial ruin, and left us with two unfounded wars.



reply posted on 30-7-2010 @ 11:54 AM by mnemeth1
Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
reply to post by astrogolf


You may not have noticed, but the "progressives", or as you know them, marxists, have spent us into a state of immenent collapse.


You got it all wrong, that would be BUSH and the GOP that spent us into near collapse. Remember: Clinton (surplus) - Bush (record deficits).

TARP, to the tune of a 700 billion bailout to the greedy bankers that started the financial collapse? That was Bush, too.

Sorry, but it was the GOP under Bush that drove this country into financial ruin, and left us with two unfounded wars.


I'm sorry but that is utterly ridiculous.

Sure the bailouts were proposed under Bush's watch, but they were carried out under Obama and he could have stopped them if he wanted to. Additionally, his administration has come out with propaganda videos declaring the bailouts were a good thing.

Of course, the bailouts never would have passed without democratic support in the congress either.

The bailing out of financial institutions and corporate shills is still going on to this day.

Obama has outspent what Bush did in 8 years already, and he's not even done with his first term.

If you still think this is a republican vs. democrat issue, I fear for this country.

We are doomed, make no mistake about it, but its not because of republicans. Its because of the STATE.


[edit on 30-7-2010 by mnemeth1]


reply posted on 30-7-2010 @ 12:06 PM by Common Good
reply to post by Stormdancer777


Thanks for the links, Given me a little more insight on all of this.

I think they are about to eat each other.

The fact that they are playing politics over this issue(both sides) is not only disturbing, but it also makes me glad that I am not a part of either of these parties.

According to my ballot this November, I am going to give all of the independants a vote. Both parties prove that they are unable to do what the people want, and instead choose to play politics with peoples lives.
THIS is why people DO NOT trust their government, because our government IS NOT looking out for the interests of their people, just themselves and their jobs.

Strong emotional outbursts like this only make the democratic party look weak, and at the same time, the republican party ceases to do what is right just to get a reaction out of the democrats, and it worked. It also made them(repubs) look bad at the same time.

These bastards make me sick.


reply posted on 30-7-2010 @ 12:13 PM by nocents
reply to post by mythatsabigprobe


when did the republicans gain the majority? How can they "block" anything?
Why did so few democrats vote for this bill that they needed help from the republicans?

I did not read the bill have any of you? Perhaps there is something else in there that people do not want there fingerprints on.


reply posted on 30-7-2010 @ 12:17 PM by Blackmarketeer
reply to post by mnemeth1


Sure the bailouts were proposed under Bush's watch, but they were carried out under Obama and he could have stopped them if he wanted to. Additionally, his administration has come out with propaganda videos declaring the bailouts were a good thing.


They were more than just proposed by Bush, they were executed under Bush and the 2008 Congress. Obama was still just a senator when that was passed.

If you don't like the bailouts that's fine, I don't either, but place the blame for TARP where it belongs, on Bush and Paulson. They were the ones who bailed out AIG, MS and Wall Street.

edit to add:
America’s Sea of Red Ink Was Years in the Making

[edit on 30-7-2010 by Blackmarketeer]


reply posted on 30-7-2010 @ 12:37 PM by mnemeth1
Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
reply to post by mnemeth1


Sure the bailouts were proposed under Bush's watch, but they were carried out under Obama and he could have stopped them if he wanted to. Additionally, his administration has come out with propaganda videos declaring the bailouts were a good thing.


They were more than just proposed by Bush, they were executed under Bush and the 2008 Congress. Obama was still just a senator when that was passed.

If you don't like the bailouts that's fine, I don't either, but place the blame for TARP where it belongs, on Bush and Paulson. They were the ones who bailed out AIG, MS and Wall Street.

edit to add:
America’s Sea of Red Ink Was Years in the Making

[edit on 30-7-2010 by Blackmarketeer]


I'm not talking about TARP (which could have been rescinded by the democrats ex-post facto), I'm talking about the rest of the insanity.

I never said Bush wasn't responsible, but saying he is ONLY responsible is idiocy.



reply posted on 30-7-2010 @ 12:38 PM by sdcigarpig
After reading what all is the hold up, and reviewing the problems here is my take on this entire issue:
Both sides should be ashamed of themselves for their actions and behaviors, as it is political grandstanding at the expense of the people who really matter. Both sides are correct in their stance, yet neither is willing to compromise on their principle. The bill is good and noble doing the correct action, however, what the Republicans are objecting to is that the Democrats who, do hold the majority in the congress, and that could get any bill passed if they wanted, and the admendment, that has absolutely nothing to do with the aid, should not have been attached to the bill. The Democrats are correct that this is shameful and it is holding up alot of what they could get done. But both are wrong at the same time, cause they have ultimately lost focus on what matters in this case, and that is the people and citizens of the country, for whom the people in the halls of power have a social contract with to govern wisely and act in the best interest of the entire country. To use this as a means of political grandstanding to either gather votes or to make the other side look bad, in the aspect of this being a year where the balance of power could shift. It gives the general population a sense that maybe that we the people need to take matters into our own hands and enforce a change at the polls to where the people can get people in who are going to speak with one voice of the entire population, and not just one group or the other, or worry about getting re-elected.


reply posted on 30-7-2010 @ 12:49 PM by mnemeth1
reply to post by damwel


I know this may be hard to comprehend, but big corporations employ a lot of people.

Therefore taking money from them means they can employ less people.

Hence, it will cost jobs.

Democrats on the other hand think they know how to create jobs better than the private sector, therefore they claim that taking money from major corporations and spending it on "green jobs" or whatever other government program strikes their fancy will "create jobs".

Of course, this is utterly ridiculous since to create jobs they must first destroy jobs by taking from the productive private sector of the economy.
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^