How much longer will Obama last?

[JayhaVVKU]

Originally posted by: Duwelon

Originally posted by: Obsoleet
Independent here. Voted for Obama. So far, he's been better than Bush. I'd like to see the wars either shutdown or finally a comprehensible explanation as to why they're going on. Other than that, I'll likely be voting for Obama again in 2012.
Also, I think I'd like to see a heavily regulated insurance industry rather than a public option. Romney should've been run in 2008 honestly, crazy mormon or not he'd had a shot at my vote due to his less warlike nature.

One thing I'd like for Republicans to change is the projection that war is cool and a positive, patriotic thing in any way shape or form. Seeing the flag connected to the gun and the cross is a pretty disgusting combo.

If brave men and women stood up and fought back against tyrants, this world would be a lot more peaceful place. Instead, we have spaghetti spined cowards predominately on the left who let tyrants run amok that cause thousands of times more harm than a war to remove them would because good people didn't stop them. Life isn't fair and tyrants don't give up their power willingly. Sacrifices must be made to remove them, whether it's a relatively quick "tear off the bandaid" of a war or the slow, agonizing misery of letting a tyrant keep an iron grip on their people at the edge of a gun, is our choice.

All my friends who supported the invasion of Iraq supported it on the grounds alone that Saddam was an evil SOB who needed to be disposed of like Hitler was. Too many Americans however turn their heads at the slow agonizing suffering of people under a dictator, so it's no wonder they're opposed to ending the suffering through military action.

So by your logic we should already have deployed troops to Sudan, North Korea, China, Iran, Libya, etc. if the reasons for the war were so altruistic.

I agree Saddam was a bad dude who did terrible things. That being said, where's your outrage for not punishing the aforementioned countries' leaders of similar or worse crimes?

Perhaps the Bush administration had ulterior motives? No...never...

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Everyone on this thread is thinking a too long time frame when talking 11/2012. Its the 11/2010 elections that are going to be the ball game.

The GOP delusion is in thinking they can stop the Obama agenda on various reforms, they will be rewarded by the American people in the election of 11/2010. Which is the same exact GOP delusion the GOP operated on in stopping any of the democratic agenda in the last two years of GWB. And while the GOP was immensely proud of itself in largely blunting all the democratic agendas during the 2007-2009 time frame, when it came to for the American people to reward the GOP, they got a rather ugly dope slap at the polls instead.

Right now Obama may be rather naive on thinking that the GOP can be reasoned with or will be anything other than obstructionists, but with some patience, all good things may come to democrats who wait, because after the election of 2010, there may not be enough republirats left to even bother to consult.

After all, many of these reforms are decades and decades over due, will a year and two months really matter? Its what sustained the policies of Reid and Pelosi during the last dark days of GWB, as they were smart enough not to shut down government just to have their way, and even now the GOP tries to shut down government while it still has the last vestiges of the tyranny of the minority.

Oh, how much further can the proud party of Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt still fall before there is nothing left?

idk, it seems like the Democrats have this delusion that the GOP is affecting their agenda.

the democrats have enough votes to pass whatever the hell they want to through either chamber of congress, even if the republicans tried to filibuster; their problem is their own party.

I don't get this reasoning at all. Say they were trying to pass a bill and they needed 60 votes to pass it and it ends up 59-41. 40 Republicans voted against it and 1 Democrat did, but by your logic the party we should blame is the Democrats? That's ridiculous.

The Republicans have gone into all-out obstruction. The Democrats do have the votes necessary to implement their agenda, and their failure to do so should most definitely reflect very badly on them. Let's not pretend that there aren't 40 people in the Senate chamber who are working at all times to defeat them though, and they are in no way absolved for their behavior.

Apologist. Sad, sad apologist. Even when you have the majority in both houses and judiciary and the executive, you still make excuses.

Cry more, bitch.

 

[Patranus]

The GOP has ZERO control right now.
The Democrats hold a majority in the House of Representatives and a filibuster proof super majority in the Senate. Not only that but the Democrats also control the White House.
I am not sure how any rational human can even consider blaming a single Republican for holding up HR3200 as that argument is simply intellectually dishonest.
Every other week, Pelosi comes out and says she has the votes to advance Obama's agenda, well, let have a vote.

