The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: Tucker on July 17, 2011, 07:25:19 PM
-
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1509874
OHdem10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sun Jul-17-11 04:15 PM
Original message
Please Explain this for me. When the Dems controlled both
Senate and House, on several occasions Nancy Pelosi
Speaker and the Democrats (sometimes a few Republicans)
would pass Legislation. Gosh a lot of legislation.
It would be sent to Senate and never voted on.
Often they knew this before sending it, but felt
compelled that House should state their position.
On TV Programs there MIGHT be a mention. The House
passed a bill on------ today. It is more a statement
of the House. It will go nowhere in the Senate.
NOW. The Teabagbers and Republicans in House pass
these statement pieces of legislation. However they
take up whole sections of the News. THE HOUSE
THE HOUSE THE HOUSE gets breathless coverage
yet the legislation will go to the Senate and
linger never being brought to the floor.
Why is so much importance given to the House
under GOP than Democrats. Tomorrow the House
is going to do some version of what it will take
for them to vote to raise the Debt Ceiling.
It seems Chris Wallace's hour was almost spent
on THE HOUSE THE HOUSE.
The other channels do spend a lot of time on
the House. Again Why the difference???
Especially, with a bunch of whackos.
Reality sucks, don't it?
21st Century FDR (349 posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sun Jul-17-11 04:17 PM
Response to Original message
1. Because Harry Reid is a spineless coward
Who refused to put an end to the bullshit fiction that you need more than 60 votes to pass ANYTHING.
bahrbearian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sun Jul-17-11 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. I really hated when he took the Public Option off the table along with Nancy,after he meet w/Bachass
Edited on Sun Jul-17-11 07:49 PM by bahrbearian
Oh wait a minute that was Obama.
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sun Jul-17-11 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. Just listening to anything our of Reid's moth reminds me of a fearful creature with shotgun to head.
But our Democratic Party gave Big Bucks and Big Effort to keep him. So...there you have it.
He's a "tool."
The DLC owns your ass.
I'm beginning to think that there are more moles than DUmmies at the DUmp now.
-
I agree Tucker, something ain't right in misfit land.
-
Because Democratic + incompetent = redundant.
-
I don't think Reid is a coward at all...a crook with limited intelligence, and the mental flexibility of an old geezer screaming at those damn' kids to get off his lawn, but not a coward. Which is unfortunate, because the lack of that one character flaw combined with the presence of all the others in him is pretty much responsible for turning the Senate into a complete dead end for getting anything productive done.
-
I don't think Reid is a coward at all...a crook with limited intelligence, and the mental flexibility of an old geezer screaming at those damn' kids to get off his lawn, but not a coward. Which is unfortunate, because the lack of that one character flaw combined with the presence of all the others in him is pretty much responsible for turning the Senate into a complete dead end for getting anything productive done.
Sometimes that's a good thing.
-
Sometimes that's a good thing.
Not when it comes to necessary Constitutional tasks like "Passing a budget."
-
Not when it comes to necessary Constitutional tasks like "Passing a budget."
For two years the Dems had vast majorities and never even bothered to submit a budget.
-
For two years the Dems had vast majorities and never even bothered to submit a budget.
That process has to start in the House, Reid's hands are at least officially clean on that one, though I'm sure he and Mrs. Skeletor cooked it up between them, she isn't smart enough to have come up with it by herself.
-
That process has to start in the House, Reid's hands are at least officially clean on that one, though I'm sure he and Mrs. Skeletor cooked it up between them, she isn't smart enough to have come up with it by herself.
True, that budget bills start in the house, but don't presidents usually present one to congress for consideration? I don't Obama did that the past two years.
-
True, that budget bills start in the house, but don't presidents usually present one to congress for consideration? I don't Obama did that the past two years.
Well, I don't recall what happened the years Mrs. Skeletor ran the House, but I believe he did present one this year, and NOBODY voted for it, Republican OR Democrat.
-
Well, I don't recall what happened the years Mrs. Skeletor ran the House, but I believe he did present one this year, and NOBODY voted for it, Republican OR Democrat.
That was in the Senate. The House passed budget got 40 votes in the Senate, Obama's got 0. Got to be pretty bad when even every member of your own party will not go on record supporting your budget. Maybe they are just thinking ahead to 2012 and do not want to be dragged down by Obama's anchor chains (reverse coattails if you will).
-
That was in the Senate. The House passed budget got 40 votes in the Senate, Obama's got 0. Got to be pretty bad when even every member of your own party will not go on record supporting your budget. Maybe they are just thinking ahead to 2012 and do not want to be dragged down by Obama's anchor chains (reverse coattails if you will).
They're not the only ones who don't want to "go down with the ship."
Why Andy may secretly root for GOP in 2012
Last Updated: 6:27 AM, July 18, 2011
Posted: 1:44 AM, July 18, 2011
Fredric U. Dicker
Will Gov. Cuomo be backing the Republican candidate for president next year?
Certainly not openly. But privately, that could be another matter.
Two nationally prominent Republicans, in an assessment that's begun being whispered in some Democratic circles, contend it's in Cuomo's political interest for President Obama to be defeated next year.
"If I'm Gov. Cuomo, I want to see Obama defeated rather than re-elected in 2012," said GOP pollster/strategist John McLaughlin, whose New York-based company boasts a top-flight client list that includes House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.).
"The question is, 'Would Cuomo rather run in 2016 against a first-term Republican or in the aftermath of a second term of Obama, the most left-wing president we may have ever seen, with economic policies that harm the private sector with massive tax increases and a homeland-security path that includes hostility to Israel?' "
Dicker may be onto something here.
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/why_andy_may_secretly_root_for_gop_nfVczp1kseOjovid5kQw8O#ixzz1STsAYG00
-
I agree Tucker, something ain't right in misfit land.
You got that right. I stumbled across this thread but haven't had time to fully read it and the internal links. If you are cube bound or have a moment, take a look:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1511825
Can loyalty oaths be far behind? :-)
-
You got that right. I stumbled across this thread but haven't had time to fully read it and the internal links. If you are cube bound or have a moment, take a look:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1511825
Can loyalty oaths be far behind? :-)
The post is a missive concerning the differences between old dems like the OP and the new dems and basically calls the new dems out for not having the benefit of living thru the 60's or something.
And right out of the gates...
Name removed (0 posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sun Jul-17-11 09:13 PM
Response to Original message
1. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
:lmao: :rotf:
Ahhh...some good dem on dem hate going on in that thread.
-
Im certain that Skins is secretly hoping for an Obama defeat. The donations and membership were so much higher when DU had a universal target. Now the infighting has carved DU into an empty shell of its former cash-cow self.