I mentioned that Ryan had passed a budget. Another poster said it was a laughable budget. I responded that it got more votes than the President’s. That is entirely on topic.
You posted 5 times about the President’s budget in this thread alone. You’ve done this in other threads in this same forum. Get your own discussion and stop hijacking the shit out of every other one.
When people trash the Republican budget, how am I not to bring up the President’ budget as a point of comparison? It’s not my fault that other posters want to argue with me on the rather simple matter that Ryan’s budget got more votes than the President’s. That’s a fact, but apparently some posters don’t like it, so we have long discussions on it whenever it’s brought up.
If you don’t jog today, me saying I’ve jogged a mile today, and thus I’m a better runner than you is a stupid argument.
Are you capable of understanding that?
Bullshit. You are a straight up one trick pony.
Will the choice of Paul Ryan as VP doom Florida for Romney?
Post 2:
Same thread, post 4:
Same thread, post 12:
You were called out on it in post 13.
In a thread about blatant lies in political ads:
We get it. You have a hard on for the President’s budget. But you’re the only one who keeps bringing it up, presumably because you want to talk about it so damn much.
Nevertheless, when someone criticizes something, responding with “compared to what?” is a legitimate rebuttal. ANYTHING can be made to look bad when compared to nothing.
I mentioned it once, other posters had a problem with it, which caused the argument to continue.
You are not the arbiter of what arguments can and cannot be employed. If a thread is getting off topic, it’s fair to point that out and I’ll be the first to get back on topic. But you cannot declare an argument illegitimate because it might lead to an off topic debate.
If you don’t like me comparing budgets posters choose to criticize with the President’s budget, then stop responding to that argument and it won’t go off topic.
Uh, no. You don’t get to blame people for responding to you when you’re the one who continually derails the thread into a more adaher-appropriate line of discussion. It’s not an argument, it’s a hijack. And you keep doing it because you seemingly can’t have a discussion about anything vaguely reminiscent (and sometimes not!) of a budget without bending it into a discussion about the President’s budget.
Two bills- one that covers the tax on arrows (apparently, Ryan is an avid bowhunter), and another that renames a post office.
Small government, sure. Just not, apparently, *necessary *government.
ahem
This is what you seem to think I said: “Ryan’s budgets are considered ludicrous, and worse than Obama’s”. Here’s what I actually said:
Emphasis mine. I said nothing about Obama’s plans, or lack thereof. I merely pointed out that Ryan’s budget plan is about as agreeable and sensible as jamming steak knives in your eyes to deal with your cataracts.
I think of it more like performing a circumcision with a chain saw, but yours works well enough.
And again, it’s fair for me to respond, “Compared to what?” Are there any other budgets plans that got more votes than Ryan’s?
Yup, Continuing Budget Resolution for 2011. Three appropriations bills for 2012, including the debt ceiling deal. You can find some details here: 2012 United States federal budget - Wikipedia
Paul Ryan’s budgets pass the House on nearly party line votes, and adaher thinks it is an amazing legislative achievement.
Obama and Boehner basically write the Budget Control Act of 2011 without Ryan being in the room, and it passes with bipartisan support and actually gets signed into law. Somehow, adaher argues that this does not count for blah blah blah reason.
Look, being a legislator isn’t like being a baseball player: there’s no quantitative measure of one guy having a better batting average than another. Effective legislators often work behind the scenes as well as having their names attached to things. Sometimes legislators succeed not by having laws enacted with their names on it, but sometimes by raising issues to national consciousness.
I think Ryan’s budget proposals are terrible. But, he’s had a significant impact on the national debate. A LOT of congressmen never achieve that.
Amen to both points.
I’m proud to say I used information (and, frankly, direct quotes) from this thread in a letter in our local journal of record (“Obama vs Ryan”) to rebut one of our local right-wing talkhards’ puff piece on Ryan a few days ago.
Lines like
made for an easy rebuttal! Thanks, Little Nemo!