The simple fact of the matter is that the moderate Democrats realize the American people do not want Obama's agenda. There is simply no other rational explanation.

 

[seemingly random]

lol @ roaring, desperate republicans. Kindly lick your wounds in silence. You sound like the guy who kills the girl who doesn't want him so nobody can have her.

 

[Lemon law]

No Patranus does have somewhat of a point, the democrats simply do not have the party discipline to maximize their advantage.
And the so called blue dog democrats do waver, but because of GOP scare tactics and partly because there are so many versions of the plan
that its easy to attack some of the aspects of an unknown plan.

At this point, I think Obama is going to take a very different tact by presenting basically one almost final version of the the health care reform bill, forcing the GOP to finally focus on a reality rather than some unknown boogie man, and then sell it to the American people by comparing it to the known problems with the current system. And if the GOP wants to defend the current system, they will be in a heap of trouble from the start.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: Pens1566

Originally posted by: spidey07
He's done.

And for the millionth time, who will beat him in '12???

Palin? Romney? Huckabee?

Good luck with that.

reelections are inevitably more about the guy already in office than the guy running against him.

if Obama's numbers continue to slide and the GOP runs someone semi-competant against him (note: it will absolutely not be Palin or Huckabee. I'd put safe money on that. I don't think it will be Romney either), I think it could be a real fight.

of course, Obama's numbers could rebound and it could be 1996 all over again. it's a long way away. much too long to say with certainty that he's done but also much too long to say that the GOP is dead and buried.

I will never understand how GHB got one term and GWB got two, must be the anti drug policy.

Ross perot split the ticket.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Everyone on this thread is thinking a too long time frame when talking 11/2012. Its the 11/2010 elections that are going to be the ball game.

The GOP delusion is in thinking they can stop the Obama agenda on various reforms, they will be rewarded by the American people in the election of 11/2010. Which is the same exact GOP delusion the GOP operated on in stopping any of the democratic agenda in the last two years of GWB. And while the GOP was immensely proud of itself in largely blunting all the democratic agendas during the 2007-2009 time frame, when it came to for the American people to reward the GOP, they got a rather ugly dope slap at the polls instead.

Right now Obama may be rather naive on thinking that the GOP can be reasoned with or will be anything other than obstructionists, but with some patience, all good things may come to democrats who wait, because after the election of 2010, there may not be enough republirats left to even bother to consult.

After all, many of these reforms are decades and decades over due, will a year and two months really matter? Its what sustained the policies of Reid and Pelosi during the last dark days of GWB, as they were smart enough not to shut down government just to have their way, and even now the GOP tries to shut down government while it still has the last vestiges of the tyranny of the minority.

Oh, how much further can the proud party of Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt still fall before there is nothing left?

idk, it seems like the Democrats have this delusion that the GOP is affecting their agenda.

the democrats have enough votes to pass whatever the hell they want to through either chamber of congress, even if the republicans tried to filibuster; their problem is their own party.

I don't get this reasoning at all. Say they were trying to pass a bill and they needed 60 votes to pass it and it ends up 59-41. 40 Republicans voted against it and 1 Democrat did, but by your logic the party we should blame is the Democrats? That's ridiculous.

The Republicans have gone into all-out obstruction. The Democrats do have the votes necessary to implement their agenda, and their failure to do so should most definitely reflect very badly on them. Let's not pretend that there aren't 40 people in the Senate chamber who are working at all times to defeat them though, and they are in no way absolved for their behavior.

So you are saying the democratic legislation is so bad, it is going to be filibustered by its own party?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: eskimospy

I don't get this reasoning at all. Say they were trying to pass a bill and they needed 60 votes to pass it and it ends up 59-41. 40 Republicans voted against it and 1 Democrat did, but by your logic the party we should blame is the Democrats? That's ridiculous.

The Republicans have gone into all-out obstruction. The Democrats do have the votes necessary to implement their agenda, and their failure to do so should most definitely reflect very badly on them. Let's not pretend that there aren't 40 people in the Senate chamber who are working at all times to defeat them though, and they are in no way absolved for their behavior.

