Page 1 of 1

Martial Law? Huh?

Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2011 6:46 am
by poptart
Greta V.: Brett Baier, now what?

Baier: (Beginning at :30) Rules committee will come up with a 'rule' for
them to do a same-day bill... rule named MARTIAL LAW... etc...







:|




Discuss.

Re: Martial Law? Huh?

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 1:37 am
by poptart
Except that wasn't specualtion by journalists.

The rules committee said they would name the same-day bill Martial Law.

Re: Martial Law? Huh?

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 2:28 am
by mvscal
poptart wrote:Greta V.: Brett Baier, now what?

:|




Discuss.
Well, he got the votes, passed the bill and it was spiked by Harry Reid in the Senate. That makes two bills passed by the Republican House which were killed by Democrats in the Senate yet Republicans are supposedly the ones who are "obstructing" the process. The Senate Democrats have not put any of their alleged plans to vote.

So...who is the "Party of No" again?

Re: Martial Law? Huh?

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 2:40 am
by poptart
The House passing those two bills (in attempt to avoid default) is deeply rooted in racism.


Barack Obama is a great leader!

Get over it.

Re: Martial Law? Huh?

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 2:58 am
by BSmack
mvscal wrote:Well, he got the votes, passed the bill and it was spiked by Harry Reid in the Senate. That makes two bills passed by the Republican House which were killed by Democrats in the Senate yet Republicans are supposedly the ones who are "obstructing" the process. The Senate Democrats have not put any of their alleged plans to vote. So...who is the "Party of No" again?
Has the filibuster been abolished?

Re: Martial Law? Huh?

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:00 am
by mvscal
BSmack wrote:
mvscal wrote:Well, he got the votes, passed the bill and it was spiked by Harry Reid in the Senate. That makes two bills passed by the Republican House which were killed by Democrats in the Senate yet Republicans are supposedly the ones who are "obstructing" the process. The Senate Democrats have not put any of their alleged plans to vote. So...who is the "Party of No" again?
Has the filibuster been abolished?
Both bills were tabled, idiot.

Re: Martial Law? Huh?

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:03 am
by BSmack
mvscal wrote:Both bills were tabled.
That is what often happens when it is apparent that an up or down vote will not happen. Llet me now when 50 votes is enought to pass a bill and you will have an argument.

Re: Martial Law? Huh?

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:48 am
by mvscal
Let me know when you chickenshit pussies actually put something on the table. It's been almost 900 days since we've had a budget from the Democrats.

Re: Martial Law? Huh?

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 4:52 am
by poptart
It's hilarious to watch the media desperately try to have the sheeple believe that the republicans (and tea party in particular) are at fault here - and are somehow being radical.

Only the dimmest of the dim bulbs believe that.


Fact: The House (republicans) have now passed two bills

Fact: The dems have passed nothing.

Fact: Barry shows us no plan.

Fact: Rating agencies have told him that they can't rate a speech.

LOLOL!

Image


Fact:The dems have had no budget since... forever.

Fact: Barry's budget proposal in May was voted down 97-0 in the senate.

How the hell does 97-0 happen?!?

Oh, I know ---> It means what you want to do is 100% insane.

:lol:


Radical is adding 5 trillion in debt in 2+ years, and showing NO inclination to do anything other than continue to run up crazy debt as far as the eye can see.

The tea party should be applauded by all non-retard Americans for actually trying to behave as ADULTS.

The White House desperately needs adult supervision.

This is obvious.

All Barry is good at is reading a teleprompter.

Ted Baxter was a funnay man, but who in fuck's name would want him as our president?

Oh, idiots.

Re: Martial Law? Huh?

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 7:35 am
by mvscal
poptart wrote:Only the dimmest of the dim bulbs believe that.
Unfortunately their numbers are in the tens of millions.

Re: Martial Law? Huh?

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 8:11 am
by poptart
poptart wrote:dimmest of the dim bulbs

idiots


Image

Re: Martial Law? Huh?

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 2:17 pm
by smackaholic
mvscal wrote:
poptart wrote:Only the dimmest of the dim bulbs believe that.
Unfortunately their numbers are in the tens of millions.
wayyyyyy into the tens. i would be good with a few tens. i'm afraid we are into the tens of tens of millions. the way we're going, we might even hit eleventy billion before the next election.

Re: Martial Law? Huh?

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 2:33 pm
by Carson
Balcks are world-reknowned for their strong leadership abilities and stewardship. Obama deserves a chance solely because he's balck.

Sin,

SoccerMom

Re: Martial Law? Huh?

Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 1:43 am
by Carson
Thirty years ago we were telling super powers we would skull-fuck them with missiles.

Now Obongo just gave a statement timed to reassure the Asian stock markets.

I'm surprised he didn't bow to the east when he finished.

Neville Chamberlain is smiling somewhere.

Re: Martial Law? Huh?

Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 1:47 am
by Shlomart Ben Yisrael
Carson wrote:Thirty years ago we were telling super powers we would skull-fuck them with missiles.
Was that around the same time you ran out of Lebanon with your skirts hiked up?
Just trying to set the time-line for historical accuracy.

Re: Martial Law? Huh?

Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 1:49 am
by Carson
I remember Libya getting a laser-guided enema about that time.

Re: Martial Law? Huh?

Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 1:53 am
by Shlomart Ben Yisrael
Carson wrote:I remember Libya getting a laser-guided enema about that time.
I remember another time they were taken off the terrorist watch list and exports were opened up to them.

Re: Martial Law? Huh?

Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 1:55 am
by Carson
Only after Qaddafi turned over his nuke program.

Re: Martial Law? Huh?

Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 1:56 am
by Shlomart Ben Yisrael
Carson wrote:Only after Qaddafi turned over his nuke program.

He didn't have a nuke program.

What he did have was blood on his hands from the Lockerbie bombing.

Re: Martial Law? Huh?

Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 1:59 am
by Carson
If they weren't nukes, then what was Dick Cheney talking about?

Re: Martial Law? Huh?

Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 2:06 am
by Shlomart Ben Yisrael
Carson wrote:If they weren't nukes, then what was Dick Cheney talking about?
A piece of paper that said someday, in the future, Quaddafi is really, really gonna think about looking like he's trying to acquire nukes.

The Libyans were not in violation of IAEA safeguards, nor were they actively seeking highly enriched uranium.
They were looking to get in Bush's good-books and get payed.