Ye Olde US Midterm Elections Thread (With Extra Vitimins)

[Helertia]

Well, that makes me feel a lot better Not too sure about the last point, though...
And may I say, thats a very well written and thought out list

[Greater Tomainia]

Too many Republicans still got in

[Helertia]

But... but... a carrot is now the Speaker of the House.

But maybe he'll open up all his speeches with "Oompa, Loompa, Doopity-Do, I've Got Political Matters For You..."

I'd prefer "Oompa, Loompa, Doopity-Dee, Please stop throwing things at me..."

[The Floridian Coast]

But maybe he'll open up all his speeches with "Oompa, Loompa, Doopity-Do, I've Got Political Matters For You..."

I'd prefer "Oompa, Loompa, Doopity-Dee, Please stop throwing things at me..."

Or maybe "Oompa, Loompa, Dappity Dant, just wanted to say

HELL NO YOU CAN'T!!!"

[Muravyets]

Of course you think they're right. In your view, which is utterly partisan and dedicated to destroying compromise not building it, you portray Republican refusal to compromise as a sign of good faith, and Democratic failure to overcome that stubborn refusal to cooperate as a sign of dishonesty. And like the Republican Party of whom you are such a fan, you dress up their obstructionism in claims that they were cut out of the process, in direct contradiction of the documented facts that every single piece of legislation in Congress must be drafted and amended from start to finish by BOTH parties, represented by BIPARTISAN committees. It must be fun to tell a lie in order to call the other side liars. That must be why the GOP does it so often.

There are several words to describe such an argument as yours. One of them is "laughable."

Actually, I'm laughing a little, okay -- a lot -- at this idea that you need more than a majority vote in the House and a supermajority vote in the Senate to pass a bill on to the President. When the majority party has those numbers, as did the Democrats from 2008-9, they don't need minority support. So I don't see how BOTH parties were needed to pass legislation. Explain, please.

It's called the rules of the Congress. You might want to look them up some time. All bills are vetted by committees that include both parties. All committees get to amend. Every bill that was obstructed by the GOP was partially written by the GOP. Their claims that they were blocked from input are flat-out bullshit. The more you repeat them, the more you show your own ignorance of how the US government works.

[Farnhamia]

Well, that makes me feel a lot better Not too sure about the last point, though...
And may I say, thats a very well written and thought out list

I agree on both counts.

FC, that last point may be silver but it's tarnished. What you're saying there is that the White House and the Democratic Party can now abandon its liberal supporters and move to the right (assuming they were left of center to begin with). That's no consolation to those of us who think they ought to have had the courage to stand on their (supposed) liberal principles while they had the chance. Then again, the Democrats have been trying to dress up in Republican hand-me-downs ever since Gingrich and his crew grabbed Congress from them back in 1994. It hasn't occurred to them that all that does is make them look ridiculous.

[Helertia]

I'd prefer "Oompa, Loompa, Doopity-Dee, Please stop throwing things at me..."

Or maybe "Oompa, Loompa, Dappity Dant, just wanted to say

[proposal=]HELL NO YOU CAN'T!!![/proposal]"

To which the Democrats ought reply "Oompa, Loompa, Duppity Dunt, Stop acting like such a total ****"

[Les Drapeaux Brulants]

I think they got it right. Since they weren't offered a chance to participate and improve legislation, stalling whatever they could was the right tactic. And it resonated with the country, as we see today.

It would be better if we had a Congress that could compromise, but that doesn't seem likely. The minority party only has so many tools at its disposal and delay is certainly a valid one.

Dude, MANY of the amendments that were included in the healthcare bill was proposed by The Republicans. Do you notice that we don't have a public option? You can thank the Republicans for that. Notice we don't have federal funding for abortions? Thank the Republicans for that. Hel 40% of the stimulus had tax cuts in it, Republicans are big on tax cuts.

Why don't you try listening to other sources once in awhile instead of always having your head up Rush Limbaugh's and Glenn Beck's ass?

Are you talking about the tax cut that no one noticed? The $15 per month that wasn't withheld? Yeah! That really stimulated the economy!

[Helertia]

Dude, MANY of the amendments that were included in the healthcare bill was proposed by The Republicans. Do you notice that we don't have a public option? You can thank the Republicans for that. Notice we don't have federal funding for abortions? Thank the Republicans for that. Hel 40% of the stimulus had tax cuts in it, Republicans are big on tax cuts.

Why don't you try listening to other sources once in awhile instead of always having your head up Rush Limbaugh's and Glenn Beck's ass?

Are you talking about the tax cut that no one noticed? The $15 per month that wasn't withheld? Yeah! That really stimulated the economy!

