Civics

C

ChesusRice

Well-Known Member
I remember how Easy Clinton got budgets passed

There was this one time Vice President Al Gore had to pass the deciding vote becuase not a single Republican voted for the budget

Oh wait that happened more than once
 
Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
ChesusRice said:
I remember how Easy Clinton got budgets passed

There was this one time Vice President Al Gore had to pass the deciding vote becuase not a single Republican voted for the budget

Oh wait that happened more than once
Click to expand...
and yet budgets were passed. hmm amazing. maybe obama just inst that interested in the details of office, he has brackets to fill out for the upcoming college football season. perhaps he should appoint a Brackets Czar to handle that shit so he has mmore time to devote to his job.

or maybe he could skip a golf game now and again.
 
B

beenthere

New Member
ChesusRice said:
Well maybe just maybe if the house didnt put a bunch of BULLSHIT they knew wouldnt get passed. We would have a budget
And speaking of Budgets
between 2000-2008 where was the appropriations in the budget for the iraq war?
Click to expand...
LOL So you are saying the democrat senate can put stuff they want in the budget and if the republican house doesn't pass it, they're considered obstructionists! But if it's the other way around, the republicans are just putting stuff in the budget they know won't be passed and are wasting time. LMFAO Do you even know what you type, you confirm you're a partisan hack!

As far as the budget appropriations for the wars, you have to ask congress. I could do a 4 minute google search and become an expert on the subject like you, but off the top of my head, I'd blame both sides of the isle for it. You can't put it all on the republicans because the democrats controlled both the house and the senate for four years and guess what, no Iraq or Afghanistan war to be found in the budget those years.

But in all fairness, putting them in the budget would have zero effect on the costs!
 
rollinbud

rollinbud

Active Member
ChesusRice said:
CIVICS 101: A "bill" is introduced when a member of Congress decides to create a new law. Any member of Congress can introduce a bill. Only members of the House may introduce bills that deal with taxes or spending. Before a bill can become a law, both houses of Congress must pass identical versions of the bill. Once a bill is introduced in either house, it goes through almost the same process. Each bill is first assigned to a committee for review. The bill is tabled, or set aside, if the committee decides the bill is not worthy. The bill is sent to the entire house for debate if the committee decides the bill is worthy of further action. If the bill passes, it is sent to the other house. A joint committee works out any differences the two houses of Congress have concerning a bill. When both houses agree on a bill, the Speaker of the House and the vice president sign it. The bill must be signed before being sent to the president. In each two-year session, thousands of bills come before Congress. Almost twelve thousand bills were introduced in Congress in one recent session. Less than five hundred were enacted into law. The Veto: A bill becomes law if the president signs it. The president doesn't always wish to sign the bill. He may choose to say "no" by vetoing it.If this happens, the bill is sent back to Congress. If two-thirds of all the members of Congress vote "yes," the bill can still become law. The bill dies when there are not enough votes to override the President. For example, when George Bush was president, Congress tried to override his vetoes thirty-six times but was successful only once. Sometimes a president decides to do nothing. He may decide neither to sign nor veto a bill. If Congress is in session, the bill becomes law after ten days without the president's signature. Otherwise, the bill suffers a pocket veto and does not become law. Obama hasnt passed a budget in 3 years
Click to expand...
Yup he can't even get his own people to vote for his whacky budget b.s. "Obama budget gets goose egg in Democrat-controlled Senate" posted at 10:32 am on May 26, 2011 by Ed Morrissey When was the last time the Senate cast a unanimous vote on an issue of any substance? The only unamimous votes in the Senate’s 112th session have been to confirm judges or on honorary resolutions, and on a few amendments, and one bill to make it illegal to publish or copy images taken by the TSA from backscatter scanners. There has not been a single unanimous negative vote in the Senate this session — until now. Yesterday, the Senate rejected by a 0-97 vote the budget proposed by Barack Obama: The Senate voted unanimously on Wednesday to reject a $3.7 trillion budget plan that President Obama sent to Capitol Hill in February. Ninety-seven senators voted against a motion to take it up. Democratic aides said ahead of the vote that the Democratic caucus would not support the plan because it has been supplanted by the deficit-reduction plan Obama outlined at a speech at George Washington University in April. Really? Oh, good. So when will Senate Democrats put that plan up for a vote? Right … never. As Harry Reid said this week, Democrats don’t want to provide leadership and do the jobs to which they were elected — they just want to tell everyone else how to do their jobs. At least Republicans bothered to propose a budget for a floor vote. Paul Ryan’s budget got 40 more votes than Obama’s. Democrats want to wait for Obama’s FY2012 plan, but thus far, no details have been forthcoming from either the White House or from Senate Democrats who run the upper chamber. It’s been almost 760 days since the Senate passed a normal budget; how much longer should we all wait? As for the Democratic rejection of the first (and thus far only) Obama budget proposal for FY2012, Mitch McConnell notes that these same Democrats thought pretty highly of it in February. They had plenty of time to pass it when Obama first introduced it; why did they do nothing? Why are they still doing nothing? For a party that worked hard to barely retain control over the Senate, Democrats seem completely disinterested in meeting their responsibilities. Who knew that Democrats would go on strike merely because the rabble had the temerity to strip them of control of one chamber of Congress?
 
C

ChesusRice

Well-Known Member
rollinbud said:
Yup he can't even get his own people to vote for his whacky budget b.s. "Obama budget gets goose egg in Democrat-controlled Senate" posted at 10:32 am on May 26, 2011 by Ed Morrissey When was the last time the Senate cast a unanimous vote on an issue of any substance? The only unamimous votes in the Senate’s 112th session have been to confirm judges or on honorary resolutions, and on a few amendments, and one bill to make it illegal to publish or copy images taken by the TSA from backscatter scanners. There has not been a single unanimous negative vote in the Senate this session — until now. Yesterday, the Senate rejected by a 0-97 vote the budget proposed by Barack Obama: The Senate voted unanimously on Wednesday to reject a $3.7 trillion budget plan that President Obama sent to Capitol Hill in February. Ninety-seven senators voted against a motion to take it up. Democratic aides said ahead of the vote that the Democratic caucus would not support the plan because it has been supplanted by the deficit-reduction plan Obama outlined at a speech at George Washington University in April. Really? Oh, good. So when will Senate Democrats put that plan up for a vote? Right … never. As Harry Reid said this week, Democrats don’t want to provide leadership and do the jobs to which they were elected — they just want to tell everyone else how to do their jobs. At least Republicans bothered to propose a budget for a floor vote. Paul Ryan’s budget got 40 more votes than Obama’s. Democrats want to wait for Obama’s FY2012 plan, but thus far, no details have been forthcoming from either the White House or from Senate Democrats who run the upper chamber. It’s been almost 760 days since the Senate passed a normal budget; how much longer should we all wait? As for the Democratic rejection of the first (and thus far only) Obama budget proposal for FY2012, Mitch McConnell notes that these same Democrats thought pretty highly of it in February. They had plenty of time to pass it when Obama first introduced it; why did they do nothing? Why are they still doing nothing? For a party that worked hard to barely retain control over the Senate, Democrats seem completely disinterested in meeting their responsibilities. Who knew that Democrats would go on strike merely because the rabble had the temerity to strip them of control of one chamber of Congress?
Click to expand...
So do you think it is a productive idea for the Republicans to put their social agenda in all of their budgets?
Proposals they know wont pass a democratic senate
just so they can say
Obama doesnt have a budget passed?
 
nontheist

nontheist

Well-Known Member
ChesusRice said:
So do you think it is a productive idea for the Republicans to put their social agenda in all of their budgets?
Proposals they know wont pass a democratic senate
just so they can say
Obama doesnt have a budget passed?
Click to expand...
The point is every successful president before Obama was able to get congress to compromise Obama cannot. When you pass bills or budgets both sides have their agenda in it, it's just how the game works. A central leaning president always gets more things done with a divided congress it's how it has to be. Blaming republicans for Obama's failures is ridiculous.
 
Red1966

Red1966

Well-Known Member
ChesusRice said:
So do you think it is a productive idea for the Republicans to put their social agenda in all of their budgets? Proposals they know wont pass a democratic senate just so they can say Obama doesnt have a budget passed?
Click to expand...
So do you think it is a productive idea for the Democrats to put their social agenda in all of their budgets? Proposals they know wont pass a Republican House just so they can say Republicans are obstructionists?
 
Canna Sylvan

Canna Sylvan

Well-Known Member
deprave said:
Yea...Are you looking to buy one? Would be a good ammount of work depending exactly what you want it to do, vbulletin is not as easy
Click to expand...
Dookie does likes. So I was wondering if "he" could be a vbulletin bot, doing all he does. I take it you can make a bot Rep and send private messages too?
 
rollinbud

rollinbud

Active Member
ChesusRice said:
So do you think it is a productive idea for the Republicans to put their social agenda in all of their budgets? Proposals they know wont pass a democratic senate just so they can say Obama doesnt have a budget passed?
Click to expand...
0bama couldn't even pass a budget when his party had control of both houses. I think that sums it all up. He can't even get his own party to support his ridiculous budget proposals because they know he is a dud.
 
B

beenthere

New Member
rollinbud said:
0bama couldn't even pass a budget when his party had control of both houses. I think that sums it all up. He can't even get his own party to support his ridiculous budget proposals because they know he is a dud.
Click to expand...
The democrat congress was practicing obstructionism, anticipating the future republican led house coming into power in the next two years! LMAO
 
canndo

canndo

Well-Known Member
Red1966 said:
So do you think it is a productive idea for the Democrats to put their social agenda in all of their budgets? Proposals they know wont pass a Republican House just so they can say Republicans are obstructionists?
Click to expand...

got any examples of this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top