"Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has threatened to reject the House’s continuing resolution when it is brought up in the Senate on Friday, leaving the future of this temporary spending bill in flux."

So what else is new. Harry Reid is 'sitting on' more than a dozen bills that might help create jobs that were passed by the Republican House - refusing to even allow them to be debated or amended in the Senate.

Harry has also not passed a timely Federal Budget in the last 3 years. He seems to be 'out to lunch' on all of his responsibilities - shameful.

You failed to mention the hundreds of jobs bills the tea people GOP republicans filibustered in the last 5 years that they are sitting on Roy. And who do you think has filibustered all the Federal Budget proposals in the last 3 years? On the tea people GOP republicans, you seem to be out to lunch.

No budget from the senate in over 800 days with a majority.

No budget from the house with a majority when pelosi was in charge.

MO keep on drinking that kool aid

The president has provided congress with his jobs plan and his deficit reduction plan. But that's as far as the White House can take these because bills on taxation or spending must originate in the House. Once again Reid can initiate a bill from the Senate, but it will then go to the House. Then ultimately bills are passed via negotiation between the two chambers.

Republicans have a super majority in the House -- a record in fact. In the Senate, Republicans threaten to filibuster all legislation now requiring a super majority of 60 votes on everything, which Reid does not have. I realize Bill O'Really and Sean Insanity aren't informing FAUX Noise viewers of this, but ignorance of the law is no excuse, especially when you go on the attack.

Historically there has been bipartisan agreement on raising the debt ceiling, on spending for infrastructure, on disaster relief, on tax cuts for small business such as the payroll tax cuts, etc., but the Party of No won't budge on anything. The Do Nothing Congress since the 2010 election is the responsibility of Republicans.

It isn't Mo who has been drinking the Kool-Aid. Look in the mirror, and you'll see a Kool-Aid mustache stain around your mouth.

Its qquite odd how our Repub friends are screaming about the Senate when the House hasn't created on jobs yet, yet vilify Dems when they play the same game the Repubs areplaying now. Hyprocisy doesn't taste very good when someone else does it to them. As for the Kool-Aid, it amazing how some Fox News commentators are screaming at having to pay their fair share taxes and name some overly bloated figure that their very nicely paid accountants will never allow them to pay. Over 50% they scream when its actually the old Clinton rates @ 39% a mere difference of 3% not 15%. But they are Repubs and fax are not their strong suit

Mo-1852032

"You failed to mention the hundreds of jobs bills the tea people GOP republicans filibustered in the last 5 years that they are sitting on Roy. And who do you think has filibustered all the Federal Budget proposals in the last 3 years? On the tea people GOP republicans, you seem to be out to lunch."

Mo, your history education needs a bit of work. The TEA Party didn't even exist until after Obama became president. Try to keep up.

As for the filibusters, most occured after Obama became president and were a direct result of a majority dem senate that wouldn't even consider any republican plans. Please get a clue.

Sorry Bob-3374873, Mo is not the one who needs a bit of work on history. This from the Pew Research Center:

But the precise nature of the Tea Party has been less clear. Is it solely a movement to reduce the size of government and cut taxes, as its name -- some people refer to it as the Taxed Enough Already party -- implies? Or do its supporters share a broader set of conservative positions on social as well as economic issues? Does the movement draw support across the religious spectrum? Or has the religious right "taken over" the Tea Party, as some commentators have suggested?¹

A new analysis by the Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion & Public Life finds that Tea Party supporters tend to have conservative opinions not just about economic matters, but also about social issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage. In addition, they are much more likely than registered voters as a whole to say that their religion is the most important factor in determining their opinions on these social issues.² And they draw disproportionate support from the ranks of white evangelical Protestants.

This from the American Sociological Association:

The analysis shows that most people who agree with the religious right also support the Tea Party. But support for the Tea Party is not synonymous with support for the religious right.

Tea party voters are more likely to fear change and harbor negative attitudes toward immigrants, according to a study presented Monday at the American Sociological Association's annual conference in Las Vegas.

