Thank you big brother!!

[Token]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/15/AR2010031503742_pf.html

Thanks for looking out for the rest of us.  No need to waste time with things such as voting. 

[Vandy Vol]

I have a lot of problems with the Republicans voting no on everything in order to spite the Obama administration.  And I have a lot of problems with the fact that Democrats have been pushing their own bill and not giving any constructive leeway to the Republicans.

However, this is absolute bullshit and is a prime example of why Nancy Pelosi is a fucking mommy part bucket.

Pardon my French.

[Jumbo]

I think they should raise our taxes, and pass the health care bill. 

[bottomfeeder]

The title of this thread caught my attention, but once I read things I realized it wasn't what I thought it would be. Kind of like an incestuous relationship between bammers.

I was thinking more along the lines of this:

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/03/eff-posts-documents-detailing-law-enforcement

http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/social_network/20100303__crim_socialnetworking.pdf

[Townhallsavoy]

Didn't Bush and Co. use the "deem and pass" tactic numerous times during his presidency? 

I actually think Chris Dodd had a big speech about how Bush was trying to be a dictator with his deem and pass schemes. 

[Vandy Vol]

Didn't Bush and Co. use the "deem and pass" tactic numerous times during his presidency? 

I actually think Chris Dodd had a big speech about how Bush was trying to be a dictator with his deem and pass schemes. 

I'm not a fan of the deem and pass strategy at all.  Bush did use it during his term.  In fact, Republicans in general have used the strategy in the past more than Democrats have.  Nonetheless, Pelosi and other Democrats sued Bush in 2005 for using the strategy, and now she's using it.

Of course, the courts ruled that it was a legal procedure, but I still don't agree with its use, either by Republicans or Democrats.  And especially not for something so large.

[GarMan]

I have a lot of problems with the Republicans voting no on everything in order to spite the Obama administration.  And I have a lot of problems with the fact that Democrats have been pushing their own bill and not giving any constructive leeway to the Republicans. 

Not that I'm a big fan of Republicans, what have those mean bad-mannered Republicans voted against that should have been considered? 

[Vandy Vol]

Not that I'm a big fan of Republicans, what have those mean bad-mannered Republicans voted against that should have been considered? 

They filibustered the bill that extended unemployment benefits for a month and provided highway funding to re-employ 2,000 workers.  They placed a blanket hold on several dozen administration nominees.  They blocked the Conrad-Gregg proposal.  McCain was a major supporter of cap and trade legislation until Obama proposed it; he also changed his stance on DADT.  And of course, there's the accepted treatment of shoe bomber Richard Reid under Bush in comparison to the rejected (yet identical) treatment of Omar Abdulmutallab under Obama.

This isn't to say that any and all of those situations mentioned above should not have been blocked, filibustered, or treated any differently.  Some of those are valid and some are not.  The point is that there is a definitive difference in the manner in which Republicans are choosing to treat bills and administrative actions under the Obama administration.  The frequency of filibusters (and threats to utilize filibusters) are measured by the number of times the upper chamber votes on cloture.  Last year, the first of the 111th Congress, there were a record 112 cloture votes.  In the first two months of 2010, the number exceeded 40.  Republicans have tried to filibuster more legislation in 2008 than in the entire 1950s and '60s combined.  With 10 months left to run in the 111th Congress, Republicans have turned to the filibuster or threatened its use at a pace that will more than triple the old record.

[AUTiger1]

I think they should raise our taxes, and pass the health care bill. 

I wish they would hurry up and shove this healthcare down our throats.  I love tax hikes and besides when it goes to hell in a handbasket, I can always blame it on that damn Bush and the evil conservatives. 

Once that is done we can talk about the important things like DADT, getting 40oz gourment beers, homosexual marriage and a whole host of pressing social issues that are bankrupting this country.........Oh, wait.....

[GarMan]

They filibustered the bill that extended unemployment benefits for a month and provided highway funding to re-employ 2,000 workers.  They placed a blanket hold on several dozen administration nominees.  They blocked the Conrad-Gregg proposal.  McCain was a major supporter of cap and trade legislation until Obama proposed it; he also changed his stance on DADT.  And of course, there's the accepted treatment of shoe bomber Richard Reid under Bush in comparison to the rejected (yet identical) treatment of Omar Abdulmutallab under Obama.

This isn't to say that any and all of those situations mentioned above should not have been blocked, filibustered, or treated any differently.  Some of those are valid and some are not. 

I think all of those plans, bills and ideas are complete garbage and should have been blocked.  Is there anything above that should have been given a chance to pass?

