Are Republicans trying to ruin the economy?

The answer is very, very clearly yes. Economic recovery would be a boon to the majority party and a majority of the incumbents, which are largely Democratic. The Republicans know this. When you have a choice between doing what's politically beneficial and doing what's right--and you're an evil fuck who hates the unemployed on principle--the choice is always easy for these people.

Well, I'M not trying to wreck the economy. But I'm slowly turning from Conservative to anarchist as I've watched both sides make nothing but mistakes for ten to twelve years now.

As a college student, I feel kind of screwed no matter what.

I understand that CHUD is 99% liberal, but dude, you're an extremist. Do you live up there on that high horse all the time? You can't just make points, you have to try your best to fucking degrade people every single time.

maybe it's gotten to the point where the country just can't afford it anymore? But then it turns into maybe we can't afford NOT to do this...who knows.

Hey Matthew, lets get together sometime, have a few drinks and destroy some shit!

It's easy to degrade, but it just ends up being kind of petty

Anytime. Well, not anytime, I've got a 5 month stint in L.A. coming up soon. But almost anytime.

Hell man, I'll be moving out there in a few months..we can make this into a nation wide tour or chaos!

What I find to be the most compelling thing is this: Is there a possibility that we have fucked our economy so bad that it won't ever be able to recover, especially with the Rs and Ds being entirely unable to agree on anything EVER anymore? Hell, China owns more than a good chunk of us at this point, along with a bunch of other nations to whom we owe money, and it isn't like they're going to forget. Funding wars, trying to clean up environmental fuck-ups every other year -- I mean, we could really be screwed here, right? I say if it isn't any better in 2012 we just say fuck it and go out on a high note. I'm sure we can get a few nukes to the Moon just for the hell of it.

OH hell, the system just need to be broken down and restarted. Too many years of entrenchment and corruption on both sides of the aisle.

Or there is always the possibility that one party is just objectively worse than the other. I fucking hate the "it's a wash" approach to thinking about American politics. First, it's a rhetorical tactic used by conservatives as a red herring to lead people away from thinking through just how fucking evil and stupid the Republican Party is these days, which pisses me off. Second, it's just plainly intellectually lazy. Finally, the corrupt elements of the Democratic Party are the Blue Dogs and Conservadems, i.e. people who would have run as Republicans if the GOP weren't so tinfoil hat crazy that they can't stand anyone who is remotely sane.

His comment isn't extreme at all, though I shouldn't be surprised that an "Anarchist/Republican" (any ideology so long as it's completely devoid of empathy!) would rail against a bill designed to help the poor.

By voting against this bill, the Republican Party kills two birds with one stone: they stall economic recovery (the success of which is basically the only platform the Democrats have left to run on in our increasingly socially conservative society) and they associate themselves with "responsible" deficit spending and small government.

Basically, Republicans can at once prevent economic recovery, blame the lack of recovery on the majority party, and associate themselves with a policy that--in their bullshit narrative--will lead to a stronger economy.

The truth is NO ONE has any idea how to respond to a fiscal crisis in a credit-based economy. There are things you DON'T do (i.e. focus on reducing the deficit in a recession) but you can't apply traditional economic heuristics to a credit-based debt-bound global economy. The national debt is easy to focus on because it's apparently concrete (it's a number)--but money itself hasn't been concrete for the past forty years so then again it's not.

I wouldn't worry about China or--foreign interests in general--ever "owning" the US, because if our economy sinks it would be as much a burden on them as it would be on us were that the case. I would, however, worry about the ever-increasing gap between the rich and the poor and basically everything that's happened as a result of the Reagan administration.

I think the two party system is ultimately very destructive. It encourages one to look at the world in black and white terms. There's way too many REPUBLICANS = BAD, DEMOCRATS = GOOD and vice versa in the world, when the reality is that both of these parties have been doing a shitty job for awhile now. Honest, hardworking, people who want to do the right thing ON BOTH sides are needed.

Corruption is rampant on both sides, and big money ultimately controls both parties. A two party system is liked by the media and people at large, because it's simplistic, and people generally like things when they're easier to understand. But there's more than two sides on every issue and the way voting goes in current politics (ALL THE DEMOCRATS VOTE THIS WAY! ALL THE REPUBLICANS VOTE THIS WAY!), is unrealistic, not representative of the country at large, and ultimately destructive.

It is looking more and more from where I stand that this was the single most earth-shattering (perhaps at some point in the future, LITERALLY earth-shattering) and disastrous decision in the history of the court.

I worry that the Democrats will go on to block any attempts by the Republicans to do anything in the future* out of sheer spite if they ever get into government again leading to permanent vindictive leglislative gridlock.

*pretending for a moment that someday in the future the Republicans will have a genuinely good idea that will help people who most need help.

