Are Republicans Committing Treason?

I thought that this was an interesting article and it asks a question that I think is long overdue. When does the GOP cross the line into treason? Certainly obstructing everything in order to prevent a president they disagree with from having a successful presidency to the point of absurdity is a clear sign that America is not their priority even though they have taken an oath of office to serve this country and not just the people that make them personally wealthy. I think the question is definitely worth considering.

Are Republicans Committing Treason?

The Republican Party no longer has Americans' best interests at heart, and we are suffering because of it. Once upon a time, in a land that now seems to have been populated by tooth fairies and unicorns, there was a political party that had a set of core beliefs to which they actually adhered.
Among them was that actually balancing the budget, as opposed to just talking about it, was sacrosanct. Slow change, while necessary, had to be balanced against the traditions of the United States, ones that had mostly served us well over two centuries.
Foreign military adventures should be limited to our national security interests. And one of the single most important components of diplomacy was protecting the economic interests not only of an elite few, but of the great many Americans who toiled in our factories and fields.
This party was known as the Republican Party, and while one might have disagreed with them on their policy prescriptions to cure any particular US ill, one could at least see some logic in their beliefs and understand that they - with some obvious exceptions from time to time (ahem, Joseph McCarthy, ahem) - were doing what they thought was right for the United States of America.
Today, this once respectable organization has turned into nothing so much as a collective id the size of a David Vitter Pampers shopping spree. When facing changes to this nation that make them uncomfortable, they choose national hate. When facing ideological worship versus the greatness of the US, the former always wins the day. When facing a choice of what is good for the US or their personal bank accounts, they inevitably go with the latter.
Every. Single. Time.

http://www.alternet.org/story/151711/are_republicans_committing_treason

 

Of course, you believe everything on this website. LOL. Wake up and smell reality.

 

Now explain this to us again.
How can you accuse the right of obstructing anything when BO was able to get his healthcare passed without a single Repub vote? If he didn't need a single Repub vote to get healthcare passed why would he need one for any other piece of legislation?

 

Probably the same way that you say Obama has had "zero" accomplisments while whining about how he passed health care reform at the same time...except that I'm being honest. Your problem is that you can't see that "NO" votes from Republicans IS obstruction even with 100's of Republican ideas in the final law.

 

Feel free to correct any of the figures presented on the website....If you can. Clichés don't really do the trick.

 

If BO has been able to get his agenda passed without a single Repub vote what exactly was obstructed & how did if effect the final outcome? By your reasoning it sounds like you think a "nay" vote = obstruction. That being the case, would you accuse the dems of obstructionism (and treason) for their unanimous vote against BO's budget plan?

 

I'm just using the liberal tactic of attacking the messenger. It seems to work pretty well for the Lefties (even though they can't attack the substance) so I thought I'd give it a try.

 

I'm sorry, but if I have to explain the meaning of the word obstruction to you then we both have a huge hill to climb. My burden would be trying to figure out how to talk down to your level using small words and pictures and your burden would consist entirely of comprehending. Let's not go there.

 

Well, perhaps we should go slower that you may be able to keep up (although I believe this is really just an attempt to dodge the question because the real answer destroys your defense of BO's failed agenda).
What was obstructed? There were attempts to obstruct but since BO got what he wanted was anything really obstructed?
So, I'll ask you again....how can any of this be the Repubs fault when BO can get what he wants with no Repub votes?

 

I was gonna ask if anyone here believed the House or Senate is focused on doing what is right for america, but that is too subjective and any answer would be essentially pointless. Instead I'll ask if anyone here believes the House or Senate is focused on the common good, or for the benefit of the party? My answer is the party.

 

I think old turtle face put it best...

 

So, just how do Repub attempts to obstruct legislation matter, in the least, when history proves BO can get his agenda passed without a single Repub vote? How does that work, exactly?

 

Most using filibusters at a record rate.

Obstructionism
GOP Set to Triple Filibuster Record

How bad is GOP obstructionism in the Senate? Republican senators are on pace to more than triple the previous record for uses of a filibuster in a Congress. In 2009, there were a record 112 cloture votes (the number of cloture votes is how you measure the use of filibusters). So far in 2010, there have already been more than 40 cloture votes. The previous record was in 1995-1996, when the Republican-controlled Senate required 50 cloture votes.

 

The Repubs should have filibustered more! Maybe it would have prevented BO from getting every piece of legislation passed that he wanted passed.

4th request:

So, just how do Repub attempts to obstruct legislation matter, in the least, when history proves BO can get his agenda passed without a single Repub vote? How does that work, exactly?

Read more: http://www.partisanlines.com/threads/are-republicans-committing-treason.4352/#ixzz1tN6Z9rEG​

 

I asked this before and you did not answer, but just how did the Republicans manage to filibuster the Senate when the democrats held 60 votes?

 

Every piece? And you seriously believe that? Would you admit to being wrong about that if I pointed out one that he couldn't get passed? Or two, or three, or four? I mean how many would I have to point out before you'd admit that he didn't get every piece of legislation passed? Just wondering.​

 

Glad you asked. Sorry I missed it before. The 111th congress (2009-2010) you are referring to filibusted 63 times.

BTW That was a record number only to be eclipsed by the 112th congress.

 

If BO could get Obamacare passed without a single Repub vote why couldn't he get any other bill passed with no Repub votes?

 

Do you really believe that Obama is getting his money one dollar at a time from little old ladies, kids collecting soda cans and average joes?
You know obama had 3/4 of a billion last election and this one could be over a billion.

" Barack Obama raised roughly $750 million from donors, surpassing all of his White House opponents this year and also eclipsing the total amount of money raised by all of the presidential candidates combined in 2004".
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=6397572&page=1

 

UHMMM? I think you still missed the question. The democrats had 60 votes. It only takes 60 votes to end a filibuster. Therefore, the only party capable of pulling off a filibuster would have been the democrats. Please explain just how you can blame the Republicans for the democrats actions.