Why did Democrats try to destroy the economy?

[tpfkaw]

Tell me, why would those irresponsible extremists attempt to destroy the entire US and world economy?

http://weaselzippers.us/2011/07/17/flashback-every-dem-senator-including-obama-voted-against-raising-debt-limit-in-2006/

[Lief 🗽]

Haven't you made this thread before? I could have sworn one of you right-wingers made a thread with exactly the same title like a month ago.

[anvi]

They cast a stupid symbolic vote knowing that the debt ceiling would be raised anyway because they were outvoted.  This time, the GOP House could really, not only symbolically, refuse to raise the debt ceiling.  But, just because the Dems were being boneheaded in 2006 doesn't mean the GOP House isn't being boneheaded now.  In fact, boneheadedness is the immediate and guaranteed result of the duopoly of political power in the U.S now.

[DrScholl]

Why are you so over the top?

[krazen1211]

They cast a stupid symbolic vote knowing that the debt ceiling would be raised anyway because they were outvoted.  This time, the GOP House could really, not only symbolically, refuse to raise the debt ceiling.  But, just because the Dems were being boneheaded in 2006 doesn't mean the GOP House isn't being boneheaded now.  In fact, boneheadedness is the immediate and guaranteed result of the duopoly of political power in the U.S now.

Surely, then, you have no problems with the symbolic votes going on now.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

They cast a stupid symbolic vote knowing that the debt ceiling would be raised anyway because they were outvoted.  This time, the GOP House could really, not only symbolically, refuse to raise the debt ceiling.  But, just because the Dems were being boneheaded in 2006 doesn't mean the GOP House isn't being boneheaded now.  In fact, boneheadedness is the immediate and guaranteed result of the duopoly of political power in the U.S now.

Surely, then, you have no problems with the symbolic votes going on now.

The difference is that the symbolic votes now are being taken by a party that actually controls one chamber. It was stupid when the Democrats did it in 2006 but now it can do real damage.

[DrScholl]

Surely, then, you have no problems with the symbolic votes going on now.

Are you not aware that Republicans control the House? There is nothing symbolic going on. They can't be the majority and the minority at the same time.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Surely, then, you have no problems with the symbolic votes going on now.

Sure.  But, if Republicans vote against it now, they have the power to destroy the economy.  Democrats in 2006 couldn't do that.  There's a difference, but you probably can't see that through your hack lenses.

[krazen1211]

Surely, then, you have no problems with the symbolic votes going on now.

Sure.  But, if Republicans vote against it now, they have the power to destroy the economy.  Democrats in 2006 couldn't do that.  There's a difference, but you probably can't see that through your hack lenses.

Interesting how you assume a future, and then get outraged over it.

Come August, if the debt ceiling is indeed raised, we'll see if all the lefties shut their mouths.

[krazen1211]

Surely, then, you have no problems with the symbolic votes going on now.

Are you not aware that Republicans control the House? There is nothing symbolic going on. They can't be the majority and the minority at the same time.

Sure they can. There are 2 houses of Congress, and the US Senate has yet to do its part.

In anycase, the Democrats have indeed voted against raising the debt ceiling a mere few months ago, setting aside the fact that such was an Obama policy.

[Bull Moose Base]

Still, the Democrats symbolic vote that posed no threat is not quite the same as the Republicans taking the entire economy hostage and threatening to sink it, which they actually can, in exchange for policy concessions.  The current GOP's behavior is more comparable to Al Qaeda than to the powerless Democratic minority of 2006.

[courts]

Still, the Democrats symbolic vote that posed no threat is not quite the same as the Republicans taking the entire economy hostage and threatening to sink it, which they actually can, in exchange for policy concessions.  The current GOP's behavior is more comparable to Al Qaeda than to the powerless Democratic minority of 2006.

Excessive hyperbole

[Bull Moose Base]

Still, the Democrats symbolic vote that posed no threat is not quite the same as the Republicans taking the entire economy hostage and threatening to sink it, which they actually can, in exchange for policy concessions.  The current GOP's behavior is more comparable to Al Qaeda than to the powerless Democratic minority of 2006.

