Weiner ejaculates

[WRESTLINGFAN]

With anger on the house floor.

http://www.lohud.com/article/20100730/NEWS05/7300373/Weiner-explodes-on-House-floor-over-9/11-responder-bill-—--Watch-speech



Theres more to it than whats presented. This could have been passed with a simple majority

[Dudeman]

With anger on the house floor.

http://www.lohud.com/article/20100730/NEWS05/7300373/Weiner-explodes-on-House-floor-over-9/11-responder-bill-—--Watch-speech



Theres more to it than whats presented. This could have been passed with a simple majority

Just to complete the sentence: This could have been passed with a simple majority or with republicans voting for it.

[torker]

He answers to a higher authority.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

He answers to a higher authority.

And his name is Allah


http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/07/11/2010-07-11_weiner_marries_hillary_aide_at_tony_li_spot.htm l

[Dude!]

He answers to a higher authority.

ha ha

[StanUpshaw]

Isn't this just his shtick? It seems like every couple of weeks Weiner's shouting about something.

[brettmojo]

Isn't this just his shtick? It seems like every couple of weeks Weiner's shouting about something.
Yeah. Weiner is always spouting off.

[KnoxHarrington]

With anger on the house floor.

http://www.lohud.com/article/20100730/NEWS05/7300373/Weiner-explodes-on-House-floor-over-9/11-responder-bill-—--Watch-speech



Theres more to it than whats presented. This could have been passed with a simple majority

A simple majority if the Republicans had agreed not to stick amendments to it they knew damn well Democrats could not agree too.

9/11 heroes aren't getting health care because of a cheap Republican political trick.

[Enabler]

<script type="text/javascript" src="http://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=4298486&w=466&h=263"></script><noscript>Watch the latest video at <a href="http://video.foxnews.com">video.foxnews.com</a></noscript>


So the Democrats insisted on a 2/3 majority vote only to cover their asses come election time? Rather than pass the bill on their own? Seriously, I dont get it. Both sides seem to agree on the issue, but it still cant get done because of what? Why did the Dems insist on the 2/3 vote? And why didnt GOP's vote for it anyway if they believed in it? If two senators from NY (who essentially agree) can't provide relief to 9/11 responders we're so fucked.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Isn't this just his shtick? It seems like every couple of weeks Weiner's shouting about something.

Maybe he's trying to be another Alan Grayson

[Pitdoc]

<script type="text/javascript" src="http://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=4298486&w=466&h=263"></script><noscript>Watch the latest video at <a href="http://video.foxnews.com">video.foxnews.com</a></noscript>


So the Democrats insisted on a 2/3 majority vote only to cover their asses come election time? Rather than pass the bill on their own? Seriously, I dont get it. Both sides seem to agree on the issue, but it still cant get done because of what? Why did the Dems insist on the 2/3 vote? And why didnt GOP's vote for it anyway if they believed in it? If two senators from NY (who essentially agree) can't provide relief to 9/11 responders we're so fucked.

More than one Republican stated that they were going to tack on an amendment repealing some of the estate tax to this bill. So, 4 Billion for NYC rescue workers( and I was ONE of them) , as long as you give about 20 Billion to rich Mofos . THATS why they couldn't have a majority vote.

[torker]

<script type="text/javascript" src="http://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=4298486&w=466&h=263"></script><noscript>Watch the latest video at <a href="http://video.foxnews.com">video.foxnews.com</a></noscript>


So the Democrats insisted on a 2/3 majority vote only to cover their asses come election time? Rather than pass the bill on their own? Seriously, I dont get it. Both sides seem to agree on the issue, but it still cant get done because of what? Why did the Dems insist on the 2/3 vote? And why didnt GOP's vote for it anyway if they believed in it? If two senators from NY (who essentially agree) can't provide relief to 9/11 responders we're so fucked.

stop making sense

[PapaBear]

And his name is Allah


http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/07/11/2010-07-11_weiner_marries_hillary_aide_at_tony_li_spot.htm l
Ex Presidents can preside over weddings? Maybe being President gets you Magistrate status or something.

