You imply that both right and left were equally against it. Regarding the second House vote, assuring passage, from Wikipedia: on October 3, it voted 263-171 to enact the bill into law. Democrats voted 172 to 63 in favor of the legislation, while Republicans voted 108 to 91 against it; overall In other words, and remember this was for a bill proposed by a Republican president, the Dems were nearly 3/4's in support while the GOP was 55% opposed. Not equal, nowhere near. I also do not get the argument "for the same reasons". Left wing opposition was due not to concerns about whether the government needed to intervene in the markets as that the terms were too favorable to the banks. Most right wing opposition was to the very concept of governmental intervention in "self-correcting" markets as a matter of so-called principle. There's a huge difference.
i'd probably consider someone making 41k a year in the upper echelon of the lower class or towards the lower threshhold of the middle.
I want to agree with you here, and to me it is a classic example of how the GOP doesn't even help upper middle class voters, if you want to know why places like Bucks County PA, Westchester County New York, Connecticut, suburban Boston and of course the west coast states vote blue. It's called the Alternative Minimum Tax which does not allow deductions of state and local taxes in computing the effect oft he AMT. Elimination of that deduction, engineered by the GOP, hits primarily blue state voters. But the GOP is more concerned about helping the very rich than those voters, so you don't hear much from them about eliminating or modifying the AMT to alow state and local tax deductions. Since the GOP does not look out for such voters, they might as well vote liberal on social issues. Which by and large is what they do.
Watching C-Span and the House Committee hearing interviewing the Pres of Planned Parenthood. So instead of investigating the videos it's a complete turnabout by the Repubs. They are challenging her not about the videos but about their revenues, why they have a reserve of money over expenses and even if the are sending money to counties deemed illegal by the Dept of State. It seems planned and scripted by the GOP because each Repub Congressman is covering a related but different aspect of the question. Jason Chafetz the head of the committee gave reasons for not inviting the guy who made the videos (who is being investigated by the AG in Calif) saying it was because of a law suit. So to me it looks like they're looking for any excuse to defund them including not needing the money because they have a surplus. I thought the lady (Ann Richard's daughter) handled herself well, she was calm and polite even though some of these guys wouldn't allow her to complete sentences or give an answer and were rude.
I watched more of the hearing and on the lefty side it also seemed that they were also in conjunction with each other, one person would make specific points (pro PP) and the next Dem would seem to add something related but not exactly the same. One thing that struck me was among the Repubs some of them eventually cut to the chase and spoke emotionally about their hatred of abortion. A few even gave personal stories about their strong feelings against it (a child of their's died, etc). Including Trey Gowdy who basically went into an anti-abortion diatribe and asked Ms. Richards if she ever tried to understand his feelings or opposition to abortion. Again I thought she was non confrontational and said she tried to understand and respected their opinions. But that abortion was the law of the land and not illegal. So what was this all about and why are they threatening to defund the gov. When there is no proof that PP did anything illegal. It was barely discussed yesterday. I remember PP years ago being known for offering contraceptives to young people including under age girls. And advice on birth control. And if a girl became pregnant keeping it confidential even from their parents. Because their thoughts were first with the patient not with the family. This to me is one reason why so much animosity against PP. That and of course abortions and a lot of them. 300,000 per year via PP. But all of them legal. They also ripped her for a 500K salary and others in PP making over 200K. This is not federal money. I thought these guys were supposed to be capitalists and encouraged people to do well. And in business 500K for a CEO is not very much even for a non profit. How much did Carly Fiorina make when she was with HP. Tens of millions. A lot. I haven't heard any of them questioning that!
