Harry Reid... senile fool

[Cancel 2016.2]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...as-ukraine-aid-deal-clears-procedural-hurdle/

But the vote came after Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) suggested that Republicans may have helped Russia annex Crimea by delaying the vote.
Reid made the comments in remarks that reopened the Senate after a week-long break. He urged GOP senators to consider how their decision affects U.S. national security and that further delay "sent a dangerous message to Russian leaders."


"Since a few Republicans blocked these important sanctions last work period, Russian lawmakers voted to annex Crimea and Russian forces have taken over Ukrainian military bases," Reid said. "It's impossible to know whether events would have unfolded differently if the United States had responded to Russian aggression with a strong, unified voice."

Reid is obviously losing his mind. The republicans that objected to this bill did so because Reid and his cronies decided to alter funds at the IMF...

But the deal also includes changes long-sought by the White House that would shift about $63 billion in IMF money from a crisis fund to a general account. Doing so would make good on a 2010 pledge by the Obama administration and ensure greater U.S. influence over the world body.

So Harry... if you wish to have it passed, why stick in something you know is going to cause problems with opposition? OH yeah... so you can whine and complain about a problem YOU created, but want to pretend is the evil Reps fault.

Why in the hell would we want to shift $63 billion from the crisis fund to the general fund Harry? How would that help Ukraine?

 

[Bonestorm]

Reid is obviously losing his mind. The republicans that objected to this bill did so because Reid and his cronies decided to alter funds at the IMF...

First of all, the Republicans didn't object to the bill. They objected to the bill being brought up for a vote and thereby required Reid to file a cloture motion, which pushed the time of the vote on the bill back by over a week, even though Reid had more than enough votes to (1) pass the cloture motion and (2) pass the bill. So, basically, the Republicans delayed a vote on the bill for no good reason whatsoever. The bill will pass with overwhelming support of the Senate.

So Harry... if you wish to have it passed, why stick in something you know is going to cause problems with opposition? OH yeah... so you can whine and complain about a problem YOU created, but want to pretend is the evil Reps fault.

Why in the hell would we want to shift $63 billion from the crisis fund to the general fund Harry? How would that help Ukraine?

If there were enough Rebpulican Senators to block the cloture motion or the bill itself, you might have a point. But there aren't. The Republicans just delayed the inevitable passage of the bill for no good reason whatsoever. What's the point of that?

 

[Jarod]

I don't care why they did it, the Republicans delayed the vote so its fair game to blame them.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

First of all, the Republicans didn't object to the bill. They objected to the bill being brought up for a vote and thereby required Reid to file a cloture motion, which pushed the time of the vote on the bill back by over a week, even though Reid had more than enough votes to (1) pass the cloture motion and (2) pass the bill. So, basically, the Republicans delayed a vote on the bill for no good reason whatsoever. The bill will pass with overwhelming support of the Senate.

so they didn't object, but they did object. OK dung.

If there were enough Rebpulican Senators to block the cloture motion or the bill itself, you might have a point. But there aren't. The Republicans just delayed the inevitable passage of the bill for no good reason whatsoever. What's the point of that?

1) Republicans wanted to pass the bill in general, they objected to Senile Reids sticking the IMF portion into the bill. Tell us Dung... do you agree with that?

2) Reid claims that the one week allowed Russia to take control of the Crimean region. Do you agree with Senile Reids comments?

 

[Bonestorm]

so they didn't object, but they did object. OK dung.

The bill was not brought up for consideration because the Republicans blocked it and required a cloture motion to be filed first.

1) Republicans wanted to pass the bill in general, they objected to Senile Reids sticking the IMF portion into the bill. Tell us Dung... do you agree with that?

No, the Republicans did not want to pass the bill in general. They wanted to pass a different bill. And, really, we're not even talking about "the Republicans." We're talking about a minority of the minorty who don't have the votes to actually block the bill from passage. The bill will pass. The minority of the minority just blocked a vote on the bill for no good reason whatsoever.

And Reid didn't stick the IMF measure into the bill. That provision was in the bill considered by the Foreign Relations Committee and which the committee voted to bring to the floor by a bipartisan vote. If the Senate would pass it, why shouldn't it be in there?

2) Reid claims that the one week allowed Russia to take control of the Crimean region. Do you agree with Senile Reids comments?

That's not actually what he said. I read his "since" to mean "in the intervening period" not to mean "because." Reid statement is an accurate recounting of the timing of the events. I'd accuse you of being a partisan asshat who immediately jumps to the worst possible concusion about your political opponents, but I know that you are an independent libertarian so I guess I'll just chalk it up to ignorance.

