The best in arts & entertainment, news, pop culture, and your mom since 2002.

[Total: 26    Average: 3.1/5]
47 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 5491
Rating: 3.1
Category:
Date: 10/09/13 08:40 AM

47 Responses to Not More Than 20 Years [Pic]

  1. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 8:40 am
    Link: Not More Than 20 Years - It seems Tea Partiers are confusing patriotism with sedition.
  2. Profile photo of DromEd
    DromEd Male 40-49
    1945 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 8:56 am

  3. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 8:57 am
    Let me remind you that the sequester is also written into law. The very same sequester that Democrats will soon be trying to prevent the implementation of.

    Also, this is a ridiculous stretch of the word "force" within the context given. The entire premise is just silly.
  4. Profile photo of panth753
    panth753 Female 18-29
    9259 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 9:03 am
    I`m with you on this one Drom.
  5. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 9:29 am
    There`s only one way I can respond to this...

    ALL HAIL GENERALISSIMO OBAMA!!!


    LET HIM WRITE THE LAWS!!
    LET HIM MAKE WAR WITHOUT DELAY!!!
    LET HIM PUNISH ALL THE DISSENTERS WHO STAND IN HIS WAY!!!

    OBAMA IS WITH US ALL AND HE WILL SEE TO SOCIETY`S NEEDS!!!

    ALL!!!
    HAIL!!!
    GENERLISSIMO!!!
    O-BA-MA!!!
  6. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33142 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 9:49 am
    So Obama, Reid and Pelosi will go to jail for 20 years?

    I`m fine with that!

    As for @Squrlz4`s intended message:

  7. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36866 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 9:52 am

    Someone came up with this idea and at no point did it occur to them that it was a stupid thought?
  8. Profile photo of djwajda
    djwajda Male 40-49
    885 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 10:15 am
    Sorry, but if this is the stand someone wants to take on this then it starts with a 20 yr sentence for Obama, down thru the senate and house, ensuring each and every member of congress gets the same. Again, it`s NOT just one party playing games here.
  9. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 10:34 am
    Is this a stretch? Yes, but not by much.

    Here`s the definition of *sedition* from Britannica:

    Crime of creating a revolt, disturbance, or violence against lawful civil authority with the intent to cause its overthrow or destruction. Because it is limited to organizing and encouraging opposition to government rather than directly participating in its overthrow, sedition is regarded as falling one step short of the more serious crime of treason.
    Here`s the situation that the Tea Partiers have put our nation in:

    Either:

    (A) Capitulate to an attempt at extortion that will do lasting damage to American democracy; OR

    (B) Incapacitate the federal gov`t and, should the debt limit not be raised, do serious economic damage.

    Add to this the fact that many Tea Partiers openly express contempt for the gov`t and a desire to tear down as much of it as possible.

    If that isn`t close to sedition, I don`t know what is.
  10. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 11:00 am
    @Squrlz

    Please keep in mind your abhorrence of checks and balances next time a Republican is in power. That is all.
  11. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 11:01 am
    S4S: I think you`ve been dipping into the fermented pumpkin juice too much.
  12. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 11:41 am
    I`ll just leave you all with this quote:

    "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. I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America`s debt limit." Barrack Obama, 2006
  13. Profile photo of PopCap
    PopCap Male 30-39
    730 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 12:01 pm
    Yep. I would agree with this. This covers Obama and everyone who voted for him in the last election. Let`s do this!
  14. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 12:08 pm
    @ CrakrJak: I absolutely agree that your quote of Obama`s there showcases hypocrisy. It`s the difference between an up-and-coming politician doing some irresponsible grandstanding (then) and a president who has a lot more responsibility on his shoulders (now). That said, Obama`s vote in 2006 didn`t result in a government shutdown.
  15. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 12:18 pm
    @ PopCap: OK, I`ll play. How in any way does voting for Obama in the last election meet the definition of sedition per United States Code 18, Section 2384?
  16. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 12:32 pm
    I guess we should also lock up the Democrats who opted for the eight (8) shutdowns during the Reagan administration. Oh, of course we shouldn`t forget the Republicans from the Carter/Clinton eras!

    This CONSTANT whining is complete and utter nonsense.
  17. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 12:43 pm
    @ HumanAction: From having debated with you previously, I know you`re smart. But you`re also (compared to me at least) young and don`t bring a lot of perspective to the table.

    The first presidency I can remember in any significant way was Richard Nixon`s: I remember his televised resignation. In the first presidential election I voted in, I voted for Ronald Reagan--because I used to be a Republican.

    Having witnessed the presidencies of Nixon, Carter, Ford, Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton, Bush 2, and now Obama, I can tell you that there has NEVER been a government shutdown remotely like this one. You`re comparing firecrackers to a nuclear bomb.

    Most of the earlier shutdowns were over relatively small budget items, like the MX Missile program--issues that were discrete and quickly resolved. Many of those prior shutdowns occurred over the weekend and were solved by the following Monday night.

    This is NOT checks and balances; it is NOT business as usual.
  18. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 12:44 pm
    Monday

    Food and Drug Safety Act (H.J.Res. 77): provides immediate funding for the Food and Drug Administration. (Passed in the House 235-162)

    Tuesday

    Head Start for Low-Income Children Act (H.J.Res. 84): provides critical education funding to support Head Start programs across the country. (Passed in the House 248-168)

    Deficit Reduction and Economic Growth Working Group Act (H.R. 3273): creates a bipartisan, bicameral working group charged with beginning negotiations, resolving the differences between the House and Senate, and helping re-open the government and address our debt. (Passed in the House 224-197)

    Federal Worker Pay Fairness Act (H.J. Res. 89): ensures that federal employees who are still on the job during Democrats` shutdown are paid on time. (Passed in the House 420-0)

    All the Dems in the House voted for it! What do all of these have in common? Blocked by Senate.
  19. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 12:47 pm
    @Squrlz

    You`re comparing firecrackers to a nuclear bomb.
    I doubt this entirely, but only time will tell. It`s certainly much too early to lay that claim. Either way, the principle is still the same: the House does not agree to the budget; this is the entire debate regardless of specific laws.

    Who are you to claim that shutting the government down over peanuts is somehow more responsible and justifiable than shutting it down over cashews?
  20. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 12:54 pm
    @ HumanAction: Peanuts? Cashews? Are you trying to make me hungry?

  21. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 1:18 pm
    @Squrlz

    Peanuts? Cashews? Are you trying to make me hungry?
    Lol - it`s the first thing that popped into my head; I had just had a Trail Mix bar with peanuts and almonds.
  22. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33142 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 1:32 pm
    It`s true @Squrlz4, we`re going to "stoneWALNUT you with NUTTY distractions until you PEANUT stand it any longer!

    Are you claiming the ALL the OWS people, ALL the "Anti-War" people, and ALL the protests since Nixon should ALL be placed in jail for 20 years?

    OWS = Overthrow the gov`t entirely
    "Anti-War" = Overthrow Bush entirely
    & etc.

    No, the actual people responsible are Obama & the Democrats, NOT US citizens exercising their RIGHT to Free Speech and RIGHT to Free Assembly...
  23. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33142 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 1:36 pm
    "We have to pass the Bill to find out what`s in it" - Nancy Pelosi

    Now that Americans KNOW what`s in it? They don`t like it! They have a right to request it be CHANGED... but Obama said NO NEGOTIATIONS PERIOD.

    How many times can you ignore this fact?

    Republican House: legally doing it`s job!
    Democrat Senate: refusing to vote! (also legal)
    Obama: refusing to even TALK about it!

    The Great Orator! The Great Negotiator! NOBEL PEACE PRIZE WINNER!
  24. Profile photo of broizfam
    broizfam Male 60-69
    4891 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 1:42 pm
    @HumanAction,
    "this is a ridiculous stretch of the word "force" within the context given"

    I`m no Republican but I have to agree with you here. This was not so much an application of force than a refusal to act. When there are major budget impasses I can understand that the difficulty may lead to a shutdown. This is a case in which a previously passed and approved law has stuck in someone`s craw and they`ve decided to cause a shutdown until they get their way, just like any recalcitrant, uncooperative child. The fact that something more or less similar happened at times in the past because of the Democrats (I`m not a Democrat, either) doesn`t make it any less stupid, infantile and irresponsible this time. They don`t like a law (I can understand that) that was passed on their watch so they`ll punish the coutry until the President submits? F*kking idiots!
  25. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 1:58 pm
    @ 5Cats: Ay yi yi. You`re arguing against something in error because you misunderstood something (again).

    I am a fervent supporter of the citizens` rights to free speech and peacable assembly. *Sedition*, in the context of this graphic, is referring to the Tea Party congresspersons who are now trying to hinder or delay the execution of settled law by attaching a proviso for its undoing to a piece of unrelated must-pass legislation.
  26. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 2:01 pm
    @ HumanAction and 5Cats: I can tell you both exactly how this is going to play out. It`s a no-brainer. HumanAction, you`re smart enough and mentally flexible enough that I think you`ll be able to accept it. 5Cats` ability to accept a truth he`ll find uncomfortable I`m much less sure of.