So you are saying the democratic legislation is so bad, it is going to be filibustered by its own party?

I know you're just doing a thing, but I'll respond anyway.

Shockingly enough it is difficult to get 60 people to agree on something. Considering that near unanimous Republican opposition is pretty much guaranteed on any significant issue (if historical precedent is instructive), the Democrats need to get every single person to agree. That's not easy as there is no margin for error.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: eskimospy

I don't get this reasoning at all. Say they were trying to pass a bill and they needed 60 votes to pass it and it ends up 59-41. 40 Republicans voted against it and 1 Democrat did, but by your logic the party we should blame is the Democrats? That's ridiculous.

The Republicans have gone into all-out obstruction. The Democrats do have the votes necessary to implement their agenda, and their failure to do so should most definitely reflect very badly on them. Let's not pretend that there aren't 40 people in the Senate chamber who are working at all times to defeat them though, and they are in no way absolved for their behavior.

So you are saying the democratic legislation is so bad, it is going to be filibustered by its own party?

I know you're just doing a thing, but I'll respond anyway.

Shockingly enough it is difficult to get 60 people to agree on something. Considering that near unanimous Republican opposition is pretty much guaranteed on any significant issue (if historical precedent is instructive), the Democrats need to get every single person to agree. That's not easy as there is no margin for error.

I never said it was easy. But the reality is if you cant get all the democrats behind it, the odds of getting a significant number of the other party on board is pretty slim.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: eskimospy

I don't get this reasoning at all. Say they were trying to pass a bill and they needed 60 votes to pass it and it ends up 59-41. 40 Republicans voted against it and 1 Democrat did, but by your logic the party we should blame is the Democrats? That's ridiculous.

The Republicans have gone into all-out obstruction. The Democrats do have the votes necessary to implement their agenda, and their failure to do so should most definitely reflect very badly on them. Let's not pretend that there aren't 40 people in the Senate chamber who are working at all times to defeat them though, and they are in no way absolved for their behavior.

Apologist. Sad, sad apologist. Even when you have the majority in both houses and judiciary and the executive, you still make excuses.

Cry more, bitch.

You're a moron. Only in your twisted mind would you blame a bill's failure on the party where 98% of the people voted for it, and absolve the party where 100% of the people voted against it. I on the other hand, being a rational person, would blame both.

Oh, and nice job on saying that the Democrats 'control the judiciary'. 62% of the federal judiciary has been appointed by Republicans, and 10 out of the 13 courts of appeal have Republican appointed majorities. Amazing how having 38% of the judiciary means the Democrats have 'control', but having 40% of the Senate means the Republicans are powerless.

 

[BoberFett]

Careful, those tears are going to short out your keyboard.

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Everyone on this thread is thinking a too long time frame when talking 11/2012. Its the 11/2010 elections that are going to be the ball game.

The GOP delusion is in thinking they can stop the Obama agenda on various reforms, they will be rewarded by the American people in the election of 11/2010. Which is the same exact GOP delusion the GOP operated on in stopping any of the democratic agenda in the last two years of GWB. And while the GOP was immensely proud of itself in largely blunting all the democratic agendas during the 2007-2009 time frame, when it came to for the American people to reward the GOP, they got a rather ugly dope slap at the polls instead.

Right now Obama may be rather naive on thinking that the GOP can be reasoned with or will be anything other than obstructionists, but with some patience, all good things may come to democrats who wait, because after the election of 2010, there may not be enough republirats left to even bother to consult.

After all, many of these reforms are decades and decades over due, will a year and two months really matter? Its what sustained the policies of Reid and Pelosi during the last dark days of GWB, as they were smart enough not to shut down government just to have their way, and even now the GOP tries to shut down government while it still has the last vestiges of the tyranny of the minority.

Oh, how much further can the proud party of Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt still fall before there is nothing left?

idk, it seems like the Democrats have this delusion that the GOP is affecting their agenda.

the democrats have enough votes to pass whatever the hell they want to through either chamber of congress, even if the republicans tried to filibuster; their problem is their own party.

