patrick.net

But there is a difference between republicans and democrats!

The Response:

"F*@k4n' Moron!"

Don't talk to yourself that way. You aren't a fucking moron just becasue you have so little knowledge of how congress works.

Back then there was no chance that they would not raise it, and this was some sort of protest vote or party line vote with totally different intentions than what is happening now.

That was the era of the Bush tax cuts, multiple off books wars and medicare part D (also not paid for).

The Bsuh tax cuts was the governemt giving the SS surplus to the rich, in the hope that it would please his base and stave off a recession (even if it meant a worse one later).

But Obama regrets his decision
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/apr/29/barack-obama/obama-regrets-2006-vote-against-raising-debt-limit/

He was a junior senator probably doing what someone asked him to do.

IT was meaningless at that time anyway(UNLIKE NOW), and probably gave him some fiscal responsibility cred with the puppet masters.

marcus says

Don't talk to yourself that way. You aren't a fucking moron just becasue you have so little knowledge of how congress works.

Back then there was no chance that they would not raise it, and this was some sort of protest vote or party line vote with totally different intentions than what is happening now.

That was the era of the Bush tax cuts, multiple off books wars and medicare part D (also not paid for).

The Bsuh tax cuts was the governemt giving the SS surplus to the rich, in the hope that it would please his base and stave off a recession (even if it meant a worse one later).

He was a junior senator probably doing what someone asked him to do.

Of course it was different....and someone made him do it.

AGain, I get that you have zero understanding of how congress works.

And that you can not and will not admit that at that time there was no possibility what so ever that his no vote mattered in any way except (maybe) relative to his voting record. That is, there was no way that the debt ceiling increase was being held up by his vote, and he knew that when he cast this vote.

You aren't as dumb as you seemingly want to appear. But then again, you hate to admit that this thread is stupid.

marcus says

AGain, I get that you have zero understanding of how congress works.

And that you can not and will not admit that at that time there was no possibility what so ever that his no vote mattered in any way except (maybe) relative to his voting record. That is, there was no way that the debt ceiling increase was being held up by his vote, and he knew that when he cast this vote.

You aren't as dumb as you seemingly want to appear. But then again, you hate to admit that this thread is stupid.

Doesn't matter if his vote mattered or not it's just the ideology that he didn't think the ceiling should be increased. If he believed in that then, then why doesn't he feel the same today?

I don't think he really did believe it. That is he must have understood that the increase in the ceiling had to occur. But he or his block of voters were probably asking for something in exchange for a yes vote. That might have been a yes vote on their pet bill.

It might have been like today, where they were negotiating on what money would be spent on, or what would or would not be cut.

The difference though is that in this case it did not ultimately matter. Nobody was saying "we default if we don't get our way."

marcus says

AGain, I get that you have zero understanding of how congress works.

And that you can not and will not admit that at that time there was no possibility what so ever that his no vote mattered in any way except (maybe) relative to his voting record. That is, there was no way that the debt ceiling increase was being held up by his vote, and he knew that when he cast this vote.

You aren't as dumb as you seemingly want to appear. But then again, you hate to admit that this thread is stupid.

Thanks, so the problem is not the blatant hypocrisy of the Senator's statement in 2006 vs his current stance now, its my limited understanding of how Congress works.

marcus says

Nobody was saying "we default if we don't get our way."

I understand now, only one party in Congress does things that can be considered obstructionist

marcus says

I don't think he really did believe it.

That's comforting to know. I'm glad that he signed what he didn't believe- NOW I understand how Congress works

Marcus says :

"there was no possibility what so ever that his no vote mattered in any way"

"I don't think he really did believe it"

"He was a junior senator probably doing what someone asked him to do."

Also comforting to know that Senators' votes are meaningless and the 2006 Senator cast his vote because some one made him and he knew it didnt matter and didn't believe it.

To further my incomplete understanding of how Congress worked I checked the Congressional record
The vote was 52-48 in favor of raising the debt ceiling: Senator Obama voting NAY

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2006-03-16/pdf/CREC-2006-03-16-pt1-PgS2236.pdf

marcus says

I don't think he really did believe it. That is he must have understood that the increase in the ceiling had to occur. But he or his block of voters were probably asking for something in exchange for a yes vote. That might have been a yes vote on their pet bill.

It might have been like today, where they were negotiating on what money would be spent on, or what would or would not be cut.

The difference though is that in this case it did not ultimately matter. Nobody was saying "we default if we don't get our way."

You're just speculating with no hard facts or evidence of your argument. The point and FACT is Obama voted NO to rise the ceiling. Who cares about the politics assuming there was even a political reason which we may never know. We just know he voted NO to rise the ceiling. That's it, that's all, nothing else and pretty much end of the discussion.