[hanso]

<script type="text/javascript" src="http://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=4298486&w=466&h=263"></script><noscript>Watch the latest video at <a href="http://video.foxnews.com">video.foxnews.com</a></noscript>


So the Democrats insisted on a 2/3 majority vote only to cover their asses come election time? Rather than pass the bill on their own? Seriously, I dont get it. Both sides seem to agree on the issue, but it still cant get done because of what? Why did the Dems insist on the 2/3 vote? And why didnt GOP's vote for it anyway if they believed in it? If two senators from NY (who essentially agree) can't provide relief to 9/11 responders we're so fucked.

I think thats just the way it is. 60 votes to pass.

[Dudeman]

With anger on the house floor.

http://www.lohud.com/article/20100730/NEWS05/7300373/Weiner-explodes-on-House-floor-over-9/11-responder-bill-—--Watch-speech



Theres more to it than whats presented. This could have been passed with a simple majority

Ironically, as pointed out above, there is more than what you have presented here... passing with a simple majority would have added unrelated amendments to the bill. To just pass the bill straight up required more votes.

Did you not know that when you started this thread? Or has your anger at democrats, which is very evident on this board, caused you to twist everything to be democrat conspiracy/incompetence/etc?

[epo]

So the Democrats insisted on a 2/3 majority vote only to cover their asses come election time? Rather than pass the bill on their own? Seriously, I dont get it. Both sides seem to agree on the issue, but it still cant get done because of what? Why did the Dems insist on the 2/3 vote? And why didnt GOP's vote for it anyway if they believed in it? If two senators from NY (who essentially agree) can't provide relief to 9/11 responders we're so fucked.

Very simple process answer:

If the House wants to pass a bill without the possibly of amendments, the rules of the House then change to require a 2/3 majority.

The Democrats wanted to pass this bill in that manner because the Republicans were threatening some unrelated amendments.

The bill then failed because 2/3 majority was not reached.

[torker]

Weiner's gonna win an Oscar for his performance.
An Oscar Mayer weiner that is....ghee ghee gee

[A.J.]

Isn't this just his shtick? It seems like every couple of weeks Weiner's shouting about something.

Looks like he learned how to work a camera from his former boss Chuck Schumer.

[hanso]

Very simple process answer:

If the House wants to pass a bill without the possibly of amendments, the rules of the House then change to require a 2/3 majority.

The Democrats wanted to pass this bill in that manner because the Republicans were threatening some unrelated amendments.

The bill then failed because 2/3 majority was not reached.

I looked this up and what I saw was "ordinary" bills (which means without amendments I guess) pass with 51 votes.

I doubt that many bills have passed like this so far. Or they are not being put in the news when they do. I see only the 60 vote ones in the news.

And once agian Fox news steps on their cranks saying the dems want this. When it's Republican's adding stuff on.

[hanso]

Dem's get called wimps at times. Then when some speak out like this guy or Grayson. They get run through the muck. Hypocritical.

[epo]

I looked this up and what I saw was "ordinary" bills (which means without amendments I guess) pass with 51 votes.

I doubt that many bills have passed like this so far. Or they are not being put in the news when they do. I see only the 60 vote ones in the news.

And once agian Fox news steps on their cranks saying the dems want this. When it's Republican's adding stuff on.

Two points about this:

1. Its funny how politicians scream there shouldn't be amendments on bills, that it should just be the bill itself they vote on. That is...until their amendment is the one that isn't approved.

2. Its funny how conservative media freak out about Weiner or Grayson screaming, but that's simply an old school tactic to draw attention to yourself/your issue. Quite frankly...the rubes back home eat that shit up.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Looks like he learned how to work a camera from his former boss Chuck Schumer.