The study, called "Cultures of the Tea Party," also claims voters who felt favorably toward the tea party movement valued deference to authority and libertarianism. The report concludes that the tea party movement is not a new political phenomenon, but rather "is best understood as a new cultural expression of the late-20th-century Republican Party."

This from a Harvard/Notre Dame study:

"Our analysis casts doubt on the Tea Party’s “origin story.” Early on, Tea Partiers were often described as nonpartisan political neophytes. Actually, the Tea Party’s supporters today were highly partisan Republicans long before the Tea Party was born, and were more likely than others to have contacted government officials. In fact, past Republican affiliation is the single strongest predictor of Tea Party support today.

What’s more, contrary to some accounts, the Tea Party is not a creature of the Great Recession. Many Americans have suffered in the last four years, but they are no more likely than anyone else to support the Tea Party. And while the public image of the Tea Party focuses on a desire to shrink government, concern over big government is hardly the only or even the most important predictor of Tea Party support among voters.

So not only is the Tea Party not about small government but rather about more religion in government, they are the same old bigots who have always been in the Republican Party.

TruePatriot-445959

"Sorry Bob-3374873, Mo is not the one who needs a bit of work on history. This from the Pew Research Center:

But the precise nature of the Tea Party has been less clear. Is it solely a movement to reduce the size of government and cut taxes, as its name -- some people refer to it as the Taxed Enough Already party -- implies? Or do its supporters share a broader set of conservative positions on social as well as economic issues? Does the movement draw support across the religious spectrum? Or has the religious right "taken over" the Tea Party, as some commentators have suggested?¹

A new analysis by the Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion & Public Life finds that Tea Party supporters tend to have conservative opinions not just about economic matters, but also about social issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage. In addition, they are much more likely than registered voters as a whole to say that their religion is the most important factor in determining their opinions on these social issues.² And they draw disproportionate support from the ranks of white evangelical Protestants.

This from the American Sociological Association:

The analysis shows that most people who agree with the religious right also support the Tea Party. But support for the Tea Party is not synonymous with support for the religious right.

Tea party voters are more likely to fear change and harbor negative attitudes toward immigrants, according to a study presented Monday at the American Sociological Association's annual conference in Las Vegas.

The study, called "Cultures of the Tea Party," also claims voters who felt favorably toward the tea party movement valued deference to authority and libertarianism. The report concludes that the tea party movement is not a new political phenomenon, but rather "is best understood as a new cultural expression of the late-20th-century Republican Party."

This from a Harvard/Notre Dame study:

"Our analysis casts doubt on the Tea Party's "origin story." Early on, Tea Partiers were often described as nonpartisan political neophytes. Actually, the Tea Party's supporters today were highly partisan Republicans long before the Tea Party was born, and were more likely than others to have contacted government officials. In fact, past Republican affiliation is the single strongest predictor of Tea Party support today.

What's more, contrary to some accounts, the Tea Party is not a creature of the Great Recession. Many Americans have suffered in the last four years, but they are no more likely than anyone else to support the Tea Party. And while the public image of the Tea Party focuses on a desire to shrink government, concern over big government is hardly the only or even the most important predictor of Tea Party support among voters.

So not only is the Tea Party not about small government but rather about more religion in government, they are the same old bigots who have always been in the Republican Party."

TP, The original discussion that Mo brought up was about the TEA Party that didn't exist 5 years ago. ADD is hard to get over. Using the Pew institute for a measuring stick is like using a torn condom to prevent pregnancy. It doesn't work except for the wrong. Then they will blame the condom.

Please try to keep up. I know you are young and idealistic. Hopefully, you will grow out of it when you mature. Being ignorant is a choice that the wrong embrace.

But for clarification, what have you done for your country that makes you a true patriot? I don't need a leftist research center to tell me I served in the navy during the Nam and volunteered. Let me know what you have done and try to learn how to speak for yourself.

BTW, the Tea in tea party means "taxed enough already." Maybe you want more taxes upon you, but most Americans don't. Blame others for your financial position but only you are to blame for that.

