House Speaker Election

[Belsnickel]

(10-09-2015, 10:14 AM)michaelsean Wrote: And I have no problem with infighting in a party. I've grown tired of the lockstep voting.

I have a problem with it when things aren't getting done. There is a way to avoid being lockstep and to get things done, and it's call compromise. I dislike lockstep voting, but it concerns me when even the most basic of the functions of our Congress is not getting done because of the infighting and partisanship.

[*michaelsean*]

(10-09-2015, 11:03 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I have a problem with it when things aren't getting done. There is a way to avoid being lockstep and to get things done, and it's call compromise. I dislike lockstep voting, but it concerns me when even the most basic of the functions of our Congress is not getting done because of the infighting and partisanship.

I don't have any problem with compromise on like goals, but on other things sometimes the answer is no.  It seems that the mere act of proposing something entitles you to at least a part of it.  If, for instance, the Dems suggest a 50% increase in taxes, the Republicans would be required to offer at least 25% or 30% or they don't know how to compromise.  

[Belsnickel]

(10-09-2015, 01:30 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I don't have any problem with compromise on like goals, but on other things sometimes the answer is no.  It seems that the mere act of proposing something entitles you to at least a part of it.  If, for instance, the Dems suggest a 50% increase in taxes, the Republicans would be required to offer at least 25% or 30% or they don't know how to compromise.  

I can get that, the idea of compromise has often been twisted in order to paint one side or the other as obstinate, when in reality the side making the claim is just as much so. When I think of compromise I am thinking of seeing a problem that needs fixing (and is within the scope of the authority you have) and getting together to come to an agreeable solution that all parties can feel some level of satisfaction with. I know, I have some pie in the sky dreams.

[*michaelsean*]

(10-09-2015, 01:37 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I can get that, the idea of compromise has often been twisted in order to paint one side or the other as obstinate, when in reality the side making the claim is just as much so. When I think of compromise I am thinking of seeing a problem that needs fixing (and is within the scope of the authority you have) and getting together to come to an agreeable solution that all parties can feel some level of satisfaction with. I know, I have some pie in the sky dreams.

Agreed.  When you have a common goal, people are going to have different ideas on how to accomplish that goal, and you have to have give and take.  Nobody is going to agree 100% with everyone else.

[GodHatesBengals]

(10-09-2015, 10:02 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Oh I don't care about name calling, I just like to point out your level of intelligence.  Mouth breather. Ooh. Burn.  I love recent college graduates.  They know so much.
Now go learn some civics, study how our government works, and tell me how the Republicans in the house are obstructionists.  Who are they obstructing?  

Not recent, but I am a college graduate. I can totally understand why you hate college-educated people so much, though. The more they learn, the more unlikely they are to buy the kind of crap you're selling.

I told you I have zero interest in educating you, so there's no point in repeating your question. I gave you the clues; if you're too lazy to utilize a dictionary and any respectable news website you prefer, that's completely your fault.

[*michaelsean*]

(10-09-2015, 03:21 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: Not recent, but I am a college graduate. I can totally understand why you hate college-educated people so much, though. The more they learn, the more unlikely they are to buy the kind of crap you're selling.

I told you I have zero interest in educating you, so there's no point in repeating your question. I gave you the clues; if you're too lazy to utilize a dictionary and any respectable news website you prefer, that's completely your fault.

No I have a bachelor's degree, and the wisdom to know what it means and what it doesn't mean.

You aren't answering because you have no answer.   You made a ridiculous statement about a majority being obstructionist. The reason you have no answer is because you just blathered out what someone told you,  and instead of having a discussion and learning something, you are left with only insults and evasion.  But it's OK.  We've all been there.

[BmorePat87]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/09/politics/house-speaker-race-paul-ryan/

Ryan is apparently considering it. Romney reportedly called and told him he should.

[*michaelsean*]

(10-09-2015, 03:45 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/09/politics/house-speaker-race-paul-ryan/

Ryan is apparently considering it. Romney reportedly called and told him he should.

The way they were talking he was an easy win but didn't want it.  Maybe that makes him perfect for the job.

[GodHatesBengals]

(10-09-2015, 03:35 PM)michaelsean Wrote: No I have a bachelor's degree, and the wisdom to know what it means and what it doesn't mean.

