It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Courageous Rep. Anthony Weiner slams Republicans

page: 5
38
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 06:05 PM
link   
Wow, the partisan rhetoric in here is so thick I'm suffocating.

PROTIP: Republicans and Democrats are no different except on a handful of issues that shouldn't be issues to begin with.

They are both in bed with corporations.

They both support war.

They both lie to you and take your money.

The republicans happen to use slightly fascist rhetoric where as the democrats use slightly communist rhetoric.

Fascist, communist, socialist; it's all corporatism in the end. In the end, multinational corporations and government become one.




posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 06:24 PM
link   

Originally posted 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.


So let me get this straight.

You voice no dissent against $286 billion dollars in Afghanistan to respond to 9/11 -- that's 268,000,000,000 dollars -- but you want the first responders to personally endure what would be less than 0.01% of that for the sake of fiscal and personal responsibility? I guess there really is a great divide in this country.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 06:28 PM
link   
Wow someone mentions the "R" word or the "D" word and we're suddenly off of the issue and onto partisan mudslinging.

Tragic really, especially when as this rep points out, people are dying! More power to this guy though, he's got a great issue here and he's showing exactly how much passion that a representative for the people should show on such a thing.

I don't know the rest of this man's politics and stances so I cannot say that I support him outright, but he's got a lot of respect from me and my full backing on this issue for sure! Go Get Em!



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 06:43 PM
link   
reply to post by inforeal
 


I've always had that same question, inforeal. My husband recently shared a book with me that provides a fair amount of insight - and believe it or not, the explinations actually make sense: "Deer Hunting with Jesus: Dispatches from America's Class War," by Joe Bageant.

It's a quick, easy read, and the injection of humor makes it enjoyable (and helps deflect the depression of the whole state of affairs). I would highly recomend it.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 






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


Therein lies the problem, so with the miracle of modern technology, lets fix it!

We'll take this part,

Therefore taking money from them means they can


and end it with something reasonable;

Therefore taking money from them means they can reduce the bonus's and bloated salary of the mangers, increase the efficiency of office staff (no paid lunches, sorry bring a sack like I do), and root out waste in the processes of the company.

Hell, they might even be able to HIRE some Americans!!



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted 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]


This was great, we need more politicians like him.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 06:59 PM
link   

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.


Clinton moved Social Security onto it's own balance sheet. He never balanced anything, he just cooked the books.

Tarp was passed by a democratic majority, and Senator Obama was head cheerleader for it.

Those Two unfounded wars were funded by the Democratic congress. Remember when Bush asked for 120 billion for the war? The democrats Gave him 180 billion.

Also, Neo-Con's came from the far left, anyone that has studied anything about political movement knows this.

Pretty sure you're the one who has it all wrong.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 07:06 PM
link   
Why don't you get a life..You MoveOn scumbag!



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by hoghead cheese
This was great, we need more politicians like him.


Try getting the 'Cheese' out of your head and read the thread.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Boomer1941
 


Honestly, I don't care if he's wrong. He's alive. He's responsive. He does not suck.

www.csmonitor.com...

Weather or not he's right or wrong has become a non issue. What is fact is congress is dull and dead and hated and it is for a good reason. They do not look nor act human.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 07:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


Courageous? I think not. I think its so funny how democrats always need to yell and tell people who disagree with them to "sit down and shut up." Show me a video of a republican screaming at the top of his lungs and telling other congresspeople to sit down and shut up. Its people like this in Washington that are ruining our country. STOP SPENDING MONEY!!!!!!!!!!!!! You want to pass a 30 billion dollar bill then PAY FOR IT. CUT SOMETHING TO PAY FOR IT. We are heading down the road to complete destruction in this country because men like Weiner are elected to office.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 07:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Common Good
 


You want to know why they didn't vote yes on this bill. You should know why they didn't vote yes on this bill. WE DON'T HAVE ANY MONEY TO FUND THIS!!!!!!! The democrats want to pass bills that aren't paid for so they can buy votes. I think this bill is a good bill but it needs to be paid for. The Democrats are acting like money grows on trees. PAY FOR SOMETHING and you might find some Republican votes.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 07:27 PM
link   
What really impressed me is that two Democrats who both voted 'Yes' damn near got into a fistfight.

I guess it's what Will Rogers said: I don't belong to any organized political party. I'm a Democrat.

And I want to know how this guy at a Philly's baseball game learned to use upchucking as an 'on command' weapon, and could he teach this trick to Democrats?

"A 21-year-old man who intentionally vomited on a spectator and his 11-year-old daughter at a Philadelphia Phillies game was sentenced Friday to up to three months in jail and community service, which the judge suggested be fulfilled by cleaning ballpark toilets and trash."