"don't think"..."must have"..."were probably"...."might have been"...."might have been"...
Same speculative assumptions you blathered over and over again with Zimmerman...
Some things never change...

marcus says

I don't think he really did believe it. That is he must have understood that the increase in the ceiling had to occur. But he or his block of voters were probably asking for something in exchange for a yes vote. That might have been a yes vote on their pet bill.

It might have been like today, where they were negotiating on what money would be spent on, or what would or would not be cut.

smaulgld says

I'm glad that he signed what he didn't believe- NOW I understand how Congress works

No you don't

spydah_hh says

You're just speculating with no hard facts or evidence of your argument

Actually it is a 100% proven fact to say that the vote did not matter and that his intentions were not to default, or to play chicken about maybe defaulting.

spydah_hh says

We just know he voted NO to rise the ceiling. That's it, that's all, nothing else and pretty much end of the discussion.

We know that this was a totally different situation, with totally different intentions. We know with certainty that he was not for holding the government hostage. This is a historical fact - because it was never a possibility. We know he was not saying if I don't get what I want I'm willing to default and if and when we default it will be your fault for not giving me what I want.

Yes, we know all of these things, which is why this thread is so stupid for implying that Obama did what the current TeaBaggers are doing.

spydah_hh says

that's all, nothing else and pretty much end of the discussion.

Yes.

One of 3 popular lies from the right wing.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/10/07/here-are-three-debt-ceiling-lies-you-ll-hear-from-the-gop-this-week.html

Yes, he did cast such a vote, but no, he’s not a hypocrite, not even a small one. The reason is simple. Democrats made no threats when they cast their votes. They knew they were going to lose and had no real intention of winning.
It was March 16, 2006, when Obama cast the fateful vote. But the Democrats’ votes, Obama’s included, were purely symbolic. The Republicans controlled the Senate at the time, 55-45. They did not choose to filibuster, which they could have done and which would have meant the Republicans needed 60 votes. If they’d done so, that would have been hardball, and in that case, Obama would have been a participant in a real threat against American creditworthiness. Even then it wouldn’t have been the same as what the GOP is doing now, unless those 45 Democrats had demanded, oh, that Bush rescind his tax cuts or his Medicare Part D bill or some other signal legislative achievement.
But the Democrats did no such thing. They cast symbolic votes to force Republicans to vote to increase the debt limit. So Obama’s 2006 vote means nothing and bears no resemblance to what’s going on today.

In case thats too much for you to read, here are key points:

" But the Democrats’ votes, Obama’s included, were purely symbolic. "

"But the Democrats knew they were going to lose. They were in the minority"

"They did not choose to filibuster, which they could have done and which would have meant the Republicans needed 60 votes. "

"Even then it wouldn’t have been the same as what the GOP is doing now, unless those 45 Democrats had demanded, oh, that Bush rescind his tax cuts or his Medicare Part D bill or some other signal legislative achievement."

I would apologize about confronting you with so many facts, but I know you dimbulbs ignore them with ease.

It's kinda your special skill.

Interesting poll results
Many dems too oppose raising the debt ceiling
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/10/08/fox-news-poll-majority-would-vote-against-raising-debt-ceiling/

marcus says

I would apologize about confronting you with so many facts, but I know you dimbulbs ignore them with ease.

It's kinda your special skill.

The daily beast interpretation constitutes confronting us with "facts"?

smaulgld says

Interesting poll results

I wonder what percent are like you guys, and don't even understand that the debt ceiling has to be raised to pay for spending that is already in place.

I wonder what percentage know what's going on with the sequester and that because of the sequester, even after the debt ceiling is raised,
the republicans have huge leverage in spending negotiations (becasue a lot of programs that democrats care about are on the sequester chopping block).

This debt ceiling extortion is about one thing only. Trying to kill Obamacare.

If the poll had been worded, "Are you in favor of the government defaulting on it's obligations in order to unfund Obamacare, I wonder how many would say yes ?

I think there needs to be a distinction between what is owed via debt obligations and what has been promised and what the ongoing operating exoenses are of the government.
Taken that way a sensible budget with priority spending can be reached.
Taking the position that we must fund everything is untenable

Weirdly, the asshole junior senator was actually being a Keynesian: opposing spending growth in a non-recessionary economy.

It was probably also to poke President Giggle-and-Kill in the eye.

HydroCabron says

Weirdly, the asshole junior senator was actually being a Keynesian: opposing spending growth in a non-recessionary economy.

It was probably also to poke President Giggle-and-Kill in the eye.

THAT is a clever argument.
It can be made with a disingenous straight face but still made

Rick Santelli Reads Obama's entire anti raising the debt ceiling speech on TV
http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?play=1&video=3000206198