Couldn't happen to a nicer guy...

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Riot

You've missed my point. Yes, both parties do the political posturing. But how many have said, in the past, "Not raising it won't cause a problem?" That's my point - the ignorance. When you have to have the Secretary of the Treasury sit down with freshmen congressmembers and explain what the debt ceiling is, and yes, if you don't address it, there really are consequences.

I don't want ignorance in there newly fresh every two years. I don't want members that don't know parlimentary procedure, don't know how committees work, don't know how to get legislation through the House or Senate. A little new blood is good, but novices governing gives you things like Sarah Palin leaving little in-the-black Wasilla 23 million in debt.

the thing will be raised, it's just that republicans know they have time so they're trying to push some of their bs thru in order to get their vote on the debt. yes, some might misunderstand, just like some of the dems including obama who voted against it, and just like some posters on here.

Politicians are typically the type of person who was the leader of the playground as a child...meaning they don't know how to do real work.

When you do get the occasional one who stands by the constitution and had a profession before entering politics they are singled out by the slapd.ick playground brigade and labeled as crazy.

We deserve to fail. We elected a borderline re.tard because of his family name and then we elected an affirmative action ivy league teleprompter champion who has never held a real job in his life.

He is arguably worse than the rich dullard.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Riot

The debt ceiling was raised several times during the Bush administrations. This is the first time so much nonsensical posturing about "not having any real consequence" has occurred (there has always been the few who have taken themselves out of the vote in favor of political posturing, Obama included)

I'm not talking Dems vs Republicans, I'm talking novices versus experienced legislators.

Not having novices doesn't mean you're left with career politicians. It's not either-or. No, I most definitely am not in favor of Washington being constantly made up of new classes of novices. I think that would be sheer disaster.

wow.

Zig really crushed you in this subject.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Danzig

the thing will be raised, it's just that republicans know they have time so they're trying to push some of their bs thru in order to get their vote on the debt. yes, some might misunderstand, just like some of the dems including obama who voted against it, and just like some posters on here.

My point wasn't about the debt ceiling, it was about term limits and having novices in Congress trying to run the government.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

wow.

Zig really crushed you in this subject.

I agree with what she said about the Dems and Repubs and the debt ceiling. No argument.

That's not what I was talking about.

Duh.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

I agree with what she said about the Dems and Repubs and the debt ceiling. No argument.

That's not what I was talking about.

Duh.

where's the support for Weiner? Where is Bill Clinton standing up for this guy's private life? The guy should be a poster boy for the Dem party and now he's garbage tossed under the bus. At least Rangel attempted to stand up for him?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Riot

My point wasn't about the debt ceiling, it was about term limits and having novices in Congress trying to run the government.

but you used the debt ceiling as a 'for instance' of why novice's don't belong..
and yet, we have one in the white house.


yeah, i do see your point after all!

[Rileyoriley]

Originally Posted by Danzig

but you used the debt ceiling as a 'for instance' of why novice's don't belong..
and yet, we have one in the white house.


yeah, i do see your point after all!