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


Yes the Republicans under Bush spent a lot of money. So I guess the solution is to spend even more money then they did and keep blaming them for the problems we have now. This is childish and not what our elected officials are suppose to do. At the end of the Bush era our debt was at 9.5 trillion dollars and is now 13.9 trillion less than 2 years later. So you tell me how all this spending is going to fix the problems we have?



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 07:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
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.


First 100 Days: Obama's Federal Spending Spree Raises Management Concerns

In $3.6 Trillion Budget, Obama Signals Broad Shift in Priorities

Bush Deficit vs. Obama Deficit in Pictures

Obama Versus Bush on Spending


Mr. Bush did sign the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) into law and loaned $240 billion to banks. But those loans are being returned at a profit to the Treasury. Rather than using those funds to pay down the deficit, Mr. Obama wants to use them for new spending. What's more, he has lavished some $320 billion from TARP on car companies, union allies, and pet causes that will never be fully returned.


Obama Shatters Spending Record for First-Year Presidents

Obama Spending Trends Charted

Obama Signs $60 Billion Afghanistan War Spending Legislation

President Obama signs cash for clunkers bill


The law provides $1 billion in funding, with $50 million allocated for administration.


Obama is requesting roughly $18.7 billion for NASA for 2010

Experts Say Cost of Obama Health Care Plan Could Top $1.5 Trillion

Obama’s Spending vs Obama’s Spending Cuts

Obama Defeats FDR (in Spending Other People’s Money)

Obama's Spending Plans May Pose Political Risks


...the White House has become increasingly concerned that President Obama's spending plans, which would require $9 trillion in government borrowing over the next decade, could become a political liability that defines the 2010 midterm elections.


Clip:: Obama; Spending us into Oblivion.

Clip:: $78.8 Trillion; United States Debt Obligations exceed world GDP

All hail Obama?!?! Are you kidding me? Hahaha... Due to Obama's new high stakes spending, your future has been put on a drastic hold. Also, keep in mind that the major overall health care cost does not go into affect until 2014. After he leaves office. Hahaha... Some people are in serious denial.

U. S. Debt Clock




[edit on 30-7-2010 by Section31]



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 07:37 PM
link   
reply to post by parrothead0333
 

Close enough?
it's not sit down and shut up, but it's a common practice. Ever watch CSPAN, dude?




posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 07:39 PM
link   
reply to post by parrothead0333
 


Don't forget the reason for some of that spending was to AVERT a financial meltdown. I don't pretend to think Obama or anyone else liked to pass bills for billions in bailouts to banks, but what choice was there - sit back and wait for the depression? That's exactly what you would have gotten under McCain/Palin.

I know you'd love to back me into some corner to defend Obama, and I'm not playing that game, I'm just sick of the "Blame Obama" game when those who CAUSED this financial landslide are now claiming they had nothing to do with it.

The Republican party no longer represents America or Americans. It represents only itself. It'll gladly watch this country fall apart before it does anything of significance to help.

They truly are PATHETIC.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by maybereal11
 


OMG! you caught a Republican lying, shocking!

Representative Weiner is not acting, he is doing his job and he understands that that this health bill is VITAL, God bless him.

Well folks just think, people who want 9/11 First Responders to die plan on taking over in November, just imagine what they will have in store for you?

Play it safe, vote Democrat.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 07:53 PM
link   
Wow! Some of you actually believe (foolishly IMO) in this left vs. right, Dem. vs. Rep. hogwash. Someday you will all wake up. I just hope it's not too late by then.

But what the heck, question is; why has no one bothered to respond to ohioriver's post about the amount already received by 9/11 victims (to include first responders)? How much is enough?

Another question; If the first responders deserve more compensation, then what about the normal, everyday first responders who are injured or disabled while executing their everyday work? Shouldn't they also be compensated for injuries?
This is not meant as disrespect for any first responder on 9/11. I have great respect and salute every one of them.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
reply to post by parrothead0333
 


Don't forget the reason for some of that spending was to AVERT a financial meltdown. I don't pretend to think Obama or anyone else liked to pass bills for billions in bailouts to banks, but what choice was there - sit back and wait for the depression? That's exactly what you would have gotten under McCain/Palin.

I know you'd love to back me into some corner to defend Obama, and I'm not playing that game, I'm just sick of the "Blame Obama" game when those who CAUSED this financial landslide are now claiming they had nothing to do with it.

The Republican party no longer represents America or Americans. It represents only itself. It'll gladly watch this country fall apart before it does anything of significance to help.

They truly are PATHETIC.


So the bailout that you criticized the entire GOP for, is now completely justified because a majority of democrats voted for it?

Nutcase....

If progressives had half a percentage of a clue about basic economics they wouldn't say the stupid things they do.

Progressives support the wars now, they justify the bailouts now, they call for a draft, support corporatism by forcing everyone to buy insurance from a Private company. They support the Patriot Act, they won't close GITMO, and they think that anyone who disagrees with them is a threat.

How very Neo-conservative of you all.




top topics



 
38
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join