Who said this?

[RAGNAR]

The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that “the buck stops here.” Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.

Senator Obama made these excellent points back in 2006. He was adamant that we shouldn't raise the debt ceiling past $9T . . .

A little too much wagyu beef tartar on the golf course will do that to you, I guess . . .

[chrisncate]

Tell us all about that new dance called the macerena while you're at it..

This quote has been hammered out there by Fox and the rest of the right wing media for well over 8 months now...

Some more recent hypocrisy news might be the fact that Michelle Bachman's mortgage was a Freddie Mac affair... you know, one of the same government programs she rails against?

[RAGNAR]

Originally Posted by chrisncate

Tell us all about that new dance called the macerena while you're at it..

Well, if the people responsible for that tune and dance ever oppose mundane art vehemently while they're in office, I'll mention it.

This quote has been hammered out there by Fox and the rest of the right wing media for well over 8 months now...

Proving nothing about the claim that the man will say and do anything in order to turn the US into a commune.

Some more recent hypocrisy news might be the fact that Michelle Bachman's mortgage was a Freddie Mac affair...

First, most mortgages go through there.

Second, once you're taxed you owe it to yourself to participate in any government program you honestly qualify for, as your capacity to stand on your own has been severely curtailed by both the seizing of a huge chunk of your income, and the decimation of the productivity the nation as a whole would be enjoying had government limited itself to protecting Rights.

you know, one of the same government programs she rails against?

She's right to detest that accountable to no one agency that's disguised as a corporation. And as I said above, so long as she didn't violate any laws or regulations, I see no problem with her using options afforded to her by a government that taxes her at ~50%.

We now return you to the facts: This nation is on the verge of economic collapse in the name of redistribution and ever-increasing regulation, it will remain there for decades to come, and Obama's presidency will be forever linked with this Pink as Pink can be and not be Red disaster -- and rightly so.

[erps]

Along the same lines, three senators were chastising the Republican's for not compromising on the debt ceiling. More do as a say and not as I do:

A look at Reid's record, however, shows that in the last decade his own voting on the issue of the debt ceiling is not only partisan but perfectly partisan. According to "The Debt Limit: History and Recent Increases," a January 2010 report by the Congressional Research Service, the Senate has passed ten increases to the debt limit since 2000. Reid never voted to increase the debt ceiling when Republicans were in control of the Senate, and he always voted to increase the debt ceiling when Democrats were in control.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: For Reid, Durbin, and Obama, a (very) partisan record on debt ceiling | Byron York | Beltway Confidential | Washington Examiner

Same thing for Durbin. Evidence is pretty strong that they vote for a debt increase, only if the democrats control the senate. So we have the pot calling the kettle black on national t.v.

I would suspect that this type of partisan voting is present on the Republican side of the aisle too.

[SloopJonB]

Originally Posted by erps

Along the same lines, three senators were chastising the Republican's for not compromising on the debt ceiling. More do as a say and not as I do:

Same thing for Durbin. Evidence is pretty strong that they vote for a debt increase, only if the democrats control the senate. So we have the pot calling the kettle black on national t.v.

I would suspect that this type of partisan voting is present on the Republican side of the aisle too.

Politicians are like pro wrestlers - they look like they're mortal enemies killing each other when the cameras are rolling and then they go out for a beer together.

[chrisncate]

Well, if the people responsible for that tune and dance ever oppose mundane art vehemently while they're in office, I'll mention it.

I mentioned it because it's very old, just like your quote.

Proving nothing about the claim that the man will say and do anything in order to turn the US into a commune.

I see "commune" is your new personal buzzword. What a joke, to imply this closeted republican president even remotely resembles a Democrat, let alone a commune starting hippy. You're out of your mind.

First, most mortgages go through there.

That's why I said a Freddie Mac affair, and not a Freddie Mac "mortgage". Why must everything be spoon fed to you?

Second, once you're taxed you owe it to yourself to participate in any government program you honestly qualify for, as your capacity to stand on your own has been severely curtailed by both the seizing of a huge chunk of your income, and the decimation of the productivity the nation as a whole would be enjoying had government limited itself to protecting Rights.

Spoke like a true right wing hypocrite: No principles, no spine, and total hypocrisy. Reminds me of the faux patriotism you people (and by you people, I mean you people) love to exhibit: "Support the troops" without serving, take government handouts while railing against them, spend like drunken sailors when you have the reigns of power, yet cry debt/deficit when out of power, etc etc.

