Obama betrays his supporters

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
You brought it up.

No, I didn't bring up pork barrel spending. You did.

Originally posted by Metal Brain
No, I didn't bring up pork barrel spending. You did.

You said:

Nobody should vote for a bill cluttered with multiple issues when they don't like one or more of them. A bill should contain one issue at a time.

A bill being cluttered with unrelated issues is a symptom of pork barrel politics.

Originally posted by no1marauder
So an Obama veto of the spending bill over this issue would have shut down the government. How would it be worth it?

It has happened before. They already kicked the can down the road (so to speak) and they could have done it again. You act like it would be the end of the world. Get real.

Obama should have used his veto power and let the Bush tax cuts expire a long time ago but did not. He needs to grow a spine and let the American people decide who to blame. He had a lot of support with letting the Bush tax cuts expire and he let that golden opportunity pass by. Now the cluttered bills will never end and he has nobody to blame but himself, but I doubt he really wants to do the right thing. He takes his orders from elitists behind the scenes. He is really just a puppet doing exactly as he is told. The Bush family is the same way. Most presidents are elected because they are hired to be good little puppets.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
You said:

Nobody should vote for a bill cluttered with multiple issues when they don't like one or more of them. A bill should contain one issue at a time.

A bill being cluttered with unrelated issues is a symptom of pork barrel politics.

It can be, but not every cluttered bill has pork spending.
You are purposely digressing and trying to defend it. Give it up.

Originally posted by Metal Brain
It has happened before. They already kicked the can down the road (so to speak) and they could have done it again. You act like it would be the end of the world. Get real.

Obama should have used his veto power and let the Bush tax cuts expire a long time ago but did not. He needs to grow a spine and let the American people decide who to blame. He had ...[text shortened]... y is the same way. Most presidents are elected because they are hired to be good little puppets.

Let me get this straight. You're upset that Obama didn't veto a bill because it contains a segment that loosens big guvamint's grip over private businesses.

Did I get that right?

Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
Let me get this straight. You're upset that Obama didn't veto a bill because it contains a segment that loosens big guvamint's grip over private businesses.

Did I get that right?

This is about genetically engineering, not just any business. You talk like it is about all businesses.
what if I did want government to have a tighter grip on big corporations? What's it to you?

Originally posted by Metal Brain
This is about genetically engineering, not just any business. You talk like it is about all businesses.
what if I did want government to have a tighter grip on big corporations? What's it to you?

It's just hilarious how you can go against your own supposed Conservative principles when it comes to bashing Obama.

I can say that about any business. Kellogg isn't just any business. They make food we consume so of course we have to regulate them. Ford isn't just any business. They put cars on our roads so of course the government has to make sure they're clean and safe. I can go on but you get the idea.

These are actually thing I agree with, but it's entertaining to see you right-wingers follow suit in the name of bashing Obama.

Originally posted by Metal Brain
Sounds like you are an apologist for poison pill amendments in legislation. A president with a backbone would:

1) Veto the bill in protest of the poison pill amendment
2) Call for another bill without the poison pill amendment
3) Use the bully pulpit to call for an end to poison pill amendments
4) Stress the counter productive effects of poison pi ...[text shortened]... dments. Seems to me Obama has no problem with it. Just a lame excuse to be a corrupt politician.

I'm with you on this, not so sure about how bad the legislation is.

Originally posted by Metal Brain
Your willful ignorance amazes me. These bio-techs that create GMOs are also chemical companies that promote the sale of their herbicides.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/24/us-monsanto-roundup-idUSTRE71N4XN20110224

Is that necessarily a bad thing? The goals of both are parallel, and have a seemingly possible collaborative goal. Only if you presume that for a few dollars profits, the corporate entity would kill off its potential consumers intentionally is it risky.

All in all, I'd rather have a rather wealthy entity controlling experimental stuff, than the government. If it goes wrong, Monsanto can be sued. When has a government agency been sued because they screwed up?

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
AFAIK Congress must pass every budget, so any budget plans the Obama administration has can be overridden by Congress.

Any budget of the President can be rejected or modified. It can only be "overridden" if the President vetoes it, and there is sufficient will of both houses to override the veto.

Other than that Congress has the responsibility to pass a budget, starting in the House. Then the Senate gets its turn, and the President can veto it. For more than four years, including two where Obama had a friendly House and Senate, there hasn't been a budget.

Originally posted by Metal Brain
LOL!!!

That is ridiculous! The approval rate of congress is pathetic but those congressmen keep getting re-elected. The fact that you think voting out people they don't like is how it works in reality just shows how much reality eludes you.

The simplicity of your mind is amusing. You think about how things should work, but you don't even look at ho ...[text shortened]... s largely an incumbent nation, no matter how unhappy Americans are with their representatives.

About 10% of House seats are in play in most elections. Gerrymandering by both parties make most House seats "safe".

I have a solution. Reduce the pay, so that nobody wants to stay in Congress for a long time. Eliminate all pensions, and all residual health care for Congress. Make Congressional salaries the average of private sector workers in their State. Then only people interested in true public service would run, and they would not stay forever. Oh and cut the budget for Congressional staff and perks.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
A Congressman representing a district in Nebraska is going to push policies that will help him/her get re-elected in the district in Nebraska. A Congressman representing Americans will push policies that will help him/her get re-elected in America.

You are right there. Everyone hates Congress, but loves their Congressman.

Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
It's just hilarious how you can go against your own supposed Conservative principles when it comes to bashing Obama.

I can say that about any business. Kellogg isn't just any business. They make food we consume so of course we have to regulate them. Ford isn't just any business. They put cars on our roads so of course the government has to make ...[text shortened]... h, but it's entertaining to see you right-wingers follow suit in the name of bashing Obama.

I'm not a right winger. What made you think that I am?

Originally posted by normbenign
About 10% of House seats are in play in most elections. Gerrymandering by both parties make most House seats "safe".

I have a solution. Reduce the pay, so that nobody wants to stay in Congress for a long time. Eliminate all pensions, and all residual health care for Congress. Make Congressional salaries the average of private sector workers in thei ...[text shortened]... un, and they would not stay forever. Oh and cut the budget for Congressional staff and perks.

I am not convinced that reducing pay and pensions would attract selfless people. Many politicians will spend more money than they earn in that public office to obtain it. Seems to me they are making a lot of money in payoffs to be corrupt.

Some people have actually claimed that increasing pay would deter corruption, but I don't buy into that either.

I don't think Congress should get any free health care. They can afford their own health insurance with the salary they receive.

Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
Let me get this straight. You're upset that Obama didn't veto a bill because it contains a segment that loosens big guvamint's grip over private businesses.

Did I get that right?

Monsanto is marketing dangerous GMO foods and need to be put completely out of business. The only reason they havent been is that they are a major corporate player in the new fascism.