Install Theme

Your web-browser is very outdated, and as such, this website may not display properly. Please consider upgrading to a modern, faster and more secure browser. Click here to do so.

The Sun's not yellow it's chicken

JTEM whining about this & that, plus the secrets of the universe and the occasional chicken recipe.

Posts tagged Republicans

Sep 24 '14
memegop:

Every Republican senator who is running for re-election voted to block building more VA facilities, just this February.Every.Single.One.‪#‎MemeGOP‬ ‪#‎UniteBlue‬

memegop:

Every Republican senator who is running for re-election voted to block building more VA facilities, just this February.
Every.
Single.
One.
‪#‎MemeGOP‬ ‪#‎UniteBlue‬

Sep 16 '14
Sep 8 '14
"

The list of “jobs bills” reveals that the legislation falls into three categories. The largest category is tax breaks and gifts for the oil, coal, and natural gas industries. The second category is regulatory repeal, which is also another gift for big business. The last category is attacks on Obamacare. Boehner’s jobs bills for veterans increased fees for services to vets.

Nowhere on the list of jobs bills that Boehner wrote about is there an actual real live jobs bill.

Boehner has given a list of 40 bills that fit the Republican ideology, but history tells us that cutting taxes for the wealthy, giving gifts to special interests, and rolling back regulations are three policy choices that do not create jobs. Speaker Boehner’s jobs bills would not put more people back to work. The House Republican definition of a jobs bill is different from what most people think of as job creation.

The only job that John Boehner is trying to protect with this bogus list is his own.

"

Jason Easley, "None of the 40 Jobs Bills That John Boehner Claims House Republicans Passed Create Jobs" (via holygoddamnshitballs)

NOTE:  Is Obama supposed to be against these bills?  It seems that as bad as Boehner and the Republican congress are, Obama hasn’t been one iota better.  He had a firm Democratic lock on both houses of congress for his first two years — coinciding with the worst days of the recession — and there was never any jobs bill.  So why would Obama start caring now?  He doesn’t have to worry about re-election…

Aug 30 '14

(Source: thebadgerman619)

Aug 21 '14
iammyfather:

jtem:

This is bullshit
First off, Obama is not going to get a Democratic congress, so it’s all just per-poisoning.  “See?  Did you see that?  Those big meanie head Republicans stopped me from doing the right thing, just like I told you they would!”
Secondly…
Obama had a comfortable Democratic majority in both houses for his first two years in office, and he never did any of the things he now pretends to care about.  Instead, he forced his own party to compromise heavily.
In his first two years alone, Obama took every Democratic healthcare plan off the table and pushed the conservative Heritage Foundation plan, the same one Mitt Romney used as a model when he was Governor of Massachusetts.  Obama rammed through more than a trillion dollars in tax cuts for the rich during his first two years, over the objections of his own party.  He wasn’t fighting the Republicans, he was fighting the Democrats.  And he refused to extend unemployment benefits. He never proposed a jobs bill, not during his first two years when he had the Democratic majority, and didn’t seem to care at all about pursuing a Democratic agenda.
Obama was elected with a mandate in 2008, and he threw it away.  He had a mandate for change, the perfect opportunity to usher in major reform, and he refused to use it. He simply had no interest what so ever.
All of the things Obama now pretends to want to do he could have gotten done in his first two years of office, and he never bothered to try. You’d have to be a fool to think that he’ll suddenly be on our side, let alone effective, if given a Democratic congress for his last two years… and you’d have to be a bigger fool to think he’ll get such a congress.
There’s no room for speculation here.  Obama had his Democratic majority — BOTH HOUSES — and he had them for two years.  He did virtually nothing.

The Republicans geared up early:  ”Filibusters skyrocket under Republican minority in 110th Congress.”