Excessive hyperbole

Both Al Qaeda and the GOP use fear of their destructive behavior to scare off intruders from what they consider "holy land" (billionaires' bank accounts or the Arabian peninsula).  They also both view sinking the American economy as a strategy for their political goals.  Realistically, I'd say they both also lost sleep over the news that Bin Laden had been killed.

[DrScholl]

Sure they can. There are 2 houses of Congress, and the US Senate has yet to do its part.

In anycase, the Democrats have indeed voted against raising the debt ceiling a mere few months ago, setting aside the fact that such was an Obama policy.

No, they cannot and I wasn't talking about the Senate. The House is trying to pretend as if they are the minority and be the majority at the same time, which is impossible to do. It makes no sense to say they can be both.

[opebo]

Still, the Democrats symbolic vote that posed no threat is not quite the same as the Republicans taking the entire economy hostage and threatening to sink it, which they actually can, in exchange for policy concessions.  The current GOP's behavior is more comparable to Al Qaeda than to the powerless Democratic minority of 2006.

Excessive hyperbole

Both Al Qaeda and the GOP use fear of their destructive behavior to scare off intruders from what they consider "holy land" (billionaires' bank accounts or the Arabian peninsula).  They also both view sinking the American economy as a strategy for their political goals.  Realistically, I'd say they both also lost sleep over the news that Bin Laden had been killed.

Correct and well defended, Joementos.  And I would add that both want to kill a lot of Americans - particularly poor Americans.

[memphis]

Still, the Democrats symbolic vote that posed no threat is not quite the same as the Republicans taking the entire economy hostage and threatening to sink it, which they actually can, in exchange for policy concessions.  The current GOP's behavior is more comparable to Al Qaeda than to the powerless Democratic minority of 2006.

Excessive hyperbole

Both Al Qaeda and the GOP use fear of their destructive behavior to scare off intruders from what they consider "holy land" (billionaires' bank accounts or the Arabian peninsula).  They also both view sinking the American economy as a strategy for their political goals.  Realistically, I'd say they both also lost sleep over the news that Bin Laden had been killed.

Correct and well defended, Joementos.  And I would add that both want to kill a lot of Americans - particularly poor Americans.

I would think Al-Qaeda would be more concerned with high-profile richers. What do they care if a few million poors die for lack of basic medical care?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Still, the Democrats symbolic vote that posed no threat is not quite the same as the Republicans taking the entire economy hostage and threatening to sink it, which they actually can, in exchange for policy concessions.  The current GOP's behavior is more comparable to Al Qaeda than to the powerless Democratic minority of 2006.

Excessive hyperbole

Both Al Qaeda and the GOP use fear of their destructive behavior to scare off intruders from what they consider "holy land" (billionaires' bank accounts or the Arabian peninsula).  They also both view sinking the American economy as a strategy for their political goals.  Realistically, I'd say they both also lost sleep over the news that Bin Laden had been killed.

Correct and well defended, Joementos.  And I would add that both want to kill a lot of Americans - particularly poor Americans.

I would think Al-Qaeda would be more concerned with high-profile richers. What do they care if a few million poors die for lack of basic medical care?

Well, to be fair, al-Qaeda wants to kill out of malice, whereas crucifying the weak is just an unfortunate side-effect of the GOP policy of worshiping the strong that they don't lose any sleep over. So the people al-Qaeda wants to kill are less innocent than the people the GOP doesn't care enough to not kill, whereas al-Qaeda has it as a more central part of their goal.

[King]

Too much excessive hyperbole will cause a stroke, youngin'.

[Gustaf]

Has this thread seen a single non-hackish post so far? (discounting King and his usual joke post)

[Ban my account ffs!]

Tell me, why would those irresponsible extremists attempt to destroy the entire US and world economy?

http://weaselzippers.us/2011/07/17/flashback-every-dem-senator-including-obama-voted-against-raising-debt-limit-in-2006/

So you admit not raising the debt ceiling would ruin the economy?  If you do that, then you have to admit that government spending is good for the economy.  Or are you just trying to have it both ways, as per usual?