And you haven't responded to my question yet. Why should a minority of the minority, for no good reason whatsoever, get to delay a vote on a bill that will easily pass the Senate?

 

[Bonestorm]

You know, I will say to my friends who are objecting to this--and there are a number of them on my side--you can call yourself Republicans--that is fine--because that is on your voter registration. Do not call yourself Reagan Republicans. Ronald Reagan would never--would never--let this kind of aggression go unresponded to by the American people.

We are not talking about troops on the ground. We are talking about responses that impose sanctions and punishment for Vladimir Putin, who clearly has said that his goal--the greatest disaster of the 20th century was the dissolution, the collapse of the then-Soviet Union. We know what Vladimir Putin is all about. We know what he understands.

So now because of an IMF fix or a campaign finance fix, we are now going to reject a piece of legislation that was done on a bipartisan basis with the leadership of the chairman, whom I see on the floor, of which I am proud, and with the ranking member, Senator Corker of Tennessee. We are going to say no.

Do you know what the most ridiculous thing about all of this is? That the majority leader has filed cloture. We have well over 60 votes. So we are going to be back in about 11 or 12 days, whatever it is, and cloture will have expired. We have well over 60 votes. We will pass this.

Instead, our signal to the people of Ukraine today, as Russian military forces are massing on their border: Wait a minute. It is more important that we get our campaign finance regulations fixed. It is more important that we have the IMF fix as a higher priority than the lives of the men and women in the Ukraine.

I have been embarrassed before on the floor of the Senate, I will tell the Presiding Officer, but I have not been embarrassed this way about Members of my own party. One of the proudest aspects I have always felt of our Republican Party and the leadership of Ronald Reagan is we stood up for people. We stood up for people when the Iron Curtain was there. We stood up for Natan Sharansky. We said, ``Tear down this wall.'' Now we have a guy who is trying to reinstate the old Russian Empire, which he has said himself, and what are we saying? No. A shameful day. I will not object.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

The bill was not brought up for consideration because the Republicans blocked it and required a cloture motion to be filed first.

So they blocked it but didn't object to it, but objected to it, but blocked it... gotcha.

No, the Republicans did not want to pass the bill in general. They wanted to pass a different bill. And, really, we're not even talking about "the Republicans." We're talking about a minority of the minorty who don't have the votes to actually block the bill from passage. The bill will pass. The minority of the minority just blocked a vote on the bill for no good reason whatsoever.

blah blah blah... they wanted to help out the Ukraine but didn't want Reids nonsense attached to it. Obviously you approve of Reids nonsense.

And Reid didn't stick the IMF measure into the bill. That provision was in the bill considered by the Foreign Relations Committee and which the committee voted to bring to the floor by a bipartisan vote. If the Senate would pass it, why shouldn't it be in there?

There was no reason for them to be a part of the Ukraine bill.

That's not actually what he said. I read his "since" to mean "in the intervening period" not to mean "because." Reid statement is an accurate recounting of the timing of the events. I'd accuse you of being a partisan asshat who immediately jumps to the worst possible concusion about your political opponents, but I know that you are an independent libertarian so I guess I'll just chalk it up to ignorance.

So in other words, you 'read' it the way your masters told you to read it. The message Reid was implying was quite clear. Which you obviously approve of.

And you haven't responded to my question yet. Why should a minority of the minority, for no good reason whatsoever, get to delay a vote on a bill that will easily pass the Senate?

LOL... take a civics lesson moron.

 

[Bonestorm]

So they blocked it but didn't object to it, but objected to it, but blocked it... gotcha.

Senators don't "object" to bills. They vote for them or against them. They can, however, object to consideration of a bill and require a cloture motion to be filed before the bill may be brought up for a vote. The Republicans in this case objected to the bill being brought to the floor for consideration, thereby blocking it.

I hope this helps with your obvious confusion.

blah blah blah... they wanted to help out the Ukraine but didn't want Reids nonsense attached to it. Obviously you approve of Reids nonsense.

As I said, it wasn't "Reid's nonsense." It was the bill reported out of committee by a bipartisan basis that would have easily passed the Senate if it were allowed to come to a vote. But it was blocked (see above if you are confused by this term) by a minority of the minority for no good reason whatsoever.

There was no reason for them to be a part of the Ukraine bill.

No reason for it not to, either, considering a majority of the Senate would vote to pass the bill with them in there.

So in other words, you 'read' it the way your masters told you to read it. The message Reid was implying was quite clear. Which you obviously approve of.

Since you're obviously not a Republican and are reknowned on this board for your independent thinking and thoughful analyses, I am very concerned about your opinion of me.

LOL... take a civics lesson moron.

Just say "I don't know." I prefer an honest answer to a stupid one.