Cut the debt; legalize gay marriage.

ima_drummer2k · May 10, 2012

one thing is abundantly clear: Legalizing same-sex marriages would mean a windfall for the wedding industry.
Click to expand...

Bring it.

Hightop · May 10, 2012

Northside Storm said: ↑

Name me a solution to the deficit that

a) does not involve massive environmental damage
b) creates new jobs, and supports a buoyant, AMERICAN industry
c) cuts government spending on entitlement programs
d) does not harm people by doing things like snatching the food from their mouths
Click to expand...

Killing all socialists.

GladiatoRowdy · May 10, 2012

Hightop said: ↑

Killing all socialists.
Click to expand...

After you finish with the three dozen or so actual socialists in the country, what then?

geeimsobored · May 10, 2012

GladiatoRowdy said: ↑

After you finish with the three dozen or so actual socialists in the country, what then?
Click to expand...

Considering the cost of executions that are compliant with the 8th amendment, I'm pretty sure his plan would help increase the deficit.

QdoubleA · May 10, 2012

Hightop said: ↑

Killing all socialists.
Click to expand...

You're going a little too far bud, as if your nazi quote and terrorist sig weren't enough.

Hightop · May 10, 2012

QdoubleA said: ↑

You're going a little too far bud, as if your nazi quote and terrorist sig weren't enough.
Click to expand...

It's an anti-Nazi/collectivist (same thing) quote.

FranchiseBlade · May 10, 2012

Hightop said: ↑

It's an anti-Nazi/collectivist (same thing) quote.
Click to expand...

It is?

This is a list of words, terms, concepts, and slogans that were specifically used in Nazi Germany.
Some words were coined by Adolf Hitler and other Nazi Party members. Other words and concepts were borrowed and appropriated, and other terms were already in use during the Weimar Republic. Finally, some are taken from Germany's cultural tradition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz – "The common good before the private good"; Rudolf Jung popularized it in his book Der Nationale Sozialismus, 1922, 2nd edition. This became Hitler's basic stance on the subordination of the economy to the national interest. (6)
Click to expand...

Maybe you should research a little more if you think it was an anti-Nazi slogan.

Hightop · May 10, 2012

FranchiseBlade said: ↑

It is?

Maybe you should research a little more if you think it was an anti-Nazi slogan.
Click to expand...

It is a pro-collectivist/socialist Nazi slogan. A dumb one. Kind of like "It takes a village"

FranchiseBlade · May 10, 2012

Hightop said: ↑

It is a pro-collectivist/socialist Nazi slogan. A dumb one. Kind of like "It takes a village"
Click to expand...

Wow, you changed your tune quickly.

Hightop · May 10, 2012

FranchiseBlade said: ↑

Wow, you changed your tune quickly.
Click to expand...

You just misunderstood what I was trying to say or I didn't explain it well enough. Nazism is just as evil as Communism/Socialism/Liberalism. There is no way I am in favor of it.

FranchiseBlade · May 10, 2012

Hightop said: ↑

You just misunderstood what I was trying to say or I didn't explain it well enough. Nazism is just as evil as Communism/Socialism/Liberalism. There is no way I am in favor of it.
Click to expand...

The first time you mentioned that it was an anti-nazi saying, then you said it was a pro-nazi saying.

That's what I was saying when I mentioned you changing your tune. You explaining your thoughts on it being a stupid saying clarifies your feelings on it.

Northside Storm · May 10, 2012

Hightop said: ↑

Killing all socialists.
Click to expand...

Btw, is that a threat to the president, as I seem to remember you regard him as a socialist?

LOL

watch out for the drones and secret service HIGHTOPPPPPP

Northside Storm · May 10, 2012

With that said, nice to see the death threats. When you reach that path, it's abundantly clear you've got a good solution up for discussion, with no other retorts than the weak delusions of violence.

So to get back on topic---

Gay marriage---

1)helps the economy
2)helps the debt situation
3)is more than morally and biologically defensible

What are we waiting for?

geeimsobored · May 10, 2012

Well the Republicans came out swinging. Some of their debt reduction "proposals" went through the house.

First, they want to stop the mandatory defense cuts from the debt ceiling deal and instead plan to offset it with cuts to food stamps, medicaid, federal funding for programs like meals on wheels, etc.. Basically its a **** you to old and poor people so we can keep up our bloated defense budget.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/20...to-cut-food-stamps-to-avoid-defense-reduction

The U.S. House voted to cut food stamps, federal workers’ benefits and other domestic programs to avoid scheduled reductions in defense spending.

The chamber today passed, 218-199, a plan to cut about $310 billion in spending to replace automatic defense-spending reductions that lawmakers in both parties agree shouldn’t be allowed to take effect in January.

“It’s important that we make sure that we’re scrutinizing how we’re spending hard-earned taxpayer dollars,” said House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, a Wisconsin Republican.

Democrats lined up against the measure, H.R. 5652, saying it would put too much of the deficit burden on the needy. The proposal goes to the Democratic-controlled Senate, where it is doomed to failure.

The Republican plan is one that “asks nothing of Mr. Exxon, that asks nothing more of hedge fund managers, but asks those who are most vulnerable in our society to share more pain,” said Representative Lloyd Doggett, a Texas Democrat.

The automatic spending reductions due to begin in January are triggered by a so-called supercommittee’s failure last year to come up with a plan to reduce the $1.2 trillion federal budget deficit. About $55 billion would be subtracted next year from the Pentagon budget, with an equal amount from non-defense programs.

Though the plan faces a veto threat from President Barack Obama, it offers a preview of what Republicans may seek after the November elections, when lawmakers consider in earnest whether to replace the automatic cuts with a new plan.

Political Risk
It also represents a political risk for Republicans. While they say voters will reward them for making tough budget choices, their plan is opposed by many outside groups. Among them are AARP, the advocacy group for the elderly; the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which opposes reductions in aid to the poor; the National Council of La Raza, which criticized the plan’s effect on illegal immigrants, and the National Treasury Employees Union, representing federal workers.

House Democrats offered an alternative that relies mostly on tax increases, including imposing a minimum tax on millionaires. It would curb various business-related tax breaks, cut farm subsidies and raise premiums for the government’s flood-insurance program. House Republicans refused to allow a vote on the Democratic plan.

‘Kind of Worried’
“Apparently our Republican colleagues are kind of worried about what we were going to propose,” said Representative Chris Van Hollen, the top Democrat on the Budget Committee. “Let’s ask people who are making over $1 million a year to get rid of some of their tax breaks, to help pay for our common defense so we don’t have to have a budget that whacks everyone else.”

The Republicans’ plan would reduce government spending by about $310 billion over a decade, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. It would cut off food stamps to 1.8 million Americans, according to CBO, while reducing aid to millions more. About 280,000 children who now receive food stamps would no longer be automatically eligible for free school lunches, CBO said.

The bill would make it easier for state governments to cut enrollment in Medicaid, the health care program for the poor, and eliminate Social Services Block Grants, which fund programs such as ‘Meals on Wheels.’

It would make it harder for illegal immigrants to claim a child tax credit and would require federal workers to pay more for their pensions, which CBO has said are more generous than private-sector retirement benefits.

Consumer Financial Protection
Other provisions would reduce funding for the administration’s Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, tighten medical malpractice laws and reduce Medicaid payments to Puerto Rico and other U.S. territories. It would allow some elements of the scheduled cuts to take effect, including a 2 percent reduction in Medicare spending.

Republicans say tough choices are necessary and that many of the cuts are designed to clamp down on waste. They say some state governments have stretched the rules and allowed too many people to collect food stamps.

“What we’re simply saying is people should actually be eligible for the benefits they receive,” said Ryan.
Click to expand...

Oh and to top that, the Republicans voted to defund the American Community Survey which is part of the US Census Bureau. Aside from the fact that we've funded this since Thomas Jefferson was president, tons of businesses are extremely reliant on this data. I myself use it all the time for work. Talk about an attack on business. WTF is this?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/...-census-survey_n_1504748.html?ref=mostpopular

WASHINGTON –- The House voted Wednesday to eliminate the detailed surveys of America that have been conducted by the Census Bureau since the nation’s earliest days.