    Lemme know if you want my read on this, HumanAction.
  27. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 2:25 pm
    @Squrlz

    Go for it. You tell me yours, and I`ll tell you mine. ;-)
  28. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 2:31 pm
    @ HumanAction: All right, here we go.

    1. Obama won`t give in an INCH on Obamacare. It`s a matter of legacy and pride and Obama`s a bit of an egomaniac. (Did you know I don`t particularly like him? The IAB crowd wrongly has been assuming I`m a big fan, but that`s yet another misunderstanding--but I digress.) The GOP misread this because Obama has ALWAYS given in previously, as with the stimulus. Why? Because, at heart, he`s more a centrist than a liberal; he`s more interested in making a name for himself in the history books as The Grand Bargainer than in being a progressive (which goes to show how off the mark all those nitwits are who claim he`s a socialist--ha!--if only). Anyway, point #1 is that Obama won`t be budging. Aside from some flexibility on the length of the CR, he`s set in stone. The GOP misread this one massively. This is about legacy and pride and Obama`s signature legislation. Fuhgeddaboudit.

    (Cont`d)
  29. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 2:37 pm
    2. Boehner`s going to fall on his sword. Why? Because Big Money pulls the strings, particularly with the GOP. All those insurance companies that are profiting MASSIVELY from the mandate--you thing *they`re* OK with the Tea Partiers delaying or gutting that mandate? Ha! Every non-Tea-Party Republican in Congress is being treated to repeated @asswhippings by the Big Boys. We already see the fractures in the ranks. This will play out uncomfortably because Boehner is going to play for time as long as he can hoping he can find a way out without losing the speakership. Will he be able to find an exit that saves his scalp? Maybe: I give him a 50-50 chance of somehow being able to deflect the Tea Partiers` wrath. How long will it take before Boehner blinks? I expect we`ll be going up to the 15th or 16th--at which point the markets start to tank and the Big Money pressure on Boehner becomes unbearable.

    (Cont`d)
  30. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 2:43 pm
    3. So the irony of all this is that the most important thing Obama will do in his presidency--avoid allowing a precedent for a small faction to overturn law that`s been settled by majority rule--he`ll do because of vanity and ego--yet it will be recorded in the history books as an act of bravery and statesmanship. Boehner could also grab a bit of glory if he plays his cards right--"He surrendered his speakership for the good of the country"--when in fact his arm was being twisted to the point of breaking by Big Insurance and then Big Finance.

    So there you have it: my read on the situation.
  31. Profile photo of ggolbez
    ggolbez Male 18-29
    1933 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 2:50 pm
    What`s the name of that cool §?
  32. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 2:50 pm
    @Squrlz

    Well, that`s an interesting take on it. Probably unsurprisingly, I have a very different perspective:

    1. I don`t think this fight was ever about Obamacare; that`s a calculated ploy - a distraction from the real debate, which is the budget. The Republicans are haggling and purposefully sent out a low-ball offer they knew would get refused. They never expected any concessions on Obamacare.

    However, they are now finding themselves in relatively good position to get the budget numbers they want. Democrats in the Senate have already agreed upon a budget that is essentially everything the GOP proposed.

    They won`t even have time to fight the sequester. Once the GOP caves on Obamacare (which they will), then the blame of the still ongoing shutdown could begin to shift to Democrats who oppose the sequester.

    (Cont.)
  33. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 2:54 pm
    2. The GOP doesn`t really have anything to lose. Let`s face it, they weren`t doing well in the polls to begin with; they`re essentially down to just their constituents backing them.

    Therefore, by forcing the issue, they don`t really have anything to lose; it`s not like their constituents are going to drop them. On the other hand, they do have the opportunity to lower public opinion of Obama and the Democratic Senate. If they drag this out long enough and play their cards right, they might be able to hurt the Democrats in the polls more than they hurt themselves.

    It`s a calculated risk.

    (Cont.)
  34. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 2:59 pm
    3. Lastly, I don`t think Obama thought the GOP and the House were actually willing to go through with it. Strangely, the shutdown is, very generally, exactly what the New Republicans (as I call them) want - less government.

    Let`s face it, we can`t "starve the beast" through tax, debt limits, sequesters, or any of that. So, that only leaves us with the option of shutting down the non-essential parts of the government.

    It`s actually somewhat brilliant. The New Republicans get an immediate and drastic reduction in the government; meanwhile, the truly sensitive government programs (Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, Military) keep on running.

    By fighting this make-believe war against Obamacare, the GOP my actually be propping themselves up for a big win on budget reform. I wouldn`t be surprised if this dragged on all month.
  35. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 3:05 pm
    Well, per your response, interesting--but we have a different take. I think this is VERY much about Obamacare; I don`t think those 30 Tea Partiers are taking part in any ploy. They were ELECTED by gerrymandered districts to stop Obamacare any way possible. It`s a fight that Boehner, savvy as he is, didn`t want and recognized as a fool`s errand; but if he doesn`t have the Tea Partiers behind him, he loses the speakership.

