This was not a "dress rehearsal", and it was not a "small change". This was the DNC making a significant change to their platform. They left out mentions of God, and the capital of Israel being Jerusalem. People made a big enough stink that Obama felt it needed to be changed. When it was brought to the floor the delegates booed God and Israel.
wow you're really digging deep on this one.
I mean it's all there in the video, you can see it with your own 2 eyes. but let's try this again.
- the arena was more than half empty. there was hardly anyone there. yes, some people boo'ed. but they're not booing God or the state of Israel
they were booing those changes.
- they were not "significant" changes either. that implies and assumes that everyone has a strong opinion about God and Jerusalem; as though they were major planks of the platform. adding in a few words and one sentence is not a significant change. it's a small amendment.
- when you say "people made a big stink" you mean "hardcore conservatives and Fox News cried a fucking river until a non-issue became an issue." nobody else really cared. and that's partly why those people were booing. they didn't like that the Dems were again conceding to artificial drama created by the GOP.
the point here is that the RNC got a huge shower of boo's when they went to ratify their
entire platform in front of the
entire delegation.
the DNC got some boos when they went to ratify small changes in front of barely half their delegation.
I know you're not very good with context so try and let that sink in before you snap reply... even though you won't
Actually, in the Senate, 60 votes is satisfactory if the minority party votes down in unison.
do yourself a favor and take a community college course on the US Congress.
you also forgot the death of Ted Kennedy, Obama's vacated Senate seat, and the fact that 60 votes is not a majority in the 21st century.
Really? So, only Bush could create debt but not Obama or Clinton? That's fucking convenient.
is English your first language?
your comprehension skills are terrible.
no one said that Obama can't add to the debt.
but I'll ask again; do you have any idea how the debt works?
do you know how borrowing and lending works?
do you know what interest is?
Obama's debt is still part of the total debt. of course.
but it doesn't account for anywhere near HALF of the debt we've incurred thanks
directly to Republicans while they were in power.
- 2 massive wars that were unfunded and borrowed heavily from Chinese banks.
- tax cuts for the highest earners that none of them needed which didn't create more jobs and were also completely unfunded.
- bank bailouts.
these things were not balanced with new revenues and they all carry interest. we will still be paying for this nonsense several different presidents from now.
Sorry, but your picture paints a skewed, er, uh, picture of the truth. Unless I am reading it wrong, it claims we had no debt prior to 2001.
this is why I call you an ignorant clown.
because you act like one.
that "skewed picture" is direct from the Congressional Budget Office.
and it doesn't say that we had "no debt" in 2001
that's just the
starting point for the Bush tax cuts and the 2 wars which happen to account for the vast majority of the current debt.
how can you be so dumb and still manage to operate a computer?