Your strong economy with falling unemployment? The same economy which independant financial bodies have consistently assessed as saved by Obama's stimulus program?

[Muravyets]

And the Republicans need to learn the word 'no'. It is not a synonym for 'cooperation', and their slogan claim during the past two years that they would be the "Party of No" dedicated to the blocking or repeal of every Obama measure - backed up by their real world action to obstruct or block every single piece of legislation and presidential appointment during that period - does not fool anyone (but them, perhaps) into thinking they were looking for compromise.

Actually the Democrats coined the phrase "Party of No"... But don't let the facts bother you.
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2010 ... -democrats

September 21, 2010|By Dennis Byrne

Mindless of the din arising from the crowds of supposed hicks, reactionaries, bigots, dupes and dolts gathering to bring down their party, Democrats have coined what they believe is a nifty campaign slogan to describe the opposition: "the party of no."

No ideas, no platform, no positive affirmations, no help for the tired, poor and huddled masses. No agenda for what they would do when they take over Congress (if they should be so lucky). Witless rabble, far outside the mainstream, who have no solutions, only "no-we-can'ts."

You are truly and profoundly tiresome. I am not going to play your silly game of pretending nothing has ever happened in the world except the specific little cherries you decide to pick from one moment to another. Everyone in the US who pays any attention at all knows that the GOP leadership in Congress, including such luminaries as John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, Eric Cantor, just to name three off the top of my head, made huge amounts of political hay declaring themselves the Party of No and promising their base that "No" was the only answer the Democrats or Obama would ever get from them on anything. The GOP created the Party of No, embraced the Party of No, published memorabilia for the Party of No, gave stump speeches for the Party of No, and generally dined out on the ticket of the Party of No for two full years. All of your arguments are dependent on a fantasy world where the majority of real current events never happened. But I live in reality, where your arguments are crap.

[The Floridian Coast]

Well, that makes me feel a lot better Not too sure about the last point, though...
And may I say, thats a very well written and thought out list

I agree on both counts.

FC, that last point may be silver but it's tarnished. What you're saying there is that the White House and the Democratic Party can now abandon its liberal supporters and move to the right (assuming they were left of center to begin with). That's no consolation to those of us who think they ought to have had the courage to stand on their (supposed) liberal principles while they had the chance. Then again, the Democrats have been trying to dress up in Republican hand-me-downs ever since Gingrich and his crew grabbed Congress from them back in 1994. It hasn't occurred to them that all that does is make them look ridiculous.

I am a strong progressive liberal and the White House's previous marginalizing of the liberal base has angered me. But I have common sense and I see the lesser of two evils and I hope most liberals will too.

It's the pragmatism in me that had me vote for Democrat Alex Sink yesterday rather than cast a protest vote for brilliant futurist Michael E. Arth.

In very broad terms, liberals need to adapt the symbolic mantra of "Now is not the time to vote for Nader", not just meaning in elections, but in what policies to support. I want Obama to cater to the center because I want him to get a second term.

[Lunatic Goofballs]

But... but... a carrot is now the Speaker of the House.

But maybe he'll open up all his speeches with "Oompa, Loompa, Doopity-Do, I've Got Political Matters For You..."

[Les Drapeaux Brulants]

Actually, I'm laughing a little, okay -- a lot -- at this idea that you need more than a majority vote in the House and a supermajority vote in the Senate to pass a bill on to the President. When the majority party has those numbers, as did the Democrats from 2008-9, they don't need minority support. So I don't see how BOTH parties were needed to pass legislation. Explain, please.

It's called the rules of the Congress. You might want to look them up some time. All bills are vetted by committees that include both parties. All committees get to amend. Every bill that was obstructed by the GOP was partially written by the GOP. Their claims that they were blocked from input are flat-out bullshit. The more you repeat them, the more you show your own ignorance of how the US government works.

I think you need to learn to count... If the majority party has 11 seats on a 21 seat committee, then they only need 11 votes to pass (or not pass) anything. The minority party is along for the ride. Same thing with the House/Senate... If the majority party has 50%+1, then it doesn't matter what the minority party thinks, the majority party has the votes. The fact that minority party members sit on committees is nice, but their votes, amendments, or testimony is not required for passing (or not passing) anything that the majority wants done.

[Wilgrove]

Dude, MANY of the amendments that were included in the healthcare bill was proposed by The Republicans. Do you notice that we don't have a public option? You can thank the Republicans for that. Notice we don't have federal funding for abortions? Thank the Republicans for that. Hel 40% of the stimulus had tax cuts in it, Republicans are big on tax cuts.

Why don't you try listening to other sources once in awhile instead of always having your head up Rush Limbaugh's and Glenn Beck's ass?

