The Conservative Cave

Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: franksolich on December 19, 2009, 09:52:10 AM

Title: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: franksolich on December 19, 2009, 09:52:10 AM
http://upload.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x74055

Oh my.

Quote
IndianaGreen  (1000+ posts)        Sat Dec-19-09 10:02 AM
Original message
 
Ben Nelson on CNN live

He was very happy about the abortion restrictions on the bill.

Quote
IndianaGreen  (1000+ posts)        Sat Dec-19-09 10:06 AM
Response to Original message
 
1. Deal involves a limited conference with House, with minor changes allowed

Quote
AlinPA  (1000+ posts)      Sat Dec-19-09 10:09 AM
Response to Original message
 
2. But he said he will vote against the final bill (after work with the house) if there are "material changes". That means if there is any public option, he will join the republicans to vote against health care reform.

Quote
IndianaGreen  (1000+ posts)        Sat Dec-19-09 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #2
 
3. or if abortion restrictions are taken off

Quote
AlinPA  (1000+ posts)      Sat Dec-19-09 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #3
 
4. Right.

Quote
IndianaGreen  (1000+ posts)        Sat Dec-19-09 10:19 AM
Response to Original message
 
5. In summary, if the House alters one iota of Nelson's provisions, he will filibuster and Harry Reid has agreed that the Senate will only discuss minor changes with House.

Quote
mascarax  (869 posts)      Sat Dec-19-09 10:34 AM
Response to Original message
 
6. So sweet when he said re: health care debate good "...from the far right to the extreme left"

Nice.

"Extreme"

Extremely nice.  And so fitting.
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: Freeper on December 19, 2009, 03:39:00 PM
Don't worry DUmmies Harry Reid paid him off.
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: BlueStateSaint on December 19, 2009, 03:54:34 PM
Don't worry DUmmies Harry Reid paid him off.

As it looks now, Dingy, Harry Reid won't be there in 2011.
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: The Village Idiot on December 19, 2009, 06:47:05 PM
Its a bigger payoff than Landreiu got. Hers is limited, Nebraska's is "forever". He is a more expensive prostitute in the long run. heh.
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: bkg on December 19, 2009, 06:51:00 PM
It begs the question...

Did he do the right thing for his constituents?

don't get me wrong, I think he's as much a POS as most of them in DC, but one could argue that he just protected Nebraska residents...
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: The Village Idiot on December 19, 2009, 06:57:50 PM
It begs the question...

Did he do the right thing for his constituents?

don't get me wrong, I think he's as much a POS as most of them in DC, but one could argue that he just protected Nebraska residents...

no.

This is a bad deal all around. Plus all that crap that will be stuffed in during reconciliation... whoa
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: bkg on December 19, 2009, 07:05:15 PM
no.

This is a bad deal all around. Plus all that crap that will be stuffed in during reconciliation... whoa

I agree - I do. But technically, Nebraska residents are benefiting from his decision, right?
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: Freeper on December 19, 2009, 07:57:32 PM
It begs the question...

Did he do the right thing for his constituents?

don't get me wrong, I think he's as much a POS as most of them in DC, but one could argue that he just protected Nebraska residents...

He was bribed plain and simple, so even if it were to do good things for his state that gets negated because it was unethical and illegal. Plus I will argue that this health care bullshit will cause more harm to his state than the small tax break his state will get.
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: bkg on December 19, 2009, 08:02:53 PM
He was bribed plain and simple, so even if it were to do good things for his state that gets negated because it was unethical and illegal. Plus I will argue that this health care bullshit will cause more harm to his state than the small tax break his state will get.

You're correct on all thoughts...

but you're missing the point I was trying to make.
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: GOBUCKS on December 19, 2009, 08:06:51 PM
You're correct on all thoughts...

but you're missing the point I was trying to make.
If Nebraskans are Americans, then they are as screwed as we are.
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: Freeper on December 19, 2009, 08:07:17 PM
You're correct on all thoughts...

but you're missing the point I was trying to make.

Ok what point was I missing then?
You can argue that it benefits his state if you wish. However I don't see how this bill benefits anyone other than the leftists. So any benefit gained by this bribe is canceled out at the end of the day.  
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: bkg on December 19, 2009, 08:13:19 PM
Ok what point was I missing then?
You can argue that it benefits his state if you wish. However I don't see how this bill benefits anyone other than the leftists. So any benefit gained by this bribe is canceled out at the end of the day.  