    I can`t conceive of this going much past a default. I work in finance; the repercussions, world-wide, would be enormous (probably more than you can conceive unless you`re familiar with bond ratings and mutual fund guidelines--not trying to condescend, but it`s a big topic and would take at least another 1,000 char post to touch on).

    In your read, what do you see becoming of Boehner? You think he`s going to hold onto the speakership?
  36. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 3:13 pm
    @Squrlz

    I can`t conceive of this going much past a default.
    I don`t see it coming to that. Even if they don`t raise the debt limit (which is highly unlikely, IMHO), there is still plenty of tax dollars to make the interest payments on a month-to-month basis - with appropriate cuts elsewhere.

    If - and it`s a big if - it comes to that and the country defaults, then I would expect to see the government shut down indefinitely. At that point, there`s no more leverage and no more reason to end it.

    As for Boehner, I think he`s going to be fine. I don`t predict he`ll lose his seat. I haven`t seen enough backlash from Republicans to make me think otherwise. Then again, I also don`t think the GOP went into this fight expecting to kill Obamacare to begin with, so I suppose my answer is a bit biased in that regard.
  37. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 3:15 pm
    @ HumanAction: Well, time will tell on all this, won`t it? Nice chatting with you. Time for dinner here. TTYL
  38. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 3:35 pm
    @Squrlz

    Indeed it will. As always, it`s nice to get someone else`s perspective.
  39. Profile photo of djwajda
    djwajda Male 40-49
    885 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 6:55 pm
    I gotta say I`m impressed at this actual...debate.

    Refreshing not to read people going for the jugular over this stuff.

  40. Profile photo of LemonCurry
    LemonCurry Male 40-49
    1106 posts
    October 9, 2013 at 9:37 pm
    sorry, unrelated:

    "... who opted for the eight (8) shutdowns ..."
    --------
    why do we add extra numbers? do we think people can`t read the word (but then they wouldn`t understand the sentence anyway)? or is it a check sum to make sure that the sentence is still in order?

    does anyone every write " ... eight (9) ... " see whether people are really paying attention?
  41. Profile photo of Shelworth
    Shelworth Male 50-59
    389 posts
    October 10, 2013 at 5:02 am
    Read that, then think of all the crap Obama`s pulled with picking and choosing which laws to enforce...
  42. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    October 10, 2013 at 6:19 am
    @LemonCurry

    why do we add extra numbers?
    Lol. It`s just habit for me. I write SOPs frequently and always use that format.
  43. Profile photo of Big_And_Tall
    Big_And_Tall Male 40-49
    36 posts
    October 10, 2013 at 9:01 am
    So...where`s the president in that picture???
  44. Profile photo of papajon0s1
    papajon0s1 Male 40-49
    579 posts
    October 10, 2013 at 11:35 am
    Oh Good Lord puuuhhhllleeaase!!!!! Spare me! You could put Obama up dozens of times over! And for that matter any number of other politicians of both parties!
  45. Profile photo of Kalimata
    Kalimata Male 30-39
    661 posts
    October 10, 2013 at 12:07 pm
    I cannot believe the depths that this thread has sunk to...

    Seriously, folks, this is an IAB thread about politics, Squrlz and Human what gives you two the right to discuss this issue without slander, rage, insults, and without Oldollie squawking about the communists and socialists?

    I`m ashamed for all of you who are being reasonable and respectful...

    Oh wait, I mean the total opposite.
  46. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33142 posts
    October 10, 2013 at 12:58 pm
    @Squrlz4: Your prognostication is `possible` but MY crystal ball sees things differently:

    1 Obama will cave! He WILL agree to changes AND a one-year delay.
    He will then claim victory! How he <<Stared Down The Tea Party... Chicago Style>> and rate himself the Best President In Modern History!

    Oh wait! he already DID rate himself the best! :-)

    2 `Big Money` WANTS the ACA! They`ll make BILLIONS MORE in profits! If Boehner succeeds, THEN he`s in trouble! You think the Tea Party = Big Money? Oy Vey! The GOP may win the ACA fight, but will cave in the budget battle, sadly.

    3 Obama is MORE concerned with his image than he is of doing his sworn duty. At least you`ve noticed this... that`s a start!
  47. Profile photo of Draculya
    Draculya Male 40-49
    14654 posts
    October 11, 2013 at 8:30 pm
    Extrajudicial Drone Strike

Leave a Reply