House Republicans, increasingly suspicious of the census generally, advanced a measure to cut the American Community Survey. It passed 232 to 190.

The survey is not part of the constitutionally mandated population count, but some version of it has been done by law as part of the decennial survey since the time of Thomas Jefferson to assess the needs of the nation. It’s generally considered a vital tool for business.

Republicans, acknowledging its usefulness, attacked the survey as an unconstitutional invasion of privacy, arguing that the government has no business knowing how many flush toilets someone has, for instance.

“It would seem that these questions hardly fit the scope of what was intended or required by the Constitution,” said Rep. Daniel Webster (R-Fla.), author of the amendment.

“This survey is inappropriate for taxpayer dollars,” Webster added. “It’s the definition of a breach of personal privacy. It’s the picture of what's wrong in Washington, D.C. It's unconstitutional.”

The survey used to be done every 10 years, along with the census, when 1 out of 6 Americans were required to answer the so-called “long form.” But the administration of President George W. Bush reformed the process in 2005 to do an annual survey of 250,000 households, making the survey more manageable, cheaper and more timely.

Democrats were perplexed by the move, which would deprive policymakers and businesses of vast, vital troves of data that they use to make decisions,

“The Republicans have earned a reputation as the ‘do-nothing party’ and now they want to also be the ‘know-nothing party,’ “ said Rep. Carolyn Maloney after the vote. “This vote repeals the work done by Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama and six Congresses to modernize the census, and does so without even a hearing or full debate.”

Rep. Chaka Fattah (D-Pa.), who ran the floor debate for Democrats, seemed especially vexed.

“We've been doing surveys in the long form since 1790 as a nation," Fattah said, referring to the time when Thomas Jefferson oversaw the census. "It's critically important. The idea that we're going to leave the greatest country in the world with less information about the condition of communities and of our families -- and that we're going to do that appropriately -- defies logic.”

It was one of two attacks Wednesday on the census. Earlier, the House passed by voice vote a measure to bar the federal government from enforcing penalties against people who refuse to fill out the longer survey.

“I think it's important to have the information, but it's important that people have freedom and liberty and we do not have an intrusive federal government that would impose a fine on people if they didn't let the information come out about whether they had a flush toilet,” said Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa).

It is unlikely that the Senate would pass such a measure, but it also could be attached to other legislation, as the House GOP has managed before with measures the Senate does not like. Webster said his cut would save $2.4 billion.
Click to expand...

Northside Storm · May 10, 2012

Webster said his cut would save $2.4 billion.
Click to expand...

LOL

Let's cut the census! That will help grow jobs! Federal guvment out.

this is ridiculous, and the definition of pissing in a bucket.

mc mark · May 10, 2012

Oh and to top that, the Republicans voted to defund the American Community Survey which is part of the US Census Bureau.
Click to expand...

And has been since the time of Jefferson

Guess they don't wanna know how many blacks, hispanics and gays we have in the country now.

Forums

Cut the debt; legalize gay marriage.

ima_drummer2k Member

Hightop Member

GladiatoRowdy Member

geeimsobored Member

QdoubleA Member

Hightop Member

FranchiseBlade Member
Supporting Member

Hightop Member

FranchiseBlade Member
Supporting Member

Hightop Member

FranchiseBlade Member
Supporting Member

Northside Storm Member

Northside Storm Member

geeimsobored Member

Northside Storm Member

mc mark Member

Share This Page

About ClutchFans

Rockets Content

Support ClutchFans!

Cut the debt; legalize gay marriage.

ima_drummer2k Member

Hightop Member

GladiatoRowdy Member

geeimsobored Member

QdoubleA Member

Hightop Member

FranchiseBlade Member Supporting Member

Hightop Member

FranchiseBlade Member Supporting Member

Hightop Member

FranchiseBlade Member Supporting Member

Northside Storm Member

Northside Storm Member

geeimsobored Member

Northside Storm Member

mc mark Member

Share This Page

FranchiseBlade Member
Supporting Member

FranchiseBlade Member
Supporting Member

FranchiseBlade Member
Supporting Member