Booster4324 Posted November 20, 2010 Share Posted November 20, 2010 (edited) Link John Boehner, current minority leader, speaker after Jan 5 Has a reputation for crying during big speeches. Has made clear he will take on President Barack Obama, vowing to repeal the health care bill. He will also have to keep the Tea Party candidates happy and in line. Eric Cantor, current chief minority whip, future majority leader The Republican 'Young Gun' has issued a 22-page blueprint calling for sweeeping government spending cuts. Has said "we will drain the swamp rather than learning to swim with the alligators". Has said that during the lame-duck session: "we will fight to make sure that no American faces a tax increase. That's why we will work quickly to cut spending by billions of dollars and eliminate earmarks. And it's why we will act to repeal ObamaCara." Edited November 20, 2010 by Booster4324 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted November 20, 2010 Share Posted November 20, 2010 Link Well, you can't repeal Obamacare with Obama in office. But, you can deny funding, cut programs, and basically be a bastard about it. I wouldn't be surprised if they force him to veto things, because it hurts him a lot more than it does them. It will look like he's refusing to listen to the people. The House GOP are holding all the cards at this point. Let's face it: with 22 Democratic Senators coming up for election in 12, it's not like the Senate will be interested in risking their butts for the far-left, or Obama. But, I have been thinking about this lately: is there a diminishing marginal return on forcing vetos? As in, at some point will Obama start to look reasoned, and even, principled, if he keeps vetoing everything? It's a hell of a risk to take, but Obama may be past the point of having nothing to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted November 20, 2010 Author Share Posted November 20, 2010 Well, you can't repeal Obamacare with Obama in office. But, you can deny funding, cut programs, and basically be a bastard about it. I wouldn't be surprised if they force him to veto things, because it hurts him a lot more than it does them. It will look like he's refusing to listen to the people. The House GOP are holding all the cards at this point. Let's face it: with 22 Democratic Senators coming up for election in 12, it's not like the Senate will be interested in risking their butts for the far-left, or Obama. But, I have been thinking about this lately: is there a diminishing marginal return on forcing vetos? As in, at some point will Obama start to look reasoned, and even, principled, if he keeps vetoing everything? It's a hell of a risk to take, but Obama may be past the point of having nothing to lose. How about the corruption aspect? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted November 20, 2010 Share Posted November 20, 2010 As OC pointed out, they can't repeal the health insurance law with BO in charge. In regards to the Cantor alligator metaphor, I'd say it was pretty silly. You only set yourself up for failure when you say such things, it is nearly impossible to keep every single member in check. People !@#$ up, that's just how it goes. Where they should be held accountable is not so much if someone screws up, but in how they deal with it when that occurs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RI Bills Fan Posted November 20, 2010 Share Posted November 20, 2010 As OC pointed out, they can't repeal the health insurance law with BO in charge. In regards to the Cantor alligator metaphor, I'd say it was pretty silly. You only set yourself up for failure when you say such things, it is nearly impossible to keep every single member in check. People !@#$ up, that's just how it goes. Where they should be held accountable is not so much if someone screws up, but in how they deal with it when that occurs. So if I understand you correctly, they should be held accountable for remaining true to their stated intentions but not for attaining the results they promised to deliver? Isn't that "Politics as Usual 101"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted November 20, 2010 Share Posted November 20, 2010 (edited) So if I understand you correctly, they should be held accountable for remaining true to their stated intentions but not for attaining the results they promised to deliver? Isn't that "Politics as Usual 101"? As I said, it was silly thing to say and I'm sure he'll end up eating his own words, much like Nancy. Edited November 20, 2010 by Magox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RI Bills Fan Posted November 20, 2010 Share Posted November 20, 2010 As I said, it was silly thing to say and I'm sure he'll end up eating his own words, much like Nancy. And I believe the OP asked if he would be held to the same standard (on this board) that Nancy is held to. The obvious answer is: No, of course not, the majority of posters on this board agree with his stated political positions so actual results are unnecessary provided he keeps feeding the faithful their daily talking points. Anyone who disagrees will be swiftly shouted down as an obviously braindead liberal lemming. As I said, "Politics as Usual" 101. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted November 20, 2010 Share Posted November 20, 2010 And I believe the OP asked if he would be held to the same standard (on this board) that Nancy is held to. The obvious answer is: No, of course not, the majority of posters on this board agree with his stated political positions so actual results are unnecessary provided he keeps feeding the faithful their daily talking points. Anyone who disagrees will be swiftly shouted down as an obviously braindead liberal lemming. As I said, "Politics as Usual" 101. I originally stated that his comment was silly and that he was setting himself up for failure. So what do you think "setting yourself up for failure" means in the context in which is what said? If it comes back to haunt him and he ends up eating his own words for his statement, I do believe that means he was held accountable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted November 20, 2010 Share Posted November 20, 2010 (edited) And I believe the OP asked if he would be held to the same standard (on this board) that Nancy is held to. The obvious answer is: No, of course not, the majority of posters on this board agree with his stated political positions so actual results are unnecessary provided he keeps feeding the faithful their daily talking points. Anyone who disagrees will be swiftly shouted down as an obviously braindead liberal lemming. As I said, "Politics as Usual" 101. I cast my votes for the candidates that i thought best represented my views and wishes. As long as i see the candidates I identiy with uphold their platforms they ran on and vote for their principles than i will be satisfied. I just want to see them uphold their end of the bargain to the best of their ability for what they campaigned on because that's what i voted for. Edited November 20, 2010 by drinkTHEkoolaid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted November 20, 2010 Share Posted November 20, 2010 I have as much faith in the upcoming Republican Congress as I had in the Obama Administration. Keep your expectations low and you won't be disappointed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted November 20, 2010 Share Posted November 20, 2010 I have as much faith in the upcoming Republican Congress as I had in the Obama Administration. Keep your expectations low and you won't be disappointed Amen. Boner has already showed his ass more than enough times and he isn't even in charge yet. Dude is an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keukasmallies Posted November 20, 2010 Share Posted November 20, 2010 Actually, I'm filing those statements in my "P" file just ahead of Queen Nancy's comment about presiding over the most ethical congress, etc. You need to internalize the fact that NO politician EVER utters an honest statement, nor honors a public commitment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 20, 2010 Share Posted November 20, 2010 I have as much faith in the upcoming Republican Congress as I had in the Obama Administration. Keep your expectations low and you won't be disappointed I, for one, am looking forward to increased openness, honesty, and accountability from the next Congress. (Surprisingly, I got all the way to "honesty" before I started laughing.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 Wait. I thought Nancy already . She captained a side-wheel back-peddler to personally oversee the work. , what a surprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 The self-righteous whining is almost at an end. Cue up the excuses as to why Hope and Change II is not happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 The self-righteous whining is almost at an end. Cue up the excuses as to why Hope and Change II is not happening. Oh, it's no where near an end. Obama still has a re-election campaign in front of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 Oh, it's no where near an end. Obama still has a re-election campaign in front of him. That will be Hope and Change III, please try to keep up with the current party of Hope and Change. Please let me know when the economy is fixed so that I can formally thank the Tea Party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 That will be Hope and Change III. It's Still Bush's fault i'm sure he can run on that for at least another 2 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted November 27, 2010 Author Share Posted November 27, 2010 It's Still Bush's fault i'm sure he can run on that for at least another 2 years I will put you down as a no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 I will put you down as a no. You're keeping track of the "nos" for Obama in 2012? You're gonna need a bigger boat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts