Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Let's just focus on the facts. There is no gridlock caused by Republicans in Congress. The Republicans, frankly, are just taking up space. If they show up and vote in 100% lockstep to do everything in their power to circumvent anything that the Democrats want...IT DOESN'T MATTER! They can scream, they can wave their own legislation around, they can hold one press conference after another claiming they're being excluded from the process and it wouldn't matter if the Democrats actually had their act together.
Here's the math:
House of Reps Breakdown:
256 Democrats
0 Independents
178 Republicans
Votes needed to pass A-N-Y-T-H-I-N-G they want...218 (that means that 38 Dems can vote with the Republicans and they can still pass whatever they want)
Senate Breakdown:
57 Democrats
2 Independents
41 Republicans (with Scott Brown victory)
Votes need to pass A-N-Y-T-H-I-N-G they want...51. Meaning that even if the Independents voted with the Republicans, they could still have 4 Democrats drop out and pass whatever they want.
So, here's where I don't see the logic. Nancy Pelosi claims after the Scott Brown victory, they don't have the votes in the House to pass health care. Scott Brown was voted into the Senate. The numbers above apply just the same as they did before Kennedy died. Yet, those who are partisan are still yelling that it's all the Republicans fault. I'm not a math genius, but even I can figure out this one.
As far as those who claim that the Democrats just want bi-partisan reform...I would ask you why? Do you think for one minute that if there was a Republican president and a Republican supermajority in Congress (not seen since the 1920s) that the Republicans wouldn't take advantage and bring every single one of their platform issues right through Congress to the President's desk? Do you think for one moment that they would stop and listen to the Democrats who would no doubt be screaming about the lack of bipartisanship?
The election of Obama and the wave of Democrats who swept into office was the American public saying "Ok, we've seen what happens when Republicans run the show...let's see now what you can do. And to make the pot even sweeter, we're not only going to give you a majority, but a supermajority (not seen since the 1920s)." And what have the Democrats done? Claim that various legislation is imperitive...that we will ruin our country without this legislation, that the days of prosperity will end if this isn't passed...blah, blah, blah. So...why can't a Democratic controlled Congress get anything passed?
As an Independent voter, I am saddened by it all. I said it before, but when Obama was elected, I felt a definite sense of optimism that has been totally deflated. I feel like I have nowhere to go...the Democrats are abysmal failures and I am not exactly jumping for joy at the prospect of voting for another Republican. I don't think I'm alone in the sea of Independent voters out there.
But I'm not going to just accept these bogus claims that Healthcare Reform, Cap & Trade, Immigration, etc, can't get passed because the Republicans are causing gridlock. The Republicans aren't doing anything...it's the Democrats who can't get their act together long enough to actually figure out what their "we will fall on the sword if necessary because we believe in this legislation so much" issues are and get them passed before November. The Republicans are practically chomping at the bit for November, but if the public supported the legislation that the Democrats passed and we saw firsthand that it worked, the Dems wouldn't have to worry about November. Instead, they've blown a history-making opportunity and the Independent voters who are going to decide the elections in November are really mad.
I agree. If the Dem's would just start ramming things through it would be much better. However, they are determined to do things in a bi-partisan manner. They want the republican's to join them in making law for the betterment of the country. I saw screw it, the country sent them there to do the business and instead of waiting and ceding their initiative just to do everything on a straight up party line vote.
However, that would change the major way that the President campaigned on changing Washington.
And that's why I knew better and didn't vote for him.
I don't know what's going on? Or is it that your too wrapped up in attempting to promulgate more talking points? It must be the latter because if you even half heartedly knew what was going on your couldn't even attempt to pass off that the Senate bill was written in a room with locked doors by Harry Reid. That is completely false, unequivocally and undeniably false.
Please show me now, how it was written behind locked doors by Majority Leader Reid. You can't...you know why? Because that comment is false.
There is your petard sir. Please hang quietly on it.
I am sorry but using something that came from MSLSD in the middle of September has so little to do with what Reid got his 60 votes used on that I am sure that you have been playing too much golf. After that bill was unsuccessful Reid, Schumer, Durbin and a couple of others went into that room that Republicans weren't allowed to enter and along with some lobbyists rewrote the whole thing. If union members get exempted from paying the fee for having Cadillac plans Andy Stern must have been in there. Oh yes, 6 unions, but not all unions were exempted. No sir, you have got to get informed about the days after the Baucus bill was introduced. That one just never was considered by Dirty Harry and he and that tiny group wrote their own bill which most Democrats admitted they knew very little, if anything about.
I am sure that you never heard Juan McCain say anything about the fact that the Republicans could have contributed as much to that bill if they would have set up a tent on the Capitol steps and sold Persian rugs. He was talking about the fact that the bill was being written in that room where no Republican was allowed to enter. If you believe none of what I say you do your own search to get caught up to the present.
I agree. If the Dem's would just start ramming things through it would be much better. However, they are determined to do things in a bi-partisan manner. They want the republican's to join them in making law for the betterment of the country. I saw screw it, the country sent them there to do the business and instead of waiting and ceding their initiative just to do everything on a straight up party line vote.
However, that would change the major way that the President campaigned on changing Washington.
And that's why I knew better and didn't vote for him.
They have all kinds of problems for the coming election and what you are proposing leaves the having to accept all blame for anything that is bad and doesn't work. They talk all that bipartisan Pelosi because they need Republican votes so they can say that Republicans were also involved in some of those laws. If they could just get one RINO from Maine to vote with them they would think they don't have to take all the blame.
Anybody who can't see why they talk about bipartisan and then tell the Republicans to get out because they aren't needed must be one of them. If one Republican votes with them on the more reprehensible bills he should be thrown out to be with them.
Try to remember what I said about why they want to have bipartisan legislation.
Agree, which I think is a bitter and huge mistake. They should have asked once, twice and then start ramming things through:
Judges
HCR
Taxes
Regulation
Environmental
etc, etc, etc.
They haven't tried to ram anything through, have they? How about health insurance reform? They aren't interested in health care reform, only in blowing the insurance companies up. You have been taken in but you aren't alone in that respect.
So now you're attempting to say that 1.) It's okay for the Democrats to ram through legislation
I know you weren't quoting my post, but I still must interject.
In January, the country was feeling pretty optimistic. The Democrats had quite literally been given a mandate to make changes. They had a Democratic President on board to sign anything that arrived on his desk, a PR machine that did an amazing job in making it "cool" to vote Democratic during the election and a media who was more than willing to put anything Obama wanted to do in rose-colored light.
If, in the first two months, the Democrats put out their bills for their "must have items", invited the Republicans to contribute and then "rammed" through legislation, I think the majority of American people would have been okay with it. When the Dems won in a sweeping election, they should have at least accomplished their "wish list" and let the American people decide if we liked it or not.
The American people were ready for change and it wasn't for nearly 6 months that we realized we didn't get what we paid for. The early stages of this year were an unprecedented opportunity for the Democrats who acted like deer in headlights at the prospect of having so much power.
Here's a little groovy sentiment for all of you passionate arm chair politicians. I see so much energy used, maybe wasted, on these pages, valid political points not withstanding. Lots of finger pointing..."The Dem's this and the Repub's that." Don't we all basically want the same things? Security. Safety. A chance to improve. Etc. We may vary at extremes but when the dust settles, those basic issues are the ones that matter. Or is it that we need something more definitive to vilify (a politician, a political party) so as to satisfy our frustrations? These polarizing positions are divisive at best.
I say ban the parties. Didn't G. Washington warn against them? Focus on the common issues. Yes. healthcare is one but let's not just ram something through the system. Let's develop it as it should be, not as it will get enough votes to pass through Washington. Ah yes...Imagine there no heaven...I know some of you realists are scoffing at the very fantasy but aren't we all living another fantasy? The one where the GOP, or the Democratic party, represents us? As long as we have privately funded elections, we, the average citizens, will probably never be truly represented. Wasn't Goldman Sachs that largest single contributor of the last two, or three, presidents, political party be damned? And if so, whose interests are really being considered?
I know you weren't quoting my post, but I still must interject.
In January, the country was feeling pretty optimistic. The Democrats had quite literally been given a mandate to make changes. They had a Democratic President on board to sign anything that arrived on his desk, a PR machine that did an amazing job in making it "cool" to vote Democratic during the election and a media who was more than willing to put anything Obama wanted to do in rose-colored light.
If, in the first two months, the Democrats put out their bills for their "must have items", invited the Republicans to contribute and then "rammed" through legislation, I think the majority of American people would have been okay with it. When the Dems won in a sweeping election, they should have at least accomplished their "wish list" and let the American people decide if we liked it or not.
The American people were ready for change and it wasn't for nearly 6 months that we realized we didn't get what we paid for. The early stages of this year were an unprecedented opportunity for the Democrats who acted like deer in headlights at the prospect of having so much power.
With all due respect...Wasn't all this "according to the latest polls" which, though useful for general purposes, are subjective as hell. Campaign promises, as compared to what is actually accomplished and /or delivered, are as different as night and day.
In January, any optimism I had, was not due to the lip service being directed at my supposed concerns. No matter how charismatic Obama, or any other candidate is / was, I have not bought into any of it since I started paying more attention to politics in general (the past 30 years or so). I am amazed at how fired up people get when the candidates campaign. Is that all it takes to make us happy? Make promises that either can't be kept or that will die in the political process (at least then we can blame the other side). I'd like to believe the promises but please...Remember "No new taxes"? Yeah right! Each time I listen, I feel like I'm having smoke blown up my *ss. Kids! Cover your ears. Adults...Santa Claus does not exist nor does racial harmony. Do I want them to? Yes. But all the wanting, and wishing, in the world will not make it so.
Once again, in my extremely skeptical opinion, special interests, likely backed by private contributions, rule. As long as that is the case, we average people, responsible for the lion's share of the Internal Revenue Service revenues, will have a bone or two thrown to us. This may keep total anarchy / revolution at bay as long as we stay distracted. But who is really footing the bill?
Last edited by Mr Floyd; 02-01-2010 at 11:36 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ban the parties...can't we all get along?