If you want to play the “Obama is incompetent” card, fine.  If you want to argue that Obama was less effective with a Democratic majority than Bill Clinton was facing a Republican majority, fine.  But I don’t see how that adds to your claim that if Obama only had what he already had, he’d do all the things he refused to do.
The Republicans aren’t going anywhere.  Even if by some miracle the Democrats took control of both houses after this election, it only places Obama IN THE EXACT SAME POSITION he was already in, back when he didn’t do any of the things you claim he wants to do.
Reagan was an effective leader, working with no fewer obstacles than Obama now faces.  Clinton was an effective leader with FAR GREATER OBSTACLES than Obama has been facing. If Obama is as incompetent as you both say he is then he should stop placing his ego above the good of the nation and resign. And, if he isn’t incompetent then he’s not doing the things you want him to do because he doesn’t believe in them.  He’s not on your side.

iammyfather:

jtem:

This is bullshit

First off, Obama is not going to get a Democratic congress, so it’s all just per-poisoning.  “See?  Did you see that?  Those big meanie head Republicans stopped me from doing the right thing, just like I told you they would!”

Secondly…

Obama had a comfortable Democratic majority in both houses for his first two years in office, and he never did any of the things he now pretends to care about.  Instead, he forced his own party to compromise heavily.

In his first two years alone, Obama took every Democratic healthcare plan off the table and pushed the conservative Heritage Foundation plan, the same one Mitt Romney used as a model when he was Governor of Massachusetts.  Obama rammed through more than a trillion dollars in tax cuts for the rich during his first two years, over the objections of his own party.  He wasn’t fighting the Republicans, he was fighting the Democrats.  And he refused to extend unemployment benefits. He never proposed a jobs bill, not during his first two years when he had the Democratic majority, and didn’t seem to care at all about pursuing a Democratic agenda.

Obama was elected with a mandate in 2008, and he threw it away.  He had a mandate for change, the perfect opportunity to usher in major reform, and he refused to use it. He simply had no interest what so ever.

All of the things Obama now pretends to want to do he could have gotten done in his first two years of office, and he never bothered to try. You’d have to be a fool to think that he’ll suddenly be on our side, let alone effective, if given a Democratic congress for his last two years… and you’d have to be a bigger fool to think he’ll get such a congress.

There’s no room for speculation here.  Obama had his Democratic majority — BOTH HOUSES — and he had them for two years.  He did virtually nothing.

The Republicans geared up early:  ”Filibusters skyrocket under Republican minority in 110th Congress.”

If you want to play the “Obama is incompetent” card, fine.  If you want to argue that Obama was less effective with a Democratic majority than Bill Clinton was facing a Republican majority, fine.  But I don’t see how that adds to your claim that if Obama only had what he already had, he’d do all the things he refused to do.

The Republicans aren’t going anywhere.  Even if by some miracle the Democrats took control of both houses after this election, it only places Obama IN THE EXACT SAME POSITION he was already in, back when he didn’t do any of the things you claim he wants to do.

Reagan was an effective leader, working with no fewer obstacles than Obama now faces.  Clinton was an effective leader with FAR GREATER OBSTACLES than Obama has been facing. If Obama is as incompetent as you both say he is then he should stop placing his ego above the good of the nation and resign. And, if he isn’t incompetent then he’s not doing the things you want him to do because he doesn’t believe in them.  He’s not on your side.

(Source: memegop)

Aug 2 '14
"A senior State Department official told CNN that the U.S. government made a mistake last year by focusing too tightly on bin Laden and “personalizing terrorism … describing parts of the elephant and not the whole beast.”"

The Bush administrations first report on terrorism (released four months before 9/11). The Bush administration, the Republicans were saying that Bill Clinton made a “Mistake” by “Focusing” on bin Laden. Bush took the focus off of bin Laden in April of 2001.

Remember this as the media tries to make out like 9/11 was Clinton’s fault. 

Jul 20 '14

think-progress:

Members of Congress are living off food stamps for a week to protest Republican cuts. It’s a challenge for them, but GOP cuts would hurt millions of everyday Americans

Question:

Why are we all still pretending they were “Republican” cuts when Obama signed them into law?

He could have vetoed them. 

