Any veto would be a high-risk step by Obama, because it would brand the Democratic Party as willing to shut down the government to aid several million illegal immigrants.Yeah, I'm sure the drivebys will report it that way. </sarc>
1 posted on
12/01/2014 1:33:48 PM PST by
PROCON
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-47 next last
To: PROCON
29 posted on
12/01/2014 1:48:06 PM PST by
Chickensoup
(Leftist totalitarian fascism is on the move.)
To: PROCON
32 posted on
12/01/2014 1:50:27 PM PST by
ctdonath2
(You know what, just do it.)
To: PROCON
Obama will shut down the government. The Repubs will get all of the blame.
33 posted on
12/01/2014 1:51:11 PM PST by
Bubba_Leroy
(The Obamanation Continues)
To: PROCON
Any veto would be a high-risk step by Obama, because it would brand the Democratic Party as willing to shut down the government to aid several million illegal immigrants.DO IT! Not only is a shut down a good thing for everyone, the polls show the majority of Americans are against oboma trying to become our new king by not enforcing our laws! Add putting illegals first on top of that- we on the right start to look really, really good.
Yeah. Go for it. Shut that monstrosity down.
To: PROCON
Bring it, Barry, ya miserable poofter.
To: PROCON
Any veto would be a high-risk step by Obama, because it would brand the Democratic Party as willing to shut down the government to aid several million illegal immigrants.No risk to the D's. They were 100% responsible for the last shut down, but did they get the blame? Nope. And they won't this time, either. And the GOP is too weak and too buys playing defense to get the real message out there. We know the GOP was NOT responsible for the last shut down, and we know they won't be responsible for this one if, in fact, it gets to that point. But midstream America doesn't know, won't be told by the midstream press and wouldn't listen even if they were.
37 posted on
12/01/2014 1:53:16 PM PST by
dware
(3 prohibited topics in mixed company: politics, religion and operating systems...)
To: PROCON
Well, that settles it. The GOPe is gonna cave. Again.
41 posted on
12/01/2014 1:58:51 PM PST by
Blood of Tyrants
(Good Muslims, like good Nazis or good liberals, are terrible human beings.)
To: PROCON
The Repubs lack any deftness with propaganda (not necessarily a bad word btw). Paid spots on primetime TV for weeks explaining in plain easy-to-understand language what Omoeba and the marxocrats are doing would be very effective. Lather, rinse, repeat until the message sinks in.
42 posted on
12/01/2014 1:59:28 PM PST by
SpaceBar
To: PROCON
mcconnell has already said the job of the US Senate is to fund government, cochran has said, when asked about withholding funds from obama’s illegal, illegal immigrant amnesty executive order, that he would not withold funding.
43 posted on
12/01/2014 1:59:30 PM PST by
duffee
(Dump the Chairman of the Mississippi Republican Party, joe nosef.)
To: PROCON
Just pass separate appropriation bills for each agency.
48 posted on
12/01/2014 2:04:45 PM PST by
oblomov
To: PROCON
Any veto would be a high-risk step by Obama, because it would brand the Democratic Party as willing to shut down the government to aid several million illegal immigrants.
Damnit . . . I just don't get the whole dysfunctional way that the media and the left view the word "ILLEGAL"
. . . it's like it's invisible to them.
49 posted on
12/01/2014 2:06:16 PM PST by
rhubarbk
(2014: First Flush . . . 2016: Final Flush)
To: PROCON
Shut’er down, works for me.
50 posted on
12/01/2014 2:06:24 PM PST by
VTenigma
(The Democratic party is the party of the mathematically challenged)
To: PROCON
Yes! Hes all in. Take him out!
52 posted on
12/01/2014 2:09:14 PM PST by
mom.mom
To: PROCON
Barack Obama. More interested in walling off DC war memorials than walling off our southern border.
53 posted on
12/01/2014 2:11:05 PM PST by
dirtboy
To: PROCON
Finally, an Obama action that I can rally behind!
To: PROCON
My advice is similar to what the one congress critter suggested. Fund everything long term but fund the immigration portion for only a few months. Then let’s see what happens. After a few months you can shut down the immigration part while the rest of the budget remains.
56 posted on
12/01/2014 2:17:44 PM PST by
hawkaw
To: PROCON
Go for it...Also, since we are doing things by fiat these days, the House should not fund ANY back pay either. NONE. (I know, wishful thinking considering the drunk is running thigs over there)
57 posted on
12/01/2014 2:29:17 PM PST by
Ghost of SVR4
(So many are so hopelessly dependent on the government that they will fight to protect it.)
To: PROCON
Shut it down, plow it under, spread lye over it, never let it rise again.
59 posted on
12/01/2014 2:39:07 PM PST by
smoothsailing
(Mel Kaminsky for President!!!)
To: PROCON
please..DO! IT!
60 posted on
12/01/2014 2:50:00 PM PST by
skinkinthegrass
("Bathhouse" E'Bola/0'Boehmer/0'McConnell; all STINK and their best friends are flies. d8^)
To: PROCON
61 posted on
12/01/2014 2:51:30 PM PST by
ßuddaßudd
(>> F U B O << "What the hell kind of country is this if I can only hate a man if he's white?")
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-47 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson