Ted Cruz: No to Superstorm Sandy Aid, Yes to Aid for Texas Explosion

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

I find comical the suggestion that those on the left are trying to make an action by a U.S. Senator - a politician - look political. I doubt that any senator needs help making what he or she does look political. What part of advocating legislation for your state is not political?

Regards,

D-Ray

Indeed. It cracks me up when a politician accuses politicians on the other side of the aisle of "playing politics." Well no shit, Sherlock.

[ebacon]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

And the right, once again shows the considerable depth of their hypocrisy in demanding financial aid for Texas, after fighting to deny financial aid for NY/NJ.

Add this to that the fact that so-called Conservatives, as a basic tenet of their idelogy, aren't supposed to demand help from others in the first place and their BS gets even deeper. Where, oh where is that fabled "Great American self-reliance" now? Shouldn't they be choppping down trees and making their own lumber to rebuild their own town instead of looking for a government handout?

You guys are so full of shit it's amazing.

Dave

They are full of shit.

Texas played political games last year when they were in a drought and fighting fires. They went public with complaints about Obama not giving them disaster aid. The truth was Obama already gave them something like twenty aid packages. The trick was the aid was fire aid, not disaster aid.

I'm sick of their games. That and fear is all they have to sell.

[whell]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

You guys are so full of shit it's amazing.

Dave

"You guys". There you go again. What's up with you, anyway?

[whell]

Originally Posted by bobabode

Awwww, poor baby. You don't think turnabout is fair play? It is a tactic employed by your so called conservative Republicant's at every turn of a news cycle. Get over yourself.

Right. So I guess we should just let every single pork laden piece of shit piece of legislation fly right on by when it suits us so we can make false moral comparisons in a lame attempt to score political points. Great plan. But we've been doing it for years, so we might as well keep going. No reason to stop now.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Indeed. It cracks me up when a politician accuses politicians on the other side of the aisle of "playing politics." Well no shit, Sherlock.

You're right. The title of this thread should be "No Shit, Sherlock".

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Right. So I guess we should just let every single pork laden piece of shit piece of legislation fly right on by when it suits us so we can make false moral comparisons in a lame attempt to score political points. Great plan. But we've been doing it for years, so we might as well keep going. No reason to stop now.

Agreed, other than the myth that the GOP tries to perpetuate that they're the party of fiscal responsibility. Anyone who puts any faith in supply-side economics should be forced to repeat middle school.

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by whell

Right. So I guess we should just let every single pork laden piece of shit piece of legislation fly right on by when it suits us so we can make false moral comparisons in a lame attempt to score political points. Great plan. But we've been doing it for years, so we might as well keep going. No reason to stop now.

I thought you took your ball, ran home and slid back under a rock, Whellie. I guess you've ripened into a full blown wingnut during your hiatus... Welcome back, I guess.

One more edit, nice to see you're in Ted Cruz's corner these days. How'd your logical falacy studies go?

[mini me]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Agreed, other than the myth that the GOP tries to perpetuate that they're the party of fiscal responsibility. Anyone who puts any faith in supply-side economics should be forced to repeat middle school.

Here, a false moral comparison is being made between advocating supply side economics, and advocating common sense. There's no advocacy in supply side economics when one:

- states opposition to an aid bill that's not really an aid bill
- advocates that the government stop spending more money than it takes in
- advocates that the government go deeper into debt to fund programs that are not affordable, and in many cases, just plain stupid.

[whell]

Originally Posted by bobabode

I thought you took your ball, ran home and slid back under a rock, Whellie. I guess you've ripened into a full blown wingnut during your hiatus... Welcome back, I guess.

One more edit, nice to see you're in Ted Cruz's corner these days. How'd your logical falacy studies go?

I see you've failed to raise your level of commentary beyond banality.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by mini me

Again, a false moral comparison is being made between advocating supply side economics, and advocating common sense. There's no advocacy in supply side economics when one:

- states opposition to an aid bill that's not really an aid bill
- advocates that the government stop spending more money than it takes in
- advocates that the government go deeper into debt to fund programs that are not affordable, and in many cases, just plain stupid.

There's an implication within your post that the GOP is less likely to do those things. I'm amazed at how many people buy into this myth. They just spend their money on different things than Democrats (e.g., unnecessary military adventurism, tax breaks for industry and rich supporters). Dubya's performance should have put to rest forever the notion that the GOP is the party of fiscal responsibility. Democrats are fiscally irresponsible. Republicans are insanely fiscally irresponsible.