He's not disputing that point Sum...

Forget it...the man is without reason...and he accuses me of spinning the vote!

What I said was factual. The rest is conjecture.

Can you not see that you are ignoring the fact that even if everyone had voted for it, it would not have been signed into law because it had already been replaced with another bill?

You are spinning this by trying to make the vote matter on a bill that was already replaced and was only brought up for show to counter the Ryan Medicare vote that the Democrats forced in the house.

(06-16-2011 02:27 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Can you not see that you are ignoring the fact that even if everyone had voted for it, it would not have been signed into law because it had already been replaced with another bill?

You are spinning this by trying to make the vote matter on a bill that was already replaced and was only brought up for show to counter the Ryan Medicare vote that the Democrats forced in the house.

The vote does matter. Just because it was a failed vote, it still matters. People see what their elected rep. are voting for. You know a voting record used to make a difference. Not like the, I voted present, or I was too busy campaigning lustrous fool we have as prez. Bastard, should be focused on the economy and jobs, instead he is working on getting a billion dollars for his re election.

Many people voted for Obama in 2008 because it was historic to have a black President, some say even to show they were not a racist, but in 2012 those same people will vote for someone else, anyone else to show they are not idiots.

Sum, you're clearly wrong on this one, Tom's right. It's not up for debate, move on.

If it mattered douchebag, why would everyone in the presidents party vote against it. Think about it for a second would ya? Geez!

(06-16-2011 03:10 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  If it mattered *********, why would everyone in the presidents party vote against it. Think about it for a second would ya? Geez!

Because they not only rejected the bill, they rejected the president as inept. Sorry you cannot see that.

HF84, you cannot pick winners and losers in political discussions any better than your sports picks. Loser.

(06-16-2011 03:26 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(06-16-2011 03:10 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  If it mattered *********, why would everyone in the presidents party vote against it. Think about it for a second would ya? Geez!

Because they not only rejected the bill, they rejected the president as inept. Sorry you cannot see that.

And your Republican leaders in the Senate just wasted a bunch of your tax dollars voting on a replaced bill that would have never been signed even if passed, simply for political theater. Sorry you can't see that.

(06-17-2011 07:10 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(06-16-2011 03:26 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(06-16-2011 03:10 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  If it mattered *********, why would everyone in the presidents party vote against it. Think about it for a second would ya? Geez!

Because they not only rejected the bill, they rejected the president as inept. Sorry you cannot see that.

And your Republican leaders in the Senate just wasted a bunch of your tax dollars voting on a replaced bill that would have never been signed even if passed, simply for political theater. Sorry you can't see that.

How is it having a vote recorded in Congress is not political theater. Unless you are voting present to obscure your radical leanings, normal constituents want their representatives on record.

(06-17-2011 08:53 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(06-17-2011 07:10 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(06-16-2011 03:26 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(06-16-2011 03:10 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  If it mattered *********, why would everyone in the presidents party vote against it. Think about it for a second would ya? Geez!

Because they not only rejected the bill, they rejected the president as inept. Sorry you cannot see that.

And your Republican leaders in the Senate just wasted a bunch of your tax dollars voting on a replaced bill that would have never been signed even if passed, simply for political theater. Sorry you can't see that.

How is it having a vote recorded in Congress is not political theater. Unless you are voting present to obscure your radical leanings, normal constituents want their representatives on record.

Say what?

And I think we are well aware by now that Obama voted present 3% of the time a decade ago in the Illinois State Legislator...but thanks for reminding us yet again!

(06-17-2011 09:35 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(06-17-2011 08:53 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(06-17-2011 07:10 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(06-16-2011 03:26 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(06-16-2011 03:10 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  If it mattered *********, why would everyone in the presidents party vote against it. Think about it for a second would ya? Geez!

Because they not only rejected the bill, they rejected the president as inept. Sorry you cannot see that.

And your Republican leaders in the Senate just wasted a bunch of your tax dollars voting on a replaced bill that would have never been signed even if passed, simply for political theater. Sorry you can't see that.

How is it having a vote recorded in Congress is not political theater. Unless you are voting present to obscure your radical leanings, normal constituents want their representatives on record.

Say what?

And I think we are well aware by now that Obama voted present 3% of the time a decade ago in the Illinois State Legislator...but thanks for reminding us yet again!

Fixed it. You did get the drift anyway, I'm sure. Present! Do you really want to go to a discussion of Obabba's voting record?

I will be more than happy to have an adult discussion about his voting record the moment you acknowledge what a present vote in Illinois actually means and that Obama voted something other than present 97% of the time.