Republicans aren't trying to ruin our economy, this is just fodder for elections. The bill was $85 Billion dollars and more or less an omnibus spending bill. Democrats wanted to push out the vote so they can put it in ads for this Nov. elections. Now they're going to put through a standalone bill to give benefits to the unemployed.

The Senate doesn't need 60 votes to pass something, back in April unemployment benefits extension went through the senate and got 59 votes and <GASP> it went on to the President's desk and was signed into law. You should be directing your anger towards the Democrats for playing political games.

http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvo...hp?cs_id=29577

So voting against a tax cut bill because it will make the Democrats look good if it passes isn't a political game?

You're such a fruitcake.

You're right you jackass, the Senate doesn't need 60 votes to pass a bill. The Senate needs 60 votes to break a GOP filibuster in order to vote on a bill. So the 60 votes is a de facto requirement for bill passage.

Which is just fucking rich. Whenever a judicial candidate is nominated for the SCOTUS, all we hear from the GOP troglodytes is how the candidate MUST. RESPECT. THE. CONSTITUTION! So tell me fuckwits, where in the Constitution does it say the Senate needs 60 votes to pass a bill? These assholes are perverting the legislative process and hurting the country while doing so.

Please link to the GOP filibuster of the bill. Keep in mind, not the THREAT but the actual filibuster. Learn government if you want to participate.

What does this mean? You think the GOP is just kidding whenever they threaten to filibuster every single bill?

If the threat is their intent, how can people not take that seriously and respond in kind? What point would it be to send the bill just to die?

You find a link? There was a bill passed with 59 votes and no filibuster, it happened just a few months ago. Please, show me the link with the filibuster for this bill.

You didn't answer my question and instead stuck to your talking points. How very GOP of you.

Yes, that bill was passed, but it was also heavily compromised thanks to the threat of a filibuster. The fact that you're ignoring that threat as inconsequential is either naive, stupid, ignorant or partisan bullshit.

Oh yeah, and there's this.

Oh go fuck yourself, you intentionally obtuse twit. You know as well as I do that no GOP apparatchik will vote for cloture, even on bills they agree with. So they don't have to perform an actual filibuster (which, you sniveling fool, would cause more problems for the democrats in the Senate than the republicans).

Second, I wasn't commenting specifically on the bill you mentioned, just your idiotic trolling comment that 60 isn't required to pass a bill. Learn to read if you want to participate.

In conclusion, fuck you.

So, let me understand this correctly. Your assertion is that the bill I linked to did indeed pass with 59 votes because of compromises, there was no filibuster. Now, here we are with another bill and it also had less then 60 votes but the Democrats did not make enough compromises and the GOP threatened to filibuster, emphasis on the word "THREATEN". Sounds like how government works, if you've ever taken a single class on how it works.. you would know that. Keep in mind, there was no filibuster on this bill so the fault lies with the Democrats for not pushing through. You don't need 60 votes in the Senate to pass a bill.

Let's focus in on your previous post, for one second.

Yet, a bill passed with 59 votes, thus negating your entire argument. It too was a bill focused on unemployment benefits and... no filibuster!

I never said you did needed 60. My point is these days you need 60 votes to pass a bill without neutering it.

You say this is how government works. I say this is how government doesn't work, if you catch my drift. This is about partisan politics, not governing. And you know it.

ETA: Which, by the way, is the point of the original post and point of the thread.

So because the GOP did the right thing for once, there is no de facto 60 vote requirement? Have you not been paying attention to the Senate in the last two years? Seriously: are you just stupid or just intentionally obtuse?

Then the bill gets neutered! That's how the United States government works!

We have successfully had bills pass with less then 60 votes since the change of the filibuster rules of the Senate. The fact that the Democrats are afraid of a filibuster does not change how our government works. You cannot vilify the minority just because you disagree with them, rules are made to protect the rights of the minority. What do you think will happen after the November elections when the Democrats are predicted to lose up to 6 seats? How will the government function then? How will any bill pass with only a 51 (plus two independents) majority?

These are questions you should be asking yourself right now. Because no matter what, the Democrats are losing seats* this November and if you think the government cannot operate now when they only have to sway one person from the other party to vote for them then you ain't seen nothing yet.

We have out of control spending going on in our government, we have no budget for the next fiscal year (which starts in October) and the majority (Democrats) are not voting for it until after the elections because they're afraid of the reaction by voters. The Democrats symbolically voted for pay-go rules and when it comes time to adhere to them, they side skirt around it. You want to know who is ruining our economy? It's the Democrats with their out of control spending! Don't get me wrong, the Republicans were out of control too but not by such extreme measures!

* meaning they will not gain seats.