I don't get this reasoning at all. Say they were trying to pass a bill and they needed 60 votes to pass it and it ends up 59-41. 40 Republicans voted against it and 1 Democrat did, but by your logic the party we should blame is the Democrats? That's ridiculous.

The Republicans have gone into all-out obstruction. The Democrats do have the votes necessary to implement their agenda, and their failure to do so should most definitely reflect very badly on them. Let's not pretend that there aren't 40 people in the Senate chamber who are working at all times to defeat them though, and they are in no way absolved for their behavior.

:laugh:

Those evil RepubliCANTS! What with their numbers, they can't successfully filibuster ANYTHING in EITHER of the chambers of Congress, BUT IT IS ALL THEIR FAULT!

:|:thumbsdown:

Who was the great "bipartisan one" who just recently told the other side to "shut up and get out of the way"? Hint: it wasn't anybody from the GOP.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Originally posted by: eskimospy

I don't get this reasoning at all. Say they were trying to pass a bill and they needed 60 votes to pass it and it ends up 59-41. 40 Republicans voted against it and 1 Democrat did, but by your logic the party we should blame is the Democrats? That's ridiculous.

The Republicans have gone into all-out obstruction. The Democrats do have the votes necessary to implement their agenda, and their failure to do so should most definitely reflect very badly on them. Let's not pretend that there aren't 40 people in the Senate chamber who are working at all times to defeat them though, and they are in no way absolved for their behavior.

:laugh:

Those evil RepubliCANTS! What with their numbers, they can't successfully filibuster ANYTHING in EITHER of the chambers of Congress, BUT IT IS ALL THEIR FAULT!

:|:thumbsdown:

Who was the great "bipartisan one" who just recently told the other side to "shut up and get out of the way"? Hint: it wasn't anybody from the GOP.

You have reading comprehension problems.

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
The Republicans have gone into all-out obstruction.

Originally posted by: eskimospy
You have reading comprehension problems.

No, I can read your apologist drivel quite well. I'm surprised there wasn't a "Bu...bu...but Bush!" in there, but there was a "Bu...bu...but the Republicans!', so you're batting 1 for 2.

:laugh:

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Originally posted by: eskimospy
The Republicans have gone into all-out obstruction.

Originally posted by: eskimospy
You have reading comprehension problems.

No, I can read your apologist drivel quite well. I'm surprised there wasn't a "Bu...bu...but Bush!" in there, but there was a "Bu...bu...but the Republicans!', so you're batting 1 for 2.

:laugh:

In order to comprehend a paragraph, you have to read all the sentences in it. Keep working at it and you'll get it, I have faith in you.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Even when you have the majority in both houses and judiciary and the executive, you still make excuses.

Oh, and nice job on saying that the Democrats 'control the judiciary'. 62% of the federal judiciary has been appointed by Republicans, and 10 out of the 13 courts of appeal have Republican appointed majorities. Amazing how having 38% of the judiciary means the Democrats have 'control', but having 40% of the Senate means the Republicans are powerless.

Careful, those tears are going to short out your keyboard.

er, good comeback. This is where you say, "I mispoke."

Worse than an apologist is one who knows they're in the wrong and refuses to admit it.

 

[BoberFett]

Way to mash up several posts, hack.

Edit: If you'll admit that you're a political hack for falsely quoting my post and piecing several posts together, I'll admit to being wrong about the percentage of federal judges appointed by either party.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: eskimospy

I don't get this reasoning at all. Say they were trying to pass a bill and they needed 60 votes to pass it and it ends up 59-41. 40 Republicans voted against it and 1 Democrat did, but by your logic the party we should blame is the Democrats? That's ridiculous.

The Republicans have gone into all-out obstruction. The Democrats do have the votes necessary to implement their agenda, and their failure to do so should most definitely reflect very badly on them. Let's not pretend that there aren't 40 people in the Senate chamber who are working at all times to defeat them though, and they are in no way absolved for their behavior.

Apologist. Sad, sad apologist. Even when you have the majority in both houses and judiciary and the executive, you still make excuses.

Cry more, bitch.

