Why does the GOP hate our veterans?

Because, while they're not killing puppy dogs, they needed something to pass the time.

I heard/read this yesterday - very sad and another example of the stark partisan nature of politics today and shows again Mitch McConnell's priorities.  Remember this?  

Speaking with National Journal magazine about Republican Party priorities for the 2008-2010 Congress, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell explained that "the single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president."

Really?

Agreed to an extent...

But are we completely dismissing the other side of the argument.  Obama claims that the bill will create all these jobs by spending $1 billion.  The GOP says there is no evidence to support this.

So who is right?  Based on Obama's job creation track record I'd say the deck is stacked against him.  But yet again the media make this out to be an "evil GOP" issue.

Let's say it truly is a fluff program that will waste money (I do not know that it is).  Don't you want people voting against it to save the waste?

Yeah it couldn't possibly have anything to do with the 1 Billion dollar price tag when we are already facing sequestration at the end of the year.

If you wont give Obama whatever money he wants for saving puppies, veterans, and small children you are just a hateful republican politician I guess.

I am so sick and tired of the emotional arguments that have nothing to do with fiscal reality. $1 billion here $1 billion there sooner or later you are talking about real money.

Yes Goose Really!

???Mitch McConnell on 10/23/2010: "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president."

I'd suggest that there are any number of things that the Senate minority leader might have considered to be the "single most important thing" to achieve. Some of these things:

• Foster creation of jobs
• Bring troops home
• Address glaring public education needs
• (Genuinely) address public debt
• [Feel free to add your own]

Instead, congressional Republicans have spent their time opposing just about everything proposed by the President or congressional Democrats, even about things they would otherwise support. House Republicans have held over 30 votes to repeal the ACA (aka, "Obamacare"). Say what you will about ACA, taking that much limited time in an admittedly futile exercise is idiotic. Do it once, maybe even twice, to establish that they think it's a bad idea: fine. Keep doing it, and they're admitting they have no ideas. Their collective temper tantrum has lasted almost two years, and it's not helping.

The current problem is congressional Republicans. It really is.

Alright, the second time around you convinced me.  Republicans, bad, evil, only interested in retaining and increasing power.  Democrats, good and they really, really hold the best interests of the citizens first and foremost.  Glad we worked that out.

How can you argue with "It really is" (I mean facts are just silly.  What's another billion to create jobs that the 800 billion in the stimulus did not.).  I'm voting for Obama now.

Wow tri_bob.  I am so enlightened.  As an unaffiliated voter I think you have just made a strong enough case how evil and nasty the repubs are that I am going to have to join the dem party.  We need to keep throwing money at program after program...and damit...eventually something is going to work!

I would tend to agree they vote along party lines (which show us they are not looking at the wording of the constitution in most cases) but the latest ruling on the ACA surprised everyone.

So you are upset that the Dems haven't nominated anyone to the supreme court who does not agree with their ideology eg. a "living constitution" and "Social Justice" being paramount?  I mean I would be shocked to see Obama nominate someone who believes in strict construction and blind justice as you would be shocked to see a Repub. Prez. nominate another RBG.

Evil? Maybe. Nasty? Probably. What's more important here is the unproductive cynicism of Republicans in the 112th Congress. While House Republicans spent time "repealing" ACA and legislating abortion, Senate Republicans forced a record number of cloture votes to overcome filibusters in 2011, and may be on pace to break that record again.

They're dragging an anchor on legislative process and progress, complaining the entire time about how slowly things are going. The plan was to ensure the President got no "wins" and that when 2012 rolled around people wouldn't pay any attention to their (lack of) contribution to the problem(s).

I make no claims about the saintliness of congressional Democrats. Although you may be surprised (not!) to know that I am a lifelong liberal Democrat, I do believe that for our political system to work properly we need to have at least two functioning political parties. Nobody, not any person or institution or political party, is right all the time. Substantive, constructive differences of opinion and policy are necessary and helpful to maintain balance. Years-long temper tantrums are neither necessary nor helpful.

Like trickle-down economics?  Heh.

Versus Kenysian Stimulus and Government multipliers voodoo?

Actually I prefer those arguments (actually based on economic theory) to the "He/They are just mean and want to let puppies and small helpless children die" arguments.  You can debate the merits and methodologies of the laffer curve or wealth effects.  You cannot rationally debate "He is just a meany".

Sorta reminds me of the Senate Majority Leader droning on and on about Romney not paying taxes for 10 years yet providing not one shred of evidence to support his claim.  

By the way have you ever considered that making sure Obama is a one term president is the most critical step in fixing those other things??? hmmmm????

I think even beyond that, both parties and their voters get irrational about anything regarding veterans (and I am one).  Objectively evaluating a veterans' program and critiquing it is one step away from getting yourself voted out of office.  Which is why I'm sort of surprised this didn't pass.

It was a tactical move by the Democrats because it forced the Republicans into a damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't situation.  Both parties play games like this all the time.

I hope you were equally as outraged when the Dems blocked everything Bush tried to push through.

As for the bill at hand, "would have spent $1 billion over five years".  That's enough for me to oppose it.  WE CAN'T AFFORD IT, no matter how good or bad it is.  So I guess I hate our veterans too which sucks because I'm a veteran myself.

The biggest problem in Washington is a total utter and complete lack of leadership.  The Democrats block everything the Republicans pass and the Republicans block everything the Democrats pass and they both just sit and point fingers at each other.  If we had strong leadership who actually reached out and worked with both sides to find compromises then compromises could be passed.  What we have is a president who refuses to even talk to the opposing party and simply rams legislation through with zero support from the other side.  The ACA is a perfect example of that.  With no bipartisan support and using technicalities to ram it through there's no way it won't just get repealed when the R's get back in power.

Just remember, compromise is a two way street.  The Dem's can't whine all day long about the Repub's not compromising when they aren't willing to compromise either.

To be honest, I kind of like all the gridlock in congress because it keeps them from spending more money.  

ENOUGH!

Are you sure?  I mean really sure?