The point is that there is a definitive difference in the manner in which Republicans are choosing to treat bills and administrative actions under the Obama administration.  The frequency of filibusters (and threats to utilize filibusters) are measured by the number of times the upper chamber votes on cloture.  Last year, the first of the 111th Congress, there were a record 112 cloture votes.  In the first two months of 2010, the number exceeded 40.  Republicans have tried to filibuster more legislation in 2008 than in the entire 1950s and '60s combined.  With 10 months left to run in the 111th Congress, Republicans have turned to the filibuster or threatened its use at a pace that will more than triple the old record.

OK...  If Republicans are in the minority, how else to they stop this trash from passing?  If there's an alternative means, please share it with us. 

[GH2001]

They filibustered the bill that extended unemployment benefits for a month and provided highway funding to re-employ 2,000 workers.  They placed a blanket hold on several dozen administration nominees.  They blocked the Conrad-Gregg proposal.  McCain was a major supporter of cap and trade legislation until Obama proposed it; he also changed his stance on DADT.  And of course, there's the accepted treatment of shoe bomber Richard Reid under Bush in comparison to the rejected (yet identical) treatment of Omar Abdulmutallab under Obama.

This isn't to say that any and all of those situations mentioned above should not have been blocked, filibustered, or treated any differently.  Some of those are valid and some are not.  The point is that there is a definitive difference in the manner in which Republicans are choosing to treat bills and administrative actions under the Obama administration.  The frequency of filibusters (and threats to utilize filibusters) are measured by the number of times the upper chamber votes on cloture.  Last year, the first of the 111th Congress, there were a record 112 cloture votes.  In the first two months of 2010, the number exceeded 40.  Republicans have tried to filibuster more legislation in 2008 than in the entire 1950s and '60s combined.  With 10 months left to run in the 111th Congress, Republicans have turned to the filibuster or threatened its use at a pace that will more than triple the old record.

You make good argument here and I dont necessarily disagree with you, but please please please for the love of everything holy, dont use John McCain as an example of "our" side. He is not one of us and neither are the Bushs. They are neocons.

And on the point of Deem and Pass and Reconciliation - These are only good under certain measures. If Bush did it with questionable motives, then I criticize him. Same thing here with Obama. The difference here to me is that SO much is at stake this time. We are talking about 1 Trillion dollars. 1/5th of our GDP. That is a TON of money in our economy on the line to be playing such a risky game with. 60% of the public does not want this bill passed. ANd the forcing of it flies right in the face of what a constitutional republic (which is what we are - not a true democracy) stand for - which is "We the People". This is how dictators rule - against the WILL and WANT of the people. There is so much wrong here.

[Vandy Vol]

I think all of those plans, bills and ideas are complete garbage and should have been blocked.  Is there anything above that should have been given a chance to pass?
OK...  If Republicans are in the minority, how else to they stop this trash from passing?  If there's an alternative means, please share it with us. 

The numerous nominees that they blocked weren't economic bills that were going to drive us into destruction.  In fact, not allowing people to be appointed just for the sake of voting no probably hindered those agencies because they did not have the necessary personnel.

At any rate, it's more of the tone that they have taken with this.  Various Republican politicians have made statements about stopping the Democrats, and even Obama in particular.  Their comments imply that their consistent no votes to bills drafted by Democrats are not an attempt to save the American people from the big bad wolf.  This is only exacerbated when they make incorrect, fear mongering statements about non-existent clauses in bills (death panels, health care for illegal immigrants, etc.).  I'm not a staunch supporter of either political party, nor do I have a general hatred for all Republican politicians, nor do I think that the Democrats have done nothing wrong in this scenario

Not all Republicans do it.  Lamar Alexander and Mike Pence (amongst others) make very informative arguments.  But overall, this has turned into a childish power struggle in which most Republicans seem more interested in causing Obama to fail than actually doing something.  That's how their commentary and consistent no votes appear to me.

[Vandy Vol]

You make good argument here and I dont necessarily disagree with you, but please please please for the love of everything holy, dont use John McCain as an example of "our" side. He is not one of us and neither are the Bushs. They are neocons.

And on the point of Deem and Pass and Reconciliation - These are only good under certain measures. If Bush did it with questionable motives, then I criticize him. Same thing here with Obama. The difference here to me is that SO much is at stake this time. We are talking about 1 Trillion dollars. 1/5th of our GDP. That is a TON of money in our economy on the line to be playing such a risky game with. 60% of the public does not want this bill passed. ANd the forcing of it flies right in the face of what a constitutional republic (which is what we are - not a true democracy) stand for - which is "We the People". This is how dictators rule - against the WILL and WANT of the people. There is so much wrong here.

The latest Rasmussen Report has 54% of voters opposing the health care reform bill.  Now, that is this specific bill.  The majority of people support health care reform in general, just not this particular bill.  Some of this might be due to incorrect statements made by Republicans about the contents of the bill, but the majority of polled voters stated that the cost is what causes them to oppose it.