You're a moron. Only in your twisted mind would you blame a bill's failure on the party where 98% of the people voted for it, and absolve the party where 100% of the people voted against it. I on the other hand, being a rational person, would blame both.

It really comes down to viewpoint. Sure, if you want something to pass and it doesn't, you are going to blame everyone that doesn't vote for it. Being a rational person, you also have to realize that parties have differences and there are some things the opposite party won't vote for, no matter what you want. In that case, you should be relying on your party which has enough votes to pass it regardless of what the opposing party does. I would never, for example, rely on Democrats to pass some of the things I want because I know many are against some of my ideas. That is just life.

In this case, it is the job of the Democrats to sell the public on their bill and it is the job of the Democrats to sell their own party on the bill, not to mention selling it to moderate Republicans.

Sure, the Republicans might be obstructing it as you mention above, but the Democrats should be the ones overcoming that obstruction. In my case, I want to wait and see what the final form of the health care bill is, for example, before I pass judgment on any particular party.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: eskimospy

I don't get this reasoning at all. Say they were trying to pass a bill and they needed 60 votes to pass it and it ends up 59-41. 40 Republicans voted against it and 1 Democrat did, but by your logic the party we should blame is the Democrats? That's ridiculous.

The Republicans have gone into all-out obstruction. The Democrats do have the votes necessary to implement their agenda, and their failure to do so should most definitely reflect very badly on them. Let's not pretend that there aren't 40 people in the Senate chamber who are working at all times to defeat them though, and they are in no way absolved for their behavior.

Apologist. Sad, sad apologist. Even when you have the majority in both houses and judiciary and the executive, you still make excuses.

Cry more, bitch.

You're a moron. Only in your twisted mind would you blame a bill's failure on the party where 98% of the people voted for it, and absolve the party where 100% of the people voted against it. I on the other hand, being a rational person, would blame both.

Blaming the Republicans for a Democrat initiative not passing is ludicrous, especially when the Democrats have enough votes to pass it without Republican help. It is the job of the Democrats to sell the public on their bill and it is the job of the Democrats to sell their own party on the bill, not to mention selling it to moderate Republicans.

Sure, the Republicans might be obstructing it as you mention above, but the Democrats should be the ones overcoming it.

As I told Boberfett, if you want to solely blame the party that has 2% of its members vote against a bill and absolve the party that has 100% of its members vote against a bill, that's your business. I on the other hand would fault the Democrats for not crafting the bill sufficiently well to pass it despite the Republican obstructionism, and I would fault the Republicans for their obstructionism. It would be 'ludicrous' to look at the issue any other way.

It's not like there is some single bill that the Republicans find so toxic that not a single one votes for it, it's nearly every meaningful bill. In the last Congress the Republicans set a new record for filibusters, absolutely blowing away the old one. To not note this would be ridiculous.

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: eskimospy

I don't get this reasoning at all. Say they were trying to pass a bill and they needed 60 votes to pass it and it ends up 59-41. 40 Republicans voted against it and 1 Democrat did, but by your logic the party we should blame is the Democrats? That's ridiculous.

The Republicans have gone into all-out obstruction. The Democrats do have the votes necessary to implement their agenda, and their failure to do so should most definitely reflect very badly on them. Let's not pretend that there aren't 40 people in the Senate chamber who are working at all times to defeat them though, and they are in no way absolved for their behavior.

Apologist. Sad, sad apologist. Even when you have the majority in both houses and judiciary and the executive, you still make excuses.

Cry more, bitch.

You're a moron. Only in your twisted mind would you blame a bill's failure on the party where 98% of the people voted for it, and absolve the party where 100% of the people voted against it. I on the other hand, being a rational person, would blame both.

Blaming the Republicans for a Democrat initiative not passing is ludicrous, especially when the Democrats have enough votes to pass it without Republican help. It is the job of the Democrats to sell the public on their bill and it is the job of the Democrats to sell their own party on the bill, not to mention selling it to moderate Republicans.

Sure, the Republicans might be obstructing it as you mention above, but the Democrats should be the ones overcoming it.