Look - I'm as conservative as the next guy, if not more so. I'm just trying to understand the other side of this. Logically, I think it could be argued that he represented Nebraskan's well by getting them all of the (supposed) benefits of the bill w/o any of the costs. In some senses, depending on how well negoiated, he gave Nebraska a good standing under the 10th.

Now - you and I know it's complete bullshit and no better than wiping their ass with COTUS, but think about it for a minute. If my previous paragraph has any truth to it, he represented his constituents well... while pissing on COTUS at the same time...

It's just a line of thought. I put no weight into it.
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: Oceander on December 19, 2009, 08:33:36 PM
Look - I'm as conservative as the next guy, if not more so. I'm just trying to understand the other side of this. Logically, I think it could be argued that he represented Nebraskan's well by getting them all of the (supposed) benefits of the bill w/o any of the costs. In some senses, depending on how well negoiated, he gave Nebraska a good standing under the 10th.

Now - you and I know it's complete bullshit and no better than wiping their ass with COTUS, but think about it for a minute. If my previous paragraph has any truth to it, he represented his constituents well... while pissing on COTUS at the same time...

It's just a line of thought. I put no weight into it.

Maybe he did - although the difference between second-class seats and first-class seats is a bit irrelevant when both are on the Titanic. 

However, what he utterly failed to do is to act as a Senator; what we are seeing right now are the inevitable consequences of one of the stupidest Constitutional amendments in history - providing for the popular election of senators.  Prior to that amendment, Senators were chosen by the legislatures of the states they represented; they therefore had a constituency that was not just a group of individuals who voted for them, but rather the state qua state that they represented.  That mechanism effectively meant that senators were more inclined to act in the best interests of the country as a whole, rather than simply as glorified Representatives out to get whatever they could for their voters, regardless of the expense to the country as a whole.

The Senate was originally supposed to act as a counterweight to the House, which would be dominated more by parochial demagogic actors than by truly national legislators; as such, it was imperative that the senators be chosen by a group that both represented the people themselves, but yet were not simply co-extensive with the people themselves.  That is what the Founders achieved by having the state legislatures choose the senators.  By throwing that provision out, we almost literally threw the baby out with the bath-water, and basically converted the senators into glorified super-representatives, with all of the prerogatives of demagogues, and none of the felt duties or obligations to look after the interests of the nation as a whole.

As such, no, Mr. Nelson is not acting as a good Senator, nor as a good steward of the trust that was reposed in him when he assumed the office of United States Senator.  Mr. Nelson has joined all of the other pigs wallowing in the Augean stables into which the Democrats have turned Capitol Hill.

Oink, Oink!

(http://i758.photobucket.com/albums/xx221/B_Oceander/Democrat_Lies/DNC_Pigs.jpg)

Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: ReaganForRushmore on December 19, 2009, 09:02:06 PM
I agree - I do. But technically, Nebraska residents are benefiting from his decision, right?

No, because when the system implodes, Nebraska will be in the same pile of shit that everybody else is
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: The Village Idiot on December 19, 2009, 10:44:39 PM
Look - I'm as conservative as the next guy, if not more so. I'm just trying to understand the other side of this. Logically, I think it could be argued that he represented Nebraskan's well by getting them all of the (supposed) benefits of the bill w/o any of the costs. In some senses, depending on how well negoiated, he gave Nebraska a good standing under the 10th.

Now - you and I know it's complete bullshit and no better than wiping their ass with COTUS, but think about it for a minute. If my previous paragraph has any truth to it, he represented his constituents well... while pissing on COTUS at the same time...

It's just a line of thought. I put no weight into it.

Nebraska loses less than the rest of us?

Okay.

I don't think they gain though.
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: Randy on December 20, 2009, 07:10:53 AM
Look - I'm as conservative as the next guy, if not more so. I'm just trying to understand the other side of this. Logically, I think it could be argued that he represented Nebraskan's well by getting them all of the (supposed) benefits of the bill w/o any of the costs. In some senses, depending on how well negoiated, he gave Nebraska a good standing under the 10th.

