If Wis doesn't primary Paul "Fkhead" Ryan out of office in 2018 I'm going to be madder than a hornets nest.
POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
Amazing how fast projects get done when you cut all the red tape and give incentives to a contractor to get the job done quicker and correctly. Imagine the inflated costs if they just let the contractor take their sweet time getting this done. Would be way over budget and behind schedule like most government projects are. $3.1M is a drop in the bucket and money well spent if they get it done by May 21. http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/news/2017/05/01/dot-chiefsays-i-85-should-re-open-by-may-26.html
Agreed. Every contract we have has performance guarantees that award us for exceeding KPIs and penalize us for missing them. At the end of the day, money is all that gets anyone's attention.
![[pfftt]](https://ct.yimg.com/mr/uploads/891/1682173.gif "Pfffttt [pfftt]")
Prove me wrong, I dare you.
![[eyeroll]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/rolleye/rolleye0011.r191677.gif "Eye roll [eyeroll]")
I'll just enjoy the laughs. Thanks for the offer though.
Calipari needs to quit taking the fkng air out of the ball when the Cats have a lead in the last 5 minutes of big games. That would be super.
I didn't know this....Bevin has 9 children - 4 of them are black.
And liberals *hate* this guy.
Now compare him to evil milk toast Steve Beshear who is 10000% old and racist af.
People are so stupid.
And liberals *hate* this guy.
Now compare him to evil milk toast Steve Beshear who is 10000% old and racist af.
People are so stupid.
Good piece here from Byron York. It's illuminating. I see several posts here lambasting Paul Ryan and other Republicans for not getting stuff done. Some of it is deserved. But generally I don't think people understand/appreciate/care about the herding of cats problem. All Republicans aren't the same - an R from Maine is a lot closer to a D than he is an R from Alabama, etc. Reading this was both enlightening - and depressing.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/b...t-of-republicans-dont-want-to/article/2621543
Byron York: Why can't House repeal Obamacare? Because a lot of Republicans don't want to
On March 24, when the Speaker pulled the GOP Obamacare bill before what would have been a sure defeat, he said, "We're going to be living with Obamacare for the foreseeable future."
But why? Republicans have 238 seats in the House. Repealing Obamacare will require 217 votes. Even with unanimous Democratic opposition, Republicans could lose 21 votes and still prevail on repeal. Why haven't they done it?
By this time, it's becoming increasingly clear that Republicans have not repealed Obamacare because a lot of Republicans do not want to repeal Obamacare.
They don't even want to sorta repeal Obamacare. The bill currently on the table, like the bill pulled in March, falls far short of a full repeal of Obamacare. And yet Republicans still cannot agree on it.
....No, the lawmaker said, "It is a problem that we have members in the Republican conference that do not want Obamacare repealed, because of their district. That's the fundamental thing that we're seeing here."
"I thought we campaigned on repealing it," the lawmaker continued. "Now that it's our turn, I'm finding there's about 50 people who really don't want to repeal Obamacare. They want to keep it."
Other conservatives are saying similar things. In an email exchange Thursday afternoon, I asked one member where the latest bill stood. "We absolutely do not have the votes to repeal it," he answered. "The fact that some members are balking at even allowing states to waive out of some of Obamacare regulations is proof positive. We've gone from 'repeal it root-and-branch' to 'Mother-may-I opt out of some of Obamacare' — and we still are having trouble getting the votes."
..."A pure repeal would get less than 200 votes," said the second member quoted above. "It really is one of the biggest political shams in history — many of these members would not have been elected without promising repeal, and now they are wilting. Some are even complaining that [the Rep. Tom MacArthur amendment] pushes the bill too far right — even though is it far short of a full repeal."
...Now, the centrists — a number of Republicans refer to them as "the mods," for moderates — appear to be moving the goalposts, even as the conservatives offer concessions. Conservatives suspect the centrists were perfectly happy for conservatives to take the blame for killing the first bill, but now are showing their true colors by rejecting compromise on the second version. Whatever the circumstances, they don't want to vote to repeal Obamacare.
The reason is fear. When the lawmaker said colleagues don't want repeal "because of their district," that was another way of saying the members are all representatives, and the voters they represent don't want repeal. From The Hill on Thursday afternoon: "Many vulnerable Republicans are running scared. One moderate Republican was overheard in a House cafeteria this week telling an aide: 'If I vote for this healthcare bill, it will be the end of my career.'"
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/b...t-of-republicans-dont-want-to/article/2621543
Byron York: Why can't House repeal Obamacare? Because a lot of Republicans don't want to
On March 24, when the Speaker pulled the GOP Obamacare bill before what would have been a sure defeat, he said, "We're going to be living with Obamacare for the foreseeable future."
But why? Republicans have 238 seats in the House. Repealing Obamacare will require 217 votes. Even with unanimous Democratic opposition, Republicans could lose 21 votes and still prevail on repeal. Why haven't they done it?
By this time, it's becoming increasingly clear that Republicans have not repealed Obamacare because a lot of Republicans do not want to repeal Obamacare.
They don't even want to sorta repeal Obamacare. The bill currently on the table, like the bill pulled in March, falls far short of a full repeal of Obamacare. And yet Republicans still cannot agree on it.
....No, the lawmaker said, "It is a problem that we have members in the Republican conference that do not want Obamacare repealed, because of their district. That's the fundamental thing that we're seeing here."
"I thought we campaigned on repealing it," the lawmaker continued. "Now that it's our turn, I'm finding there's about 50 people who really don't want to repeal Obamacare. They want to keep it."
Other conservatives are saying similar things. In an email exchange Thursday afternoon, I asked one member where the latest bill stood. "We absolutely do not have the votes to repeal it," he answered. "The fact that some members are balking at even allowing states to waive out of some of Obamacare regulations is proof positive. We've gone from 'repeal it root-and-branch' to 'Mother-may-I opt out of some of Obamacare' — and we still are having trouble getting the votes."
..."A pure repeal would get less than 200 votes," said the second member quoted above. "It really is one of the biggest political shams in history — many of these members would not have been elected without promising repeal, and now they are wilting. Some are even complaining that [the Rep. Tom MacArthur amendment] pushes the bill too far right — even though is it far short of a full repeal."
...Now, the centrists — a number of Republicans refer to them as "the mods," for moderates — appear to be moving the goalposts, even as the conservatives offer concessions. Conservatives suspect the centrists were perfectly happy for conservatives to take the blame for killing the first bill, but now are showing their true colors by rejecting compromise on the second version. Whatever the circumstances, they don't want to vote to repeal Obamacare.
The reason is fear. When the lawmaker said colleagues don't want repeal "because of their district," that was another way of saying the members are all representatives, and the voters they represent don't want repeal. From The Hill on Thursday afternoon: "Many vulnerable Republicans are running scared. One moderate Republican was overheard in a House cafeteria this week telling an aide: 'If I vote for this healthcare bill, it will be the end of my career.'"
So, bottom line - I don't know what Ryan, or Trump for that matter, are supposed to do with that. You have somewhere between 40 and 50 Republicans in the House who think if they vote for to repeal and replace, it will end their careers.
What is Ryan supposed to do, hold them at gunpoint? Blood from turnip.
I recall some of this in 2010 when the Dems were armtwisting to get the votes to pass Obamacare. Seems like one guy from Michigan voted for it and then resigned. So, they got it done, but my recollection is they were just a few votes short of what they needed. Ryan can't have more than 22 defections - if he's got between 40 and 50, don't see how you bridge that gap.
This is like what I say when posters blame Cal for someone leaving early for the draft, even when it looks like a stupid decision. What's he supposed to do, pull a gun?
What is Ryan supposed to do, hold them at gunpoint? Blood from turnip.
I recall some of this in 2010 when the Dems were armtwisting to get the votes to pass Obamacare. Seems like one guy from Michigan voted for it and then resigned. So, they got it done, but my recollection is they were just a few votes short of what they needed. Ryan can't have more than 22 defections - if he's got between 40 and 50, don't see how you bridge that gap.
This is like what I say when posters blame Cal for someone leaving early for the draft, even when it looks like a stupid decision. What's he supposed to do, pull a gun?
According to Twitter: Non white person/someone who doesn't masturbate to American flag.