As I told Boberfett, if you want to solely blame the party that has 2% of its members vote against a bill and absolve the party that has 100% of its members vote against a bill, that's your business. I on the other hand would fault the Democrats for not crafting the bill sufficiently well to pass it despite the Republican obstructionism, and I would fault the Republicans for their obstructionism. It would be 'ludicrous' to look at the issue any other way.

It's not like there is some single bill that the Republicans find so toxic that not a single one votes for it, it's nearly every meaningful bill. In the last Congress the Republicans set a new record for filibusters, absolutely blowing away the old one. To not note this would be ridiculous.

GOP leaders haven't met Obama for health talks since April

"The ball is in President Obama's court to reach out to Republicans if he wants a bipartisan bill on healthcare reform, House GOP Leader John Boehner (Ohio) said Monday morning.

Boehner told reporters that the president has not invited House GOP leaders to the White House for meetings on healthcare reform since the end of April.

Earlier this year, GOP leaders sent a letter to the president in May stating that they would like to work with the administration to find "common ground" on healthcare reform.

But the administration responded with a tersely worded letter indicating that they had healthcare reform under control."

Who are the ones "obstructing" debate on health care again?

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: eskimospy

I don't get this reasoning at all. Say they were trying to pass a bill and they needed 60 votes to pass it and it ends up 59-41. 40 Republicans voted against it and 1 Democrat did, but by your logic the party we should blame is the Democrats? That's ridiculous.

The Republicans have gone into all-out obstruction. The Democrats do have the votes necessary to implement their agenda, and their failure to do so should most definitely reflect very badly on them. Let's not pretend that there aren't 40 people in the Senate chamber who are working at all times to defeat them though, and they are in no way absolved for their behavior.

Apologist. Sad, sad apologist. Even when you have the majority in both houses and judiciary and the executive, you still make excuses.

Cry more, bitch.

You're a moron. Only in your twisted mind would you blame a bill's failure on the party where 98% of the people voted for it, and absolve the party where 100% of the people voted against it. I on the other hand, being a rational person, would blame both.

Blaming the Republicans for a Democrat initiative not passing is ludicrous, especially when the Democrats have enough votes to pass it without Republican help. It is the job of the Democrats to sell the public on their bill and it is the job of the Democrats to sell their own party on the bill, not to mention selling it to moderate Republicans.

Sure, the Republicans might be obstructing it as you mention above, but the Democrats should be the ones overcoming it.

As I told Boberfett, if you want to solely blame the party that has 2% of its members vote against a bill and absolve the party that has 100% of its members vote against a bill, that's your business. I on the other hand would fault the Democrats for not crafting the bill sufficiently well to pass it despite the Republican obstructionism, and I would fault the Republicans for their obstructionism. It would be 'ludicrous' to look at the issue any other way.

Ding ding ding, we have a winner!

It's not like there is some single bill that the Republicans find so toxic that not a single one votes for it, it's nearly every meaningful bill. In the last Congress the Republicans set a new record for filibusters, absolutely blowing away the old one. To not note this would be ridiculous.

It seems like this is just an excuse. I don't care what Republicans did in the last Congress. I don't care what Democrats did last Congress. Why aren't the Democrats able to overcome this obstructionism which is happening *now*? Additionally, why would you *expect* Republicans to vote for a bill that they are against, just for the sake of passing it because you think it is right? This goes to the point above -- the Democrats crafted the bill and obviously didn't do a great job to consider the objections that might arise.

BTW, I edited my post.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: blanghorst

It seems like this is just an excuse. I don't care what Republicans did in the last Congress. I don't care what Democrats did last Congress. Why aren't the Democrats able to overcome this obstructionism which is happening *now*? Additionally, why would you *expect* Republicans to vote for a bill that they are against, just for the sake of passing it because you think it is right? This goes to the point above -- the Democrats crafted the bill and obviously didn't do a great job to consider the objections that might arise.

BTW, I edited my post.

I blame the Republicans because their record shows it is unlikely they are bargaining in good faith. (that is why their previous performance is relevant) It's certainly their political choice to block all the Democrats' bills if they want to, but that's probably not what is best for the country. If you read up on the Senate Republicans' recent actions you will see that their leadership is whipping them hard to vote against nearly everything of consequence, regardless of the content of the bill. If our elected representatives are voting based upon politics instead of the merits of the legislation, they deserve to be called out on that.