And when has he ever explained his actions to the voters, apologized to the families affected by the cuts? Put another way:

Why are we supposed to excuse Obama for his unconscionable actions when he has never even asked us to?  As far as Obama is concerned, he did the right thing.  The Republicans weren’t wrong, and he did the right thing by signing that bill into law instead of vetoing it…

Enough already.  Obama and the congress are currently staging a ridiculous “For the children” (of illegal aliens) media fest, yet they turned their backs on Americans time & time again.  The hell with them, and the hell with “Think-progress” and anyone else who covers for Obama’s disgraceful actions.

Jul 1 '14

Republicans invented a crisis in Iraq out of the blue, and now flee like cowards, blaming everyone but themselves: The left got it right!

culturistjack:

jtem:

culturistjack:

They’re like flat earth people. They have perfectly clear evidence but choose to ignore it.

Cowards.

YOU ARE SO FULL OF SHIT!

What is happening in Iraq was guaranteed to happen and even predicted!

It was literally impossible for any government we left behind to withstand the TAINT of foreign interventionism.  And, yes, the left knew this and said it — GONG BACK BEFORE YOU CONSERVATIVES STARTED THE WAR!

Secondly, you radicalized the opposition.  A foreign army made up of western infidels invaded their country.  Suddenly even moderate Muslims were thinking that the hard-liners were right, that there really is a religious war going on… and there were foreign infidels in their streets to prove it!

Heck, even some Republicans — like Bush’s own Secretary of State — gave you some warnings in advance… “The Pottery Barn Rule”

Remember, "You break it, you own it."

From the moment we stepped foot inside Iraq, the United States became responsible for EVERYTHING.  Someone doesn’t have a job?  America’s fault!  The power went off?  America’s fault!  The price of something is too high?  America’s fault!  The road is in bad shape?  America’s fault! 

Starting the second the first U.S. soldier entered Iraq, we owned it and we owned every problem that everyone had.  Heck, America’s own lunatic Reich wing blame Obama for EVERYTHING, even their own policies (like Iraq). Why oh why would you dingbats think the Iraqis would be LESS pathetic than you, when they had a million times more things to complain about?

Stop being cowards.  You wanted the Iraq war, you got the Iraq war and you own every last thing that’s happening in Iraq.  Conservatives own the failure of Iraq.

- You assume that all conservatives support the Iraq War. Nope.

There were about ZERO conservatives willing to stand against the war until after the quagmire had been achieved. When Chuck Hagel came out against the war he was a U.S. Senator, but he chose not to run for re-election as his “Liberal” stance was so costly. And even as he was saying “This was a mistake” the Reich was deep into attacks on Democrats who were in vocal opposition. The Republican smear machine was in full swing. Max Cleland was subjected to a full-scale smear campaign, his patriotism question (“attacked,” really), and even associated WITH Saddam Hussein & Bin Laden in Republican ads… all in the election just a few months before the war’s start.


- You suggest this wouldn’t have happened without our intervention. Yes it would have.
-

Bullshit. It not only would NOT have happened, it did not happen. We had ten years of painful sanctions on Iraq, all attacking quality of life, infrastructure and limiting oil income, and STILL nobody could losen Saddam’s grip on the country.

We imposed “No Fly Zones” stripping Saddam of his one major advantage over rebels — air power — and STILL Saddam’s grip never faltered.

We attacked Iraq many, many times. No, not just the two wars but countless times between the two wars! Always as punishment for “This” or in response to “That,” but we never just randomly dropped bombs. Every time we targeted his military and the means for waging war. Still, no rebels could weaken Saddam’s grip.

The left still refuses to accept that this caliphate has always been inevitable because it is a direct result of the Islamic ideology.
- The left still refuses to discuss Jihad.

Which REQUIRES that the same be true of every Muslim state (doubly so for every middle eastern Muslim state) and not just Iraq.

You’re preaching Total War on over a billion people, a third Word War… even as you whine about the inevitable outcome in Iraq.

- The left still shuts down any frank discussion about how Islam damages our society.

This is coming from the same lunatic Reich wing that gave anthrax to Saddam, supplied Iran, protected Iran and had it’s President, Dubya Bush, holding hands & kissing in public with the king of Saudi Arabia.