When he's having a press conference on a Sunday in the middle of a snowstorm he would make Chucky proud

[Dudeman]

When he's having a press conference on a Sunday in the middle of a snowstorm he would make Chucky proud

I am wondering if you are going to address how you misrepresented this situation. To continue your anti-democrat tirade on a comedy radio show message board you started this thread by implying that the democrats made this bill fail by not having a simple majority vote on it, when we all know it wasn't that simple (ie. the addition of amendments.) You do your position no good when you only partially explain the situation in order to make your side look better.

[epo]

Now we uncover the reason (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hbFu_USPHXmnxTOR0tOnrbYrckcwD9H942U80)why Wrestling Fan misrepresented the truth on this process:

A key backer of the bill, U.S. Rep. Peter King, a Long Island Republican, accused Democrats of staging a "charade."

King said Democrats were "petrified" about casting votes as the fall elections near on controversial amendments, possibly including one that could ban the bill from covering illegal immigrants who were sickened by trade center dust.

ONE TRICK FUCKING PONY

[Enabler]

More than one Republican stated that they were going to tack on an amendment repealing some of the estate tax to this bill. So, 4 Billion for NYC rescue workers( and I was ONE of them) , as long as you give about 20 Billion to rich Mofos . THATS why they couldn't have a majority vote.

Very simple process answer:

If the House wants to pass a bill without the possibly of amendments, the rules of the House then change to require a 2/3 majority.

The Democrats wanted to pass this bill in that manner because the Republicans were threatening some unrelated amendments.

The bill then failed because 2/3 majority was not reached.

So in a straight up majority vote in the house...the minority can add amendments? But in a 2/3 majority vote, no amendments can be tacked on? And the dems wanted the 2/3 vote to block a repub tax cut proposal?

It really is impossible to figure out which one of these jizzmops to support. Especially when virtually every person alive agrees with the original intent of the bill, but it still cant get done. Again, we're so fucked.

[epo]

So in a straight up majority vote in the house...the minority can add amendments? But in a 2/3 majority vote, no amendments can be tacked on? And the dems wanted the 2/3 vote to block a repub tax cut proposal?

It really is impossible to figure out which one of these jizzmops to support. Especially when virtually every person alive agrees with the original intent of the bill, but it still cant get done. Again, we're so fucked.

They can propose amendments which then get debated for addition. One of the major problems is they greatly slow down the process.

I would think with the great number of 9/11 responders getting sick, time would be a major concern on this issue.

[Enabler]

They can propose amendments which then get debated for addition. One of the major problems is they greatly slow down the process.

I would think with the great number of 9/11 responders getting sick, time would be a major concern on this issue.

Absolutely. And the cowardice King referred to was in reference to democrats being unwilling to pass a bill that has an amendment which would exclude illegal immigrant rescue workers from benefits?

That just seems to paint the Dems in too good of a light. Whats the actual percentage of illegal 9/11 responders? If its even 3% Id be astounded? Were democrats so afraid of voter backlash over excluding illegals that they overlooked the urgent needs of the vast majority of legal responders?

It still doesnt make sense. Arent most of the people who will be applying for these benefits cops,firemen,emt's and union construction workers? Its pretty impossible for illegal immigrants to get any of those jobs.

Personally I believe that if you worked at ground zero and got sick you deserve compensation. Regardless of citizenship. But wouldnt it have been better to go for the straight majority vote and get help to the bulk of the people right away? Then fight for the small percentage that GOP's wanted to exclude at a later time?

[hanso]

Wow! keep holding on to that fair & balanced line.

[spoon]

Wow! keep holding on to that fair & balanced line.

Shep Smith's balls are fair and balanced!

[A.J.]

Shep Smith's balls are fair and balanced!

Unlike Asian reporter One Hung Lo.

[hanso]

The asian guy is juan? Maybe WF can get to the bottom of this.

[torker]

Shep Smith's balls are fair and balanced!

Shep has testicles, not ball.

[hanso]

A-Rod has blueballs.