The Democrats do it too, so it's not like the Republicans are alone in this. To ignore the Republicans' (or Democratic) actions is simply to make their bad behavior without consequence, and that's wrong.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: blanghorst

As I told Boberfett, if you want to solely blame the party that has 2% of its members vote against a bill and absolve the party that has 100% of its members vote against a bill, that's your business. I on the other hand would fault the Democrats for not crafting the bill sufficiently well to pass it despite the Republican obstructionism, and I would fault the Republicans for their obstructionism. It would be 'ludicrous' to look at the issue any other way.

Ding ding ding, we have a winner!

It's not like there is some single bill that the Republicans find so toxic that not a single one votes for it, it's nearly every meaningful bill. In the last Congress the Republicans set a new record for filibusters, absolutely blowing away the old one. To not note this would be ridiculous.

It seems like this is just an excuse. I don't care what Republicans did in the last Congress. I don't care what Democrats did last Congress. Why aren't the Democrats able to overcome this obstructionism which is happening *now*? Additionally, why would you *expect* Republicans to vote for a bill that they are against, just for the sake of passing it because you think it is right? This goes to the point above -- the Democrats crafted the bill and obviously didn't do a great job to consider the objections that might arise.

BTW, I edited my post.

I blame the Republicans because their record shows it is unlikely they are bargaining in good faith. (that is why their previous performance is relevant) It's certainly their political choice to block all the Democrats' bills if they want to, but that's probably not what is best for the country. If you read up on the Senate Republicans' recent actions you will see that their leadership is whipping them hard to vote against nearly everything of consequence, regardless of the content of the bill. If our elected representatives are voting based upon politics instead of the merits of the legislation, they deserve to be called out on that.

The Democrats do it too, so it's not like the Republicans are alone in this. To ignore the Republicans' (or Democratic) actions is simply to make their bad behavior without consequence, and that's wrong.

Which, if you have been following most of my posts, gets to my point. Both parties suck and only do what is in their own best interests -- not the nation's best interest.

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: blanghorst

It seems like this is just an excuse. I don't care what Republicans did in the last Congress. I don't care what Democrats did last Congress. Why aren't the Democrats able to overcome this obstructionism which is happening *now*? Additionally, why would you *expect* Republicans to vote for a bill that they are against, just for the sake of passing it because you think it is right? This goes to the point above -- the Democrats crafted the bill and obviously didn't do a great job to consider the objections that might arise.

BTW, I edited my post.

I blame the Republicans because their record shows it is unlikely they are bargaining in good faith. (that is why their previous performance is relevant) It's certainly their political choice to block all the Democrats' bills if they want to, but that's probably not what is best for the country. If you read up on the Senate Republicans' recent actions you will see that their leadership is whipping them hard to vote against nearly everything of consequence, regardless of the content of the bill. If our elected representatives are voting based upon politics instead of the merits of the legislation, they deserve to be called out on that.

The Democrats do it too, so it's not like the Republicans are alone in this. To ignore the Republicans' (or Democratic) actions is simply to make their bad behavior without consequence, and that's wrong.

Another one:

Max Baucus moves forward with health care bill

"Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) said Wednesday that he will push ahead with a comprehensive health care reform bill with ? or without ? Republican support and start a committee markup the week of Sept. 21."

Yup, sure sounds like the Democrats are really willing to debate this very important issue and craft a bi-partisan bill!

"Shut up and get out of the way!" How can the Republicans "obstruct" anything when they are being totally ignored in the process?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Which, if you have been following most of my posts, gets to my point. Both parties suck and only do what is in their own best interests -- not the nation's best interest.

Just so we're clear, you are now willing to also blame the Republicans? I'm not so much concerned with hanging some guilt on their heads as I am with having a rational assessment of what's going on in Congress.

Honestly though, I don't fault the parties for playing politics. (that's why they are political parties after all) It wouldn't matter what political party was in power, the current 2, 2 new ones, or 20 new ones. That's what people do. I do hope that we can call it out for what it is though.