Hahahahahahahahahahaha. It's really working out great for us, isn't it? What a system!

Snaieke, I know how government is supposed to work, but my point is that it's not working. If I believed for a second that republicans were voting no (or threatening to vote no) because of principles or beliefs, and even better, if they could somehow articulate those beliefs in a way that makes me convinced they're not viewing the American political landscape as a giant football field, I'd say that yes, it's working.

It's all partisan bullshit, and you're the biggest cheerleader the GOP has. You view it as a game. But this isn't a game, there are people's lives at stake.

And if you think that this is government "working," how to do you eplain stuff like this? I'm sure you'll make some smart ass comeback about how it's all bullshit coming from a fascist media leftist source. Fine. But it's true, and it's about these people making decisions based on nothing but a gameplan. And it's screwing everyone in the country, even you and all the rest of the cheerleaders.

Don't get me wrong, I've got issues with my side of the isle as well. But in companion, they've got nothing on your guys.

So you agree, thanks for all the fish!

Context, dipshit. Learn it. Use it.

Your blindness to the GOP's proposals does not negate them. The GOP has put forth ideas to better this country* and the majority (Democrats) have dismissed them throughout the last two years. The Dems have attempted to incorporate some of their ideas into portions in their behemoth, omnibus spending bills but for the most part they've lacked the true spirit of what the GOP intended. You can't expect 100 Senators to vote on the same measure, it just won't happen. You have to isolate and target those that you think can come to your side and agree on a set of measures that will achieve a mutual goal. The modern day Democrats have abandoned that principal and gone straight for the role of vilifying the opposition. First it was Bush and now it is the minority party. It's very disingenuous for the Democrats to actually claim they cannot pass anything due to the GOP. They've managed to pass quite a few bills with enough support to bypass any real filibusters and several bills have passed without the 60 necessary votes. They're simply playing an elaborate game of politics with the American citizens lives but throughout it all, the government system is working, unfortunately due to the super majority of the Democrats mostly leftist agenda items are being sent through. Notable exception was the health care bill, which the GOP should have flocked to but had already (after a year) painted themselves into a corner and could not vote for it but that is for another thread (the one where it was discussed).

As to the video? It lacks the nuance facts behind the votes. That is the problem when you get your information from leftist individuals (like Maddow) and leftist news sites (like huffpo). For example; The paygo bill was combined with the bill to increase our debt limit to 14.3 trillion dollars, of course you were going to lose support when you're in one hand saying "We will only enact legislation that we can pay for!" and while in the other saying "But we need to increase our debt cap for when we don't"... which by the way, the increase will only last until just after the elections and then they'll have to vote to increase it again, because of the Democrats rampant and irresponsible spending.

[source]

You see, the problem is you're so far left and so partisan that you can't look at facts and make an educated decision without your partisan nature getting in the way. You want to try and paint an image of me as someone taking this as a game, when I'm the only one on here who has consistently posted the exact same complaints against both sides since I came on here. I criticized both Bush and Obama and both left and right politicians for their policies if they were in direct conflict with my own beliefs.. meanwhile most of the folks on here have had a beef with Bush for things that they've let Obama slide on and that by definition is hypocrisy.


* from their view

You're so all over the place in this post, it's hysterical.
"It's the Dems fault for villifying their opposition!"

"Yes, it's all a game!"

"But it's WORKING!"

"Except for that one tiny thing what was it oh yeah HEALTH CARE! That was a mistake on the GOP's part, but after a year of vilifying the opposition, what else could they do, they painted themselves into a corner!"

"It's hypocritical to feel one way about one party but not the other about yours, even though I just ranted and raved about Dems vilifying their opposition and everyone knows Republicans would NEVER do anything like that even though I just admitted they did about Health Care!"

Give me a break, dude. You need a life preserver. You can't tread water forever.

I've been to some Republican meetings. I know we're trying to ruin lots of things. You know: love, decency, equality, Rock and Roll, the usual. But it's hard to hear the details of exactly what we're trying to ruin what with all the maniacal cackling going on. I'll try to take better notes next time.

Well, it's hard to take good notes and eat babies at the same time.

To be fair, I blame the Dems in the senate too. And I blame Obama plenty for some of his lies, misleading statements and misdirection. I think our whole way of governing has gotten out of control. Doesn't it scare anyone that China is ten times more efficient at governing than we are, and has been for some time? India too. For democracy to work, it has to work. It's not working right and you can stomp your feet and tell me things are getting done, but it's all just theater, pomp and circumstance.

The problem is, governing has become a game because its almost always about something other than the aim of the bill.
Its not about health care, its about showing a position, about making a statement. Its not about unemployed, its about not losing/winning votes in the next election.
There are so many elections which, due to the way the system is set up, are crucial to staying in power that you have about 1 actual year in any legislative period where you can do stuff and not primarily care about some sort of electoral race or consequence.