And as I said, you are afraid to debate. No guts no glory. I am so sure you can't stand on your own premise that I will bet you $100 that you could not provide a convincing argument on your own knowledge. All fluff mo stuff.

Bob-3374873 -- I provided conclusions from three different studies. In addition, every single Tea Party candidate ran as Republican in 2010. Not one ran as Libertarian or Independent. The Tea Party are not a group of people who suddenly appeared on the Earth. They are merely a morphing from right-wing factions from the past, such as those who supported Goldwater, the Moral Majority, etc. but with tricorn hats.

You, on the other hand make a lot of presumptions about a lot of things with no basis. Thank you for your service. But ad hominem attacks against others do not make your case.

Brad, you and Mo need to read on this. Not denying the fillibustered bills, but they, if they had passed would have raised taxes 8 times and created a new department inside the IRS. Thank you Repulicans for stoping these, thank you not allowing a socialist agenda to take over any more than it already has. The bill before harry ried right now should be passed, it has cuts that they don't like because they can't spend and want to pin any and all the american woes on republicans.

Brad, how in God's name can you say, that the repeal of regulations won't create jobs. You sir have completly lost your since and understand of liberty and are totally engrossed in your messiah.

MRWSR -- "socialist agenda" - Hahahaha. At least I got a laugh from reading your post. You watch too much Sean Hannity Dude. This is not the first time Boehner has had to regroup because of uncompromising ideologues in his Party. And that 12% approval rating is going to go into the negatives if this keeps up.

TruePatriot, glad to entertain you. Both sides have uncompromising ideologues, that's what makes it a two party system. I don't want to live in your socialist uptopia. Hannity sir is one of hundreds that has called this man for what he is. A socialist. I don't care if he is one, just don't bring it here, it's killing us. So laugh and enjoy.

Sean Hannity:

He grew up in Franklin Square, New York^[3] and attended Sacred Heart Seminary in Hempstead, New York during his middle school years and St. Pius X Preparatory Seminary high school in Uniondale, New York.^[4]Hannity dropped out of New York University and Adelphi University to pursue his broadcasting career.^[5]

That is indeed impressive, and certainly someone with merit and credibility that I would listen to above all else (not).

Your just jealous.

The wrong will always think they are right, but the polls of likely voters show them to be wrong.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/trust_on_issues

Unless you cite multiple polls around the same snap shot date, and preferably average the results, a sample size of only 1,000 and error of margin of +/- 3 points means what exactly? Also, what does a snap shot in time mean? You have to track results over time as well. It's funny how conservatives will find one poll in their favor (though with the margin of error not as much as they think) and cling to it for dear life.

Olrockcandymtnroustabout

"Old dog repubs have got to be wondering and turning over in their graves with this new bunch. They're own worst enemy. Come to the middle. How hard can it be lol. Weird. Sure hate to have Boenher's job since the koch bros took over. Poor guy. Repubs making Reid's job a walk in the park. Easy to figure out predictable foe. C'mon republicans, hear the popping sound already, and get your ducks in a row damnit."

You should heed your own advice. Reid is on the ropes. Obama is under the ropes. You asked for hope and change from one who doesn't care about anyone except himself. You elected an unemployable fool who can't even get a job as a lawyer since he gave up his law licence to prevent an investigation about his lying on his original application to be a lawyer. Even the Illinois bar sees him as a liar and he ran instead of proving himself innocent. What lawyer is so incompetent that he can't defend himself if he is in the right? Only one that idiots would vote for.

It is almost funny how the wrong make claims but when someone trys to debate the issues of the wrong they scatter like roaches when the light is turned on.

Come on wrong, get your debating skills together. Learn to think for yourselves instead of depending on bias to be your witness.

Can't you commit to debate or is name calling and racism the best you have got? Ever hear of Allan Keys? Herman Cain? Are you such a racist that you don't know who they are or what they represent?

Please bring something other than BS to the debate. Use your on intellect, if you have some. I am waiting, so bring it.