I think some people are hung up on whether or not someone at Planned Parenthood's possibly dickdancing around some provisions of the Hyde Amendment. Bottom line is Roe v. Wade's the law of the land and is not getting overturned nor is Planned Parenthood's not getting defunded: political suicide. If you're an American citizen you are entitled to: An abortion A heated kidney shaped pool A microwave oven--don't watch the food cook A Dyna-Gym--I'll personally demonstrate it in the privacy of your own home A kingsize Titanic unsinkable Molly Brown waterbed with polybendum A foolproof plan and an airtight alibi Real simulated Indian jewelry! A Gucci shoetree! A year's supply of antibiotics Bob Dylan's new unlisted phone number Rosemary's baby! A dream date in kneepads with Paul Williams A new Matador A new mastadon A Maverick A Mustang A Montego A Merc Montclair A Mark IV A meteor A Mercedes An MG Or a Malibu? A Maserati A Mac truck A Mazda A new Monza Or a moped A Winnebago Hell, a herd of Winnebago's, we're giving 'em away Or how about a McCulloch chainsaw? A Las Vegas wedding A Mexican divorce A solid gold Kama Sutra coffee pot Or A baby's arm holding an apple?
Thanks for the reply and advice, Joe. And of course as you know, a wise man learns more from his enemies than a fool from his friends. But don't you think it's a little too much advice. And can't you can find more constructive ways to spend your time.
How so, reading your boilerplate talking points? Sorry my 10 sec. cut-and-paste was totally lost on you... Props D - leave it to you to "get it."
Hillary Clinton's "deeply distressed" over Kevin McCarthy's comments regarding Benghazi and the hearings associated with it. In reality, Clinton's beside herself as McCarthy (showing his inexperience) stupidly shot himself in the foot. What a klutz.
There seems to be two theories explaining the popularity of non politicians like Trump, Carson and even Carly (she did run for Senator in 2010) in the GOP. The three of them are clobbering career politicians in the polls. One theory (by the Conservatives) is that it's a backlash because GOP voters think thanks to people like Boner they didn't do enough to resist Obama and the Dems. And that what the people want is complete opposition to liberals and no compromising on their principles. That's their spin. The other is the opposite: that GOP voters are tired of lack of significant legislation, infighting and no compromise. And they also see these politicians as being out for themselves and special interests. If it's the second one there seems to be no wake up call here. They continue to fail miserably and continue their agenda. And look real stupid on a daily basis doing it (ie Kevin McCarthy, but at least he told the truth).
Yeah, telling the truth about what the GOP was up to, still is, with these "Benghazi! Benghazi!" invetigations shold probably disqualify him from being speaker. Next thing you know he will brag about what a great job the GOP has been doing taking care of the very rich at the expesne of everyone else.
Well, my point was that he's shown himself to be a bit of a rube when it comes to political savviness. Cynically-speaking, McCarthy's done the one thing that both Dems and Repubs would agree on: do not show your hand in terms of what your motives are which is another way of saying "don't tell the truth" (again, cynically-speaking). Previous GOP case in point: Mitch McConnell saying his goal was to make Obama a one-term prez. By doing so, he flushed OB's hand by painting himself as a partisan obstructionist and in doing so allowed OB to sit back in a non-compromising / "come around to my way of thinking" position. It works both ways as well: on the flip side of the coin, Harry Reid intentionally put it out there about Mitt Romney not paying taxes. When it was shown that Reid not only lied about it but did so intentionally, Reid cynically went full-blown Machiavellian and justified it with this gem: "well, he didn't win did he?" So what we have here with McCarthy is yet another example of sleezebag partisanship vs. statesmanship. Now as for statesmanship? . Well I think it's pretty clear at this stage to say that ship's sailed long ago...
Basically Carly has been giving the public (and successfully) popular Repub talking points on topics like PP (stinging allegations with no proof), Hillary (she called her a liar) and now she says if Putin doesn't come in line possibly taking military action in Syria against the Russians. She's been accused by some Dems like Barbara Boxer (who defeated Carly in 2010 in her Senate race) of saying anything necessary to win an election.
So you're a 'Babs' guy eh? . Ok, let's take a humorous 'Babs' break from your fanatical hard-on for Fiorino's harden mug, my bleating bud. Barbara Boxer, Ted Kennedy, Hillary Clinton and a fetus are playing golf. Clinton puts the fetus on top of the tee, grabs a driver and goes into her backswing. "Hold it," says Boxer. "You need a three-wood!" Barbara Boxer, Ted Kennedy, Hillary Clinton and a fetus go to heaven and meet St Peter at the gates. They each give their names, except the fetus, who just says, "Fetus." St Peter checks his paperwork. "You're not human," he says. So Boxer goes to hell.
