WTF Since when was a 40% vote enough for a motion to pass or stall

dbzeag

Wants to kiss you where it stinks
Jun 9, 2006
16,992
451
298
42
And you would have had him do what exactly?

Have the feds fund the interstate spending they are supposed to, like interstate infrastructure, fund a military with the motivation as being protectors of our country (only) and not invaders of others, and set the tax rate (most likely lower) accordingly.

Then do little else.
 

plot

Morning Boehner
Oct 16, 2006
20,031
4,165
323
kansas city
Have the feds fund the interstate spending they are supposed to, like interstate infrastructure, fund a military with the motivation as being protectors of our country (only) and not invaders of others, and set the tax rate (most likely lower) accordingly.

Then do little else.

This. Exactly this.

the tea party was founded on the same ideas then taken over by christan zealots.
 

OzSTEEZ

¡ɟɟo ʞɔnɟ ʇunɔ 'ᴉO
Nov 11, 2008
35,272
9,368
473
40
Oz
Have the feds fund the interstate spending they are supposed to, like interstate infrastructure, fund a military with the motivation as being protectors of our country (only) and not invaders of others, and set the tax rate (most likely lower) accordingly.

Then do little else.

I meant with the expiring tax cuts..
 

dbzeag

Wants to kiss you where it stinks
Jun 9, 2006
16,992
451
298
42
I meant with the expiring tax cuts..

Cut the spending by reviewing the philosophy and policies of what the federal government is supposed to do, then make the cuts for everyone permenant because it would have been deemed the feds spend too much money on too many useless things.
 

OzSTEEZ

¡ɟɟo ʞɔnɟ ʇunɔ 'ᴉO
Nov 11, 2008
35,272
9,368
473
40
Oz
Cut the spending by reviewing the philosophy and policies of what the federal government is supposed to do, then make the cuts for everyone permenant because it would have been deemed the feds spend too much money on too many useless things.

So you would have had Obama let them expire, then readdress them later after cutting spending..
 

Duke

. . first name's "Daisy" boys
May 12, 2008
55,859
18,142
41
Brandon, FL
no. it's not less that it should be. It's exactly where it should be. And, in 2 more years it is scheduled to increase - IF it's not addressed prior.

This doesn't mean the dems get to go on a spending spree calculating out 50 years worth of income and selling it to JD Wentworth for present value.

Gov't Spending needs to be reeled in significantly so the citizens can spend their own money in their own economy.

I'm sorry, did you say DEM's and Spending spree?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/14/AR2010121407208.html

Look to your own house, first.

The Cons voted in a new party thinking change was coming, and instead bought into it hook, line, and sinker.

The day the conservative voters of america realize they are getting as fucked by their own republican leadership as they are by democratic politicians and stop blindly following the conservative rhetoric, we might actually be able to get an informed and free thinking populace out there making votes that will actually result in something happening.
 
Last edited:

fly

Osharts 11
Oct 1, 2004
71,754
23,476
1,073
Steam
mattressfish
No, no, no, no, NO.

It was the Church as an institution having a stake/control/finger in the pie (Like the Church of England) over the government that the framers wanted to avoid, not necessarily religion(s) since that's what gave people a moral base.

Freedom of religion, yes, but since some form of religion formed most people's central belief systems, I don't think it's possible to have asked for it to not come into play at all at that time.

Where did I say they didn't want religion? :confused:
 

OzSTEEZ

¡ɟɟo ʞɔnɟ ʇunɔ 'ᴉO
Nov 11, 2008
35,272
9,368
473
40
Oz
What does it really matter now?

This matter has been established that the United State gives freedom to all religions, and treats them all equally.
 

OzSTEEZ

¡ɟɟo ʞɔnɟ ʇunɔ 'ᴉO
Nov 11, 2008
35,272
9,368
473
40
Oz
I wont stand for a lot of what chikken says.. I'm off for a smoke..
 

my little brony

Keep Being A Little Bitch
Oct 15, 2004
34,952
18,763
823
You calling me an angry person is like DB calling someone gay.

I was talking about politicians and how a minimum majority vote rules in Australian politics as opposed to hear. Maybe it wasn't as clear cut as I thought it was.
You may want to keep backpedaling and pretend that you were talking about something else because you were wrong and if that helps you sleep at night to think you won an internet forum, go right ahead. Go ahead and pretend you didn't clearly say:

you said:
I guess to me is seems stupid to go against the will of the people.
in the very sentence before mentioning majority rules.

Yes, you are an angry person. I have my temper but you constantly rage against the machine and tell us all how much you hate this country. It's a good thing that you are rare among australians because the ones I know do a much better job of representing your countrymen.
 

my little brony

Keep Being A Little Bitch
Oct 15, 2004
34,952
18,763
823
Yeah I know the government belong to the people, well should I should say. But there is an obvious difference between the GDP and the money in your bank account. The point is, the normal rate of money tax payers put into the GDP is currently less than it should be. You have been getting a discount for years, and now you are getting that discount for a couple more.
:lol: that's not how gdp works
 

my little brony

Keep Being A Little Bitch
Oct 15, 2004
34,952
18,763
823
FbqVh.png

aaaand that is a flat out lie
 

OzSTEEZ

¡ɟɟo ʞɔnɟ ʇunɔ 'ᴉO
Nov 11, 2008
35,272
9,368
473
40
Oz
You may want to keep backpedaling and pretend that you were talking about something else because you were wrong and if that helps you sleep at night to think you won an internet forum, go right ahead. Go ahead and pretend you didn't clearly say:

in the very sentence before mentioning majority rules.

Yes, you are an angry person. I have my temper but you constantly rage against the machine and tell us all how much you hate this country. It's a good thing that you are rare among australians because the ones I know do a much better job of representing your countrymen.

Way to take my words out of context. If you had been following along with the conversation, you'd know that we were talking about the ratio of votes needed to pass a law.

Why would I be wanting to "win an internet forum" :lol: when I stated that I wasn't so clear on what I was talking about. Sounds like you are the one trying his hardest to "win an internet forum"..