And the shit is just piled up too high to get through it under these circumstances. I think both parties, though the republicans moreso than the democrats on average, are perfectly fine with blocking the other for 2 years if it means getting a shot at getting to the top again. Sure, most of these people would happily do actual work, but not at the cost it takes, not at the price of losing some election, support, money, goodwill or polling points.

Ever since Clintons 2nd term, it looks to me as if the american political system has been in campaign mode without a break.
And thats not a matter of parties.

That China is a dictatorship but still has a stronger education system than we do is troubling to me. That nobody seems to care in this country is even more troubling.

They're not bound to the rules that we are so they're more flexible. I'm not suggesting we become a dictatorship, and I don't want our country to be run like China, but the fact is we were able to govern more in our history than we are now, and when I mean govern I mean actually get stuff done. Partisanship isn't new, everyone knows that, and you can blame it on the 24 hour news cycle or sensationalistic taste, but at the end of the day it's become more and more a gigantic media circus and political theater. And yes, I do believe that's an intentional distraction from the "financial dictatorship" that you talk about above, that is both very real and very scary.

When my uncle talks about how we have to oppose Obama's plans for socialization because we're all become Serf's I have to laugh. He's so deluded he doesn't realize that few in government are actually speaking or care about him. It's all a rouse. It's hard to know what to really do about anything anymore.

No China is great at making itself appear better and also is great at crushing dissent. If you read the news closely you'll see that they have had some major incidents (like, riots) break out and get suppressed in the last couple of years.

India is not that efficient either.

What makes the US different is we cover so many workings of government publicly, not the old boring budget debates but the OMG Lets' beat up on the BOP CEO!

I do agree this campaign mode of governing isn't working, except of course when it does (like with Healthcare).

I don't want to become the cheerleader for China of all countries, but read up on this to get an idea of what I'm talking about.

Hahaha no. Just no.

People from all over the world are still flocking to US Universities. (in fact the article linked in your link are obsessed with Harvard!) The US still leads in the number of Nobel prize winners.

Plus, "innovation" is not predicated by the official Education system. Drive around Silicon Valley, or Silicon Alley in NYC, and while you will indeed meet a log of people with impressive degrees, you will also find just as many people who learned on the job, to say nothing of the occasional college drop out turned billionaire.

On thing to remember about China: Yes on paper they turn out tens of thousands of "engineers" every year from their University system, but they also call everything engineering. So you've got Lawn and gardening engineers etc.

China simply does not (to date) allow real innovation, because the more you allow freedom of thought , the more "problems" (like people expressing themselves) you have. China is already seeing real problems with maintaining order in rural areas (fun fact: most economic development in China is in the Coastal cities), if they turn out to have a Real Estate bubble (and most observers thing they have a BIG one) they could have a disaster.

What I will agree with (as any same person would) is the K-12 Education system in the US is in bad shape and needs reform. And (to get this thread back on track) that is yet another area where the GOP is screwing the country.

There's also substantial brain drain in several states and the country as a whole. Google, for instance, had to leave Phoenix, AZ for a variety of reasons, one of which was quality of life. This hurts AZ's economy because a thriving tech sector can help a state's economy.

If the people in charge of your state/country pass laws that make living some place horrible, intelligent people won't want to live there. And then what happens? Your state/country turns into a big wasteland.

What were' seeing now is funding to public education being slashed, infrastructure falling apart, and public places being left to disrepair. Who wants to raise a family in that kind of environment? So the smart, creative people go elsewhere. That's a problem.

Not true unless you wanna lump all public k-12 education with the bad schools. After living in two major cities with totally abysmal public education systems, I don't disagree with you that inner city schools get the shaft. That being said, there are still a great deal of fantastic public schools in this country. I'm not saying they are perfect, but the idea that the rich only get the best education pre-college is simply not true.

I totally agree with you on No Child Left Behind's destruction of the public school system as we know it. Teaching for tests simply does not work and the idea that math, science, and reading trumps all other subjects is starting to rear its ugly head in civics education in this country. Public school children don't know shit about our government and that ignorance turns into apathy or hatred for our governmental system.

Furthermore, coming from a great deal of experience on this as a former student and a former educator, our public school system is failing our children not just when it comes to education, but also in providing a safe place of learning for our children. Bullying is rampant in schools today and children and adolescents are becoming more violent and participants in drug use than ever before. Perhaps this is a problem easily addressed by parents, but the idea that schools should have no say so when it comes to the development of a child is simply preposterous. Teen suicide is at dramatic highs, school shootings and school violence is at a high rate, and teen drug use is an epidemic (especially the abuse of prescription drugs).