I learn lots of things there. Just last week I got paid by Soros to protest at Berkley but ran into some violence and the guy who tried to slap me was a left-winger posing as a right-winger posing as a left-winger posing as a furry.
Last edited:
Satan is a made up character in a story that SyFy channel rejected for being less believable than Tiger-rantula vs. Sharktopus.
Republicans need to do the right thing their political careers be damned. Term limits, we need term limits people.
Matthew 24:36
But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
awesome to interact with someone that knows more than God
But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
awesome to interact with someone that knows more than God
Anyone else watching this press briefing? Mulvaney and Kelly are putting the Democrats and media on blast. Both just said regardless of what the Democrats are celebrating and regardless of what the media is reporting, the budget includes several hundred million towards building walls and securing the border.
"We are taking their (the Dems) taxpayer money to build this (the wall)".
He's drilling the Dems.
He's drilling the Dems.
347 million towards replacing chain link fencing with 20 foot high solid steel. The border security asked for and prefers that in certain areas compared to brick and mortar because they can see through it. Also, concrete levees will be built to secure the border where there is water.
Last edited:
I hope trump shuts the effing government down for the rest of this term. Kind of like a chef ramsey hell's kitchen SHUT IT DOWN!" That'd be a start.
Mulvaney seems to think that might be the answer to draining the swamp (my interpretation of his comments).
BTW, Mulvaney is the OMB director... in case anyone is curious.
If Ryan isnt getting the support from repubs that he needs, they need to out each and everyone repub that doesnt want to repeal. That way their constituients can see whos to blame.
But he wont, because hes trying to ride the fence so he gets support for the presidential nom in the future.
So if Ryan is so dead set on running, he needs to step down so someone not afraid of criticism can do it.
And yes to term limits.
But he wont, because hes trying to ride the fence so he gets support for the presidential nom in the future.
So if Ryan is so dead set on running, he needs to step down so someone not afraid of criticism can do it.
And yes to term limits.
If Paul Ryan thinks he could ever be elected President he's a damn fool.
well, that was my first instinct too - just embarrass them. name names. Shame them. Let the whole world see who it is that is doing this. but.......read the story I quoted. that's not the premise. The premise is you have 40-50 who don't want to vote for it because their constituents don't want them to vote for it. If they vote for it, they'll be punished by their constituents, who will vote them out of office.
In that context, it does no good for Trump to call a press conference and specifically name Congressman X from the state of Y for screwing this - that will be good publicity for that guy.....
How anyone could be against term limits is beyond me.
I generally think they are a good idea, but at the same time, being a lawmaker in congress isn't something that's really easy. Trump went in as an "outsider" and is finding that his business ways of having everyone tell him yes to every idea or question, screwing people over if he felt like it, etc, doesn't necessarily translate to the public sector.
There would have to be a happy medium - probably 8-10 years. If you replaced people wholesale every term, nothing would ever get done.
Their constituents aren't going to be without healthcare. They will be without Obamacare and that needs to be made clear to their voters.
Damn, forget Trump telling the press something just let Mulvaney do it. That guy just laid the hammer on the Dems.
Mostly, yes, unless they have a preexisting condition, then they'll lose everything. The Freedom Caucus is only on board now because they got their way, and preexisting conditions aren't included in the new bill.
That's why the new bill is losing support from some moderates. Like it or not, taking that away from people after giving it to them for several years is risky.
Not to mention what makes matters worse is even though the Freedom Caucus wants no preexisting conditions covered for the general public, they also put in an exemption clause, allowing them, their families, their staff and their staff's families to continue to be covered with preexisting conditions.
Basically, what's good enough for the general public, isn't good enough for them and theirs.
Paul Ryan is a goddam idiot and wouldn't come close to winning the Presidency.
+ ![[cheers]](https://ct.yimg.com/mr/uploads/891/5628.gif "Cheers [cheers]")
This is great news - especially the part about hiring new college and university graduates.
I'd be on board with more local tech resources. 75% of those roles at our company have been moved offshore and the ROI hasn't been great IMO.
How is the pre-existing condition dealt with in terms of cut off? For example, say you had cancer in 2012 and were covered under the ACA - you went through treatment and beat it. If the ACA is repealed and you are covered under the new act, and you have a recurrence 2 years from now, is that covered or not?