Are you talking about the tax cut that no one noticed? The $15 per month that wasn't withheld? Yeah! That really stimulated the economy!

*sigh*

Obama did cut taxes
The Stimulus worked, but it wasn't enough. However, The stimulus did create 1.4 to 3.3 million jobs.

[Helertia]

I agree on both counts.

FC, that last point may be silver but it's tarnished. What you're saying there is that the White House and the Democratic Party can now abandon its liberal supporters and move to the right (assuming they were left of center to begin with). That's no consolation to those of us who think they ought to have had the courage to stand on their (supposed) liberal principles while they had the chance. Then again, the Democrats have been trying to dress up in Republican hand-me-downs ever since Gingrich and his crew grabbed Congress from them back in 1994. It hasn't occurred to them that all that does is make them look ridiculous.

I am a strong progressive liberal and the White House's previous marginalizing of the liberal base has angered me. But I have common sense and I see the lesser of two evils and I hope most liberals will too.

It's the pragmatism in me that had me vote for Democrat Alex Sink yesterday rather than cast a protest vote for brilliant futurist Michael E. Arth.

In very broad terms, liberals need to adapt the symbolic mantra of "Now is not the time to vote for Nader", not just meaning in elections, but in what policies to support. I want Obama to cater to the center because I want him to get a second term.

You have a point. It seems to me (and I'm only reckoning, and thus ill informed and wrong) that the job now is to defend the achievement of the past two years. In military terms, foritify the territory that we've won rather than try and take more.

[Farnhamia]

I agree on both counts.

FC, that last point may be silver but it's tarnished. What you're saying there is that the White House and the Democratic Party can now abandon its liberal supporters and move to the right (assuming they were left of center to begin with). That's no consolation to those of us who think they ought to have had the courage to stand on their (supposed) liberal principles while they had the chance. Then again, the Democrats have been trying to dress up in Republican hand-me-downs ever since Gingrich and his crew grabbed Congress from them back in 1994. It hasn't occurred to them that all that does is make them look ridiculous.

I am a strong progressive liberal and the White House's previous marginalizing of the liberal base has angered me. But I have common sense and I see the lesser of two evils and I hope most liberals will too.

It's the pragmatism in me that had me vote for Democrat Alex Sink yesterday rather than cast a protest vote for brilliant futurist Michael E. Arth.

In very broad terms, liberals need to adapt the symbolic mantra of "Now is not the time to vote for Nader", not just meaning in elections, but in what policies to support. I want Obama to cater to the center because I want him to get a second term.

Alright, but still, I'm getting very tired of the less of two evils. And there is never a time to vote for Nader. Ever. I do want Obama to have another term but I would much prefer it be because I thought he was going to do things I approve of, instead of because I couldn't bear the damage a Republican president might inflict.

[Jingoist Hippostan]

I'm glad the GOP took control of the House. Now they'll really have to grow up and take some responsibility instead of being the party of No.

[The Floridian Coast]

Well I approve of Obama's first two years and it is absolutely vital he stands up for what he achieved.

History, at least, will vindicate Obama and the 111th.

[Wilgrove]

But... but... a carrot is now the Speaker of the House.

I thought he was an Oompa Loompa.

Anyways, great post The Floridian Coast.

[DemocraticConfusion]

Since world war 2, the majority of governmental action (as opposed to inaction) has occured when neither party controls both the House and the Senate. Let us hope that is true this time around.

[The Floridian Coast]

But... but... a carrot is now the Speaker of the House.

I thought he was an Oompa Loompa.

Anyways, great post The Floridian Coast.

Thank you, much appreciated from an NSer I remember from when I used to have a nation 3 years ago, and whom I've always found to be insightful.

[Wilgrove]

I thought he was an Oompa Loompa.

Anyways, great post The Floridian Coast.

Thank you, much appreciated from an NSer I remember from when I used to have a nation 3 years ago, and whom I've always found to be insightful.

You know, the new Speaker of the House needs to bring in the cast of Jersey Shore on the opening day. Just have a row of orange people and say "WE'RE HERE, WE'RE ORANGE, GET USED TO IT!"

[Innsmothe]

I thought he was an Oompa Loompa.

Anyways, great post The Floridian Coast.

Thank you, much appreciated from an NSer I remember from when I used to have a nation 3 years ago, and whom I've always found to be insightful.

He is also mine. *Draws line two feet in between you and him.*

*Pouts*


And I am sad that the raving loonies didn't get in, it'll make the Repubs seem more mature.

[Nort Eurasia]

I hope this is satire. I really, really hope this is satire.

[DemocraticConfusion]

The comments made on this thread are a microcosm of liberals who wont work with the right. jsut as bad as those on the right who are hyper-partisan wouldn't you agree?