You aren't answering because you have no answer.   You made a ridiculous statement about a majority being obstructionist. The reason you have no answer is because you just blathered out what someone told you,  and instead of having a discussion and learning something, you are left with only insults and evasion.  But it's OK.  We've all been there.

If saying I have no answer because I refuse to pull out a link to a dictionary website and explain the obvious makes you feel as though you've won something, feel free to collect the prize in your head. I couldn't care less.

I stand by what I said re obstructionist. Again, if you weren't too lazy to utilize the wonderful resource of the Internet, you would see why. But you will not, because you desperately want to drag me down the rabbit hole of right-wing obfuscation with you. And I simply refuse to do that with you people. Your ignorance is your fault, and I will not engage in useless, redundant digressions in an attempt to teach those who do not wish to know.

[*michaelsean*]

If you don't want to take it from me, read Matt's post. You still haven't said who it is they are obstructing. There is nothing to obstruct. They control what is brought up.

[GodHatesBengals]

(10-09-2015, 04:37 PM)michaelsean Wrote: If you don't want to take it from me, read Matt's post.  You still haven't said who it is they are obstructing.

And you can hold your breath until Jesus comes back and sends all the liberals to hell, because again, I'm not interested in educating you. If you can't figure out who and what is obstructed, that's your fault, and I have no obligation to waste my time trying to correct you when I know it won't do you any good.

[*michaelsean*]

(10-09-2015, 04:43 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: And you can hold your breath until Jesus comes back and sends all the liberals to hell, because again, I'm not interested in educating you. If you can't figure out who and what is obstructed, that's your fault, and I have no obligation to waste my time trying to correct you when I know it won't do you any good.

You made the claim so of course you have an obligation    This isn't one of your wacko left wing boards.

[StLucieBengal]

(10-09-2015, 11:03 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I have a problem with it when things aren't getting done. There is a way to avoid being lockstep and to get things done, and it's call compromise. I dislike lockstep voting, but it concerns me when even the most basic of the functions of our Congress is not getting done because of the infighting and partisanship.

There are some things you can not compromise on when you make promises to your voters. Budget issues.

[Belsnickel]

(10-09-2015, 06:25 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: There are some things you can not compromise on when you make promises to your voters. Budget issues.

So it's okay to lie about everything else? Actually, budget issues are where there should be tons of compromise. Nothing gets done fiscally without it. Pretending that isn't the case is lacking a basis in reality.

[*michaelsean*]

(10-09-2015, 06:25 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: There are some things you can not compromise on when you make promises to your voters.    Budget issues.

I would say on the budget there is no choice but compromise.  You are spending like 3 trillion dollars.   Nobody even in the same party is going to agree on that.

[GodHatesBengals]

(10-09-2015, 06:25 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: There are some things you can not compromise on when you make promises to your voters.    Budget issues.

There are some things candidates should not promise to voters. The impossible.

[GodHatesBengals]

(10-09-2015, 05:50 PM)michaelsean Wrote: You made the claim so of course you have an obligation

I really don't have an obligation to copy and paste a dictionary definition and a few articles about current events. Not sure why you would think I do.

I know you cons are pissed because people demand evidence when your side makes outrageous, absurd claims, and you want a piece of the action, but this instance is quite a different matter. The burden of proof still depends on the questioning party's willingness to do some minimum of their own work--like looking up words they don't understand in a dictionary and knowing a little about current events.

I can tell you the grass in my yard is green all day, but if you refuse to look, I don't have an "obligation" to tape your eyes open.

[StLucieBengal]

(10-09-2015, 07:23 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I would say on the budget there is no choice but compromise.  You are spending like 3 trillion dollars.   Nobody even in the same party is going to agree on that.

They can easily set how much we spend then negotiate on how we spend it all.

[StLucieBengal]

(10-09-2015, 07:51 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: There are some things candidates should not promise to voters. The impossible.

Yeah promising to not run up debt is so much a terrible thing.  

[Belsnickel]

(10-09-2015, 10:08 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: They can easily set how much we spend then negotiate on how we spend it all.

Not that simple. Expenditures are only one part, revenue is another huge issue.