Now - you and I know it's complete bullshit and no better than wiping their ass with COTUS, but think about it for a minute. If my previous paragraph has any truth to it, he represented his constituents well... while pissing on COTUS at the same time...

It's just a line of thought. I put no weight into it.

Let me run this through the English-DUmmie translator.

Nebraska is only getting ass-raped by 10 convicts while the rest of us have to take it from the full line of 20. Either way we're all screwed, Nebraska just gets to take the shower of shame a bit sooner.
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: Oceander on December 20, 2009, 10:02:18 AM
Let me run this through the English-DUmmie translator.

Nebraska is only getting ass-raped by 10 convicts while the rest of us have to take it from the full line of 20. Either way we're all screwed, Nebraska just gets to take the shower of shame a bit sooner.

Exactly, although said a little more ... earthier ... than I would have said it.
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: bkg on December 20, 2009, 10:17:18 AM
Nebraska loses less than the rest of us?

Okay.

I don't think they gain though.

Probably the best way to say it. If the country is going down and you can slow it a bit for your personal state, in some ways, some one will find a way to justify those actions as what is best for NE.

Again - I do NOT agree with his actions. Just trying to play devil's advocate for a moment.
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: dutch508 on December 20, 2009, 11:18:51 AM
Probably the best way to say it. If the country is going down and you can slow it a bit for your personal state, in some ways, some one will find a way to justify those actions as what is best for NE.

Again - I do NOT agree with his actions. Just trying to play devil's advocate for a moment.

Ben Nelson sold the country out for 30 peices of silver. I am sure his justification is, "At least I've protected the Nebraskan people"- at the expense of the rest of the country.
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: TheSarge on December 20, 2009, 11:29:20 AM
This suddenly makes the 2010 Mid terms that much more important for the Republicans to win.
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: Oceander on December 20, 2009, 12:08:18 PM
This suddenly makes the 2010 Mid terms that much more important for the Republicans to win.

Clearly.  2010 means everything; 2012 means almost nothing (nothing substantive, it would be a nice formality, but that's about all it would be).  If we fail to break the Democrats' chokehold on Congress in 2010, then the country is dead, period.  At that point we might as well start teaching our kids to speak Mandarin so that at least they'll be able to understand what their owners are saying about them when they grow up, and that regardless of whether or not Sarah Palin sits in the Whitehouse after 2012.

On the other hand, if we win 2010 - and here "win" means breaking the Democrats' chokehold with enough seats that we can at least reliably filibuster any stupidity of theirs - then we win, regardless of whether or not Zero still sits in the Whitehouse after 2012.  In fact, provided we can "win" in 2010, at this point I would be inclined to vote for Zero, just to watch the veins bulge on his temples and the spittle fleck his chin as he rants in impotent rage about being unable to implement any more of his hardcore radical leftist agenda, hopefully to the point of having a coronary.
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: BlueStateSaint on December 20, 2009, 01:12:06 PM
Clearly.  2010 means everything; 2012 means almost nothing (nothing substantive, it would be a nice formality, but that's about all it would be).  If we fail to break the Democrats' chokehold on Congress in 2010, then the country is dead, period.  At that point we might as well start teaching our kids to speak Mandarin so that at least they'll be able to understand what their owners are saying about them when they grow up, and that regardless of whether or not Sarah Palin sits in the Whitehouse after 2012.

On the other hand, if we win 2010 - and here "win" means breaking the Democrats' chokehold with enough seats that we can at least reliably filibuster any stupidity of theirs - then we win, regardless of whether or not Zero still sits in the Whitehouse after 2012.  In fact, provided we can "win" in 2010, at this point I would be inclined to vote for Zero, just to watch the veins bulge on his temples and the spittle fleck his chin as he rants in impotent rage about being unable to implement any more of his hardcore radical leftist agenda, hopefully to the point of having a coronary.

I think that the Republicans need to take back control of the House, and nominal control of the Senate (more than 50 Republican Senators).  That way, they will be able to seriously undermine the Obamessiah's agenda.  As the six years when the Republicans ran the Congress during the reign of the Clenis illustrate, there's still a good amount of damage that can be done by having the White House have a Democrat live there.  So, the elections of 2012 are still tantamount, as the Left's hold on the remaining Dems is going to be tight enough that they will do whatever they can to retard anything that the Republicans will be able to pass, in opposition to the Obamination's agenda.  In 2012, there's 24 Democrat Senate seats up for grabs, and only 9 Republican Senate seats up for grabs, and there's going to be a rather unpopular Democrat (Obama) at the top of the slate.  Dem Senate losses will be huge.