She's right to detest that accountable to no one agency that's disguised as a corporation. And as I said above, so long as she didn't violate any laws or regulations, I see no problem with her using options afforded to her by a government that taxes her at ~50%.

The problem is the hypocrisy. But in your hyper partisan world, you can't see hypocrisy in your candidate for p.o.t.u.s.

We now return you to the facts...

And once again, Ragnar achieves low earth orbit powered solely by the contents of his own ass...

[RAGNAR]

Originally Posted by chrisncate

I mentioned it because it's very old, just like your quote.

"We always know what you mean, Joey."

I see "commune" is your new personal buzzword.

"I'll alert the media."

What a joke, to imply this closeted republican president even remotely resembles a Democrat, let alone a commune starting hippy. You're out of your mind.

You know McGovern lost, right? You also know that he adjusted his POV dramatically after he actually tried to open a small business so he could make ends meet, and failed . . .

That's why I said a Freddie Mac affair, and not a Freddie Mac "mortgage".

Got it.

Why must everything be spoon fed to you?

Because we live in a nanny state . . .

Spoke like a true right wing hypocrite: No principles, no spine, and total hypocrisy.

You missed the point.

It's not hypocritical if you're forced into paying for such schemes. What would be hypocritical is if we managed to undo FM, and she then came out for a new agency/program that does exactly what FM did. (FM is a disaster, one acknowledged as one by even the most left leaning DCers.)

Reminds me of the faux patriotism you people (and by you people, I mean you people) love to exhibit: "Support the troops" without serving, take government handouts while railing against them, spend like drunken sailors when you have the reigns of power, yet cry debt/deficit when out of power, etc etc.

-- "Support the troops" was a knee-jerk slogan, one that gained popularity quickly because we all remember how your intellectual ancestors treated Vietnam Vets. And I see no problem with those who haven't served expressing support for our vets. Lord knows your side did/does everything it could/can to demean them.

-- As long as you're forced to pay in there's nothing hypocritical about using programs you qualify for. What would be hypocritical would be for someone who opposed such programs to come out for them if they're ever done away with, for example.

-- I was against all of the spending the GOP is responsible for. And there's never been a single DC politician that reflects my beliefs so you might want to address this obfuscation to someone else.

The problem is the hypocrisy. But in your hyper partisan world, you can't see hypocrisy in your candidate for p.o.t.u.s.

I'm not a member of any party, I'm not a Republican, I wasn't much of a supporter of anyone after Reagan, not even an all-out fan of Reagan's. (At some point you have to edit the text you C&P so as to make sure it fits the context.)

And once again, Ragnar achieves low earth orbit powered solely by the contents of his own ass...

I'm afraid that that power is also provided to me by our nanny state . . . I'd thank you for it, but apparently, we all have a right to it.

[RAGNAR]

Now that we got that out of the way, CnC: what do you have to say about BO's 2006 points? What's different at this point? Why is it OK for us to carry a $14.5T credit cap just five years after he spoke those wonderful words?

[chrisncate]

It's not hypocritical if you're forced into paying for such schemes.

Wrong. It's the height of hypocrisy and lack of principle when you campaign against this program, yet use it yourself.

It's as bad as her fruity hubby suckling the teet of medicare for his "clinic" that claims to "treat" homosexuality, while they both campaign against medicare.

"Support the troops"...I see no problem with those who haven't served expressing support for our vets.

I can assume then, by your logic expressed above, that Al Gore exhibits no hypocrisy then with his green agenda while leaving a massive carbon footprint? Noted.

I'm not a member of any party, I'm not a Republican, I wasn't much of a supporter of anyone after Reagan, not even an all-out fan of Reagan's. (At some point you have to edit the text you C&P so as to make sure it fits the context.)

Oh, you're a tea partier, no doubt.

I'm afraid that that power is also provided to me by our nanny state . . . I'd thank you for it, but apparently we all have a right to this sort of thing.

Yup, tea party rhetoric of the Ayn Rand flavor, through and through.

[SloopJonB]

Originally Posted by chrisncate

And once again, Ragnar achieves low earth orbit powered solely by the contents of his own ass...

Too perfect for words!!!! ROFLMAO X 1000