Of course, none of this means that I support to bill itself, and I certainly don't support the manner in which Pelosi is trying to get it passed.  And I agree with you that the Bush administration is just as blameworthy as the Obama administration for using it; I only brought up Bush because someone else mentioned that he used it.  And I also agree that this is a huge bill that shouldn't be passed via this method.  Regardless, it is my opinion that no bill, regardless of its size, should be passed in this manner.

[wreckingball]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/15/AR2010031503742_pf.html

Thanks for looking out for the rest of us.  No need to waste time with things such as voting. 

You're welcome.

[CCTAU]

The latest Rasmussen Report has 54% of voters opposing the health care reform bill. 

Oh hey. Look at that. That is about the same number of people who actually pay taxes. Do we not see this country divided into those who pay and those who do not? Estimated 46% do not pay taxes. Damn funny how that works out.

[Saniflush]

I see it divided differently.


Those who think they know what is best for me and those that are too dumb to realize how they are getting fucked by not standing on their own.

[GarMan]

The numerous nominees that they blocked weren't economic bills that were going to drive us into destruction.  In fact, not allowing people to be appointed just for the sake of voting no probably hindered those agencies because they did not have the necessary personnel.

Seriously, when you take a break from talking in 50,000 foot platitudes, maybe you can share a specific nominee that should have been given a fair opportunity.  I remember something like three nominees in a row that had newly discovered tax discrepancies in their background.  I guess those bad old Republicrats aren't playing fair. 

At any rate, it's more of the tone that they have taken with this.  Various Republican politicians have made statements about stopping the Democrats, and even Obama in particular.  Their comments imply that their consistent no votes to bills drafted by Democrats are not an attempt to save the American people from the big bad wolf.  This is only exacerbated when they make incorrect, fear mongering statements about non-existent clauses in bills (death panels, health care for illegal immigrants, etc.).  I'm not a staunch supporter of either political party, nor do I have a general hatred for all Republican politicians, nor do I think that the Democrats have done nothing wrong in this scenario

Not all Republicans do it.  Lamar Alexander and Mike Pence (amongst others) make very informative arguments.  But overall, this has turned into a childish power struggle in which most Republicans seem more interested in causing Obama to fail than actually doing something.  That's how their commentary and consistent no votes appear to me.

I understand the general perception of this, but we're still waiting for specifics.  I think the scare tactics are silly, but there are a lot of truths out there that have been wrongly classified as fear mongering. 

[Vandy Vol]

Seriously, when you take a break from talking in 50,000 foot platitudes, maybe you can share a specific nominee that should have been given a fair opportunity.  I remember something like three nominees in a row that had newly discovered tax discrepancies in their background.  I guess those bad old Republicrats aren't playing fair.

Terry Yonkers, Frank Kendall and Erin Conaton are just a few of the 70 withheld nominees who did not have any legitimate reason to be withheld.  And let's not act as if Republican nominees have never had tax issues; Paul O'Neill and Bernard Kerik should ring some bells.

[GarMan]

Terry Yonkers, Frank Kendall and Erin Conaton are just a few of the 70 withheld nominees who did not have any legitimate reason to be withheld. 

Yeah...  Pretty silly...  From what I've read though, it's politics as usual.  A Republicrat Senator from 'Bama wants two of his pet projects to be considered.  By the way, he seems to have lifted his hold on most of the nominations back in February.  Oh...  And, Demoncraps never do this...  Right...

And let's not act as if Republican nominees have never had tax issues; Paul O'Neill and Bernard Kerik should ring some bells. 

Of course...  I have no problem whatsoever calling a spade a spade, but just because one does something doesn't absolve the other of the responsibility.  If we're going to shoot, let's take the shots where they belong. 

[Vandy Vol]

Yeah...  Pretty silly...  From what I've read though, it's politics as usual.  A Republicrat Senator from 'Bama wants two of his pet projects to be considered.  By the way, he seems to have lifted his hold on most of the nominations back in February.  Oh...  And, Demoncraps never do this...  Right...

It is politics as usual; Democrats have done it as well.  I never said that they haven't.  Nonetheless, the frequency with which Republicans have done this since Obama's election and the tone they've taken in their open defiance has reeked of childish games.

Of course...  I have no problem whatsoever calling a spade a spade, but just because one does something doesn't absolve the other of the responsibility.  If we're going to shoot, let's take the shots where they belong. 

I agree.  I never attempted to absolve Democrats of any responsibility; I even pointed them out in my initial posts as being blameworthy for several things.  However, the degree to which I see Republicans doing this is slightly absurd.