So, come 2013, the Senate could very well have 63 or 64 Republican Senators in it--more than enough to steamroll any Democrat opposition to a Republican president's attempts to repair the damage the Obamination has wrought on the United States of America.
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: bkg on December 20, 2009, 01:18:53 PM
I'd prefer to see independents, Constututionalists and Tea Party candidates gain about 20-22 seats. Fawk the GOP.
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: AllosaursRus on December 21, 2009, 11:45:10 AM
I'd prefer to see independents, Constututionalists and Tea Party candidates gain about 20-22 seats. Fawk the GOP.

As long as they run on the Repub ticket. Anyone who believes a third party will accomplish anything more than keeping DimWits in office, is living on Uranus!
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: bkg on December 21, 2009, 11:50:37 AM
As long as they run on the Repub ticket. Anyone who believes a third party will accomplish anything more than keeping DimWits in office, is living on Uranus!

And anyone who believes that the GOP is any more fiscally conservative than the DNC has been asleep for the last 8-9 years.

I don't disagree that third party will be hard, but I'm not voting for another party...
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: GOBUCKS on December 21, 2009, 11:54:59 AM
Quote
As long as they run on the Repub ticket. Anyone who believes a third party will accomplish anything more than keeping DimWits in office, is living on Uranus!
Of course, you are 100% right, but save your breath. It's like discussing foreign policy with a ronbot.
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: bkg on December 21, 2009, 11:57:44 AM
Of course, you are 100% right, but save your breath. It's like discussing foreign policy with a ronbot.

Clearly you don't like my opinion. That's fine. No need to attempt a passive-aggressive insult, though.

You really looking forward to GOP in control? What will they do differently? What will they reverse? Seriously.
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: BlueStateSaint on December 21, 2009, 12:41:34 PM
Clearly you don't like my opinion. That's fine. No need to attempt a passive-aggressive insult, though.

You really looking forward to GOP in control? What will they do differently? What will they reverse? Seriously.

One of the things that they will do differently is that they'll prosecute the WOT as a war, and not as a crime.
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: bkg on December 21, 2009, 12:45:49 PM
One of the things that they will do differently is that they'll prosecute the WOT as a war, and not as a crime.

Won't happen in 2010. Maybe in 2012 if there's a new president as well. But Holder and Obama have already made that decision. Terrorists will be on American soil before next year's elections... no on will move them back to Gitmo under this president. Had McCain won, likely would have been as you suggest. Just don't see it shifting directions under this administration unless something major happens.
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: BlueStateSaint on December 21, 2009, 01:36:15 PM
Won't happen in 2010. Maybe in 2012 if there's a new president as well. But Holder and Obama have already made that decision. Terrorists will be on American soil before next year's elections... no on will move them back to Gitmo under this president. Had McCain won, likely would have been as you suggest. Just don't see it shifting directions under this administration unless something major happens.

By "control," I mean that there's got to be a Republican in the White House.
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: bkg on December 21, 2009, 01:57:56 PM
By "control," I mean that there's got to be a Republican in the White House.

I think you're correct on that. And not only a Republican, a conservative...
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: BlueStateSaint on December 21, 2009, 02:25:24 PM
I think you're correct on that. And not only a Republican, a conservative...

AFAIC, the two need to be the same.
Title: Re: primitives being ungrateful about Nebraska's senior senator
Post by: Oceander on December 21, 2009, 04:41:14 PM
And anyone who believes that the GOP is any more fiscally conservative than the DNC has been asleep for the last 8-9 years.

I don't disagree that third party will be hard, but I'm not voting for another party...

Look, there are not a whole ton of people here who disagree with you on the philosophical niceties, but the simple, blunt fact of the matter is, a vote for a third party is as good as a vote for the Democrats.  If you really want to help the Democrats flush the country down the toilet, go ahead and vote on punctilious philosophical issues.  If you don't, then vote for the Republican who stinks the least, and then make sure you hold his or her toes to the fire constantly to keep him or her from getting lazy and drifting over to the Democrat side of things.