Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Sept 30, 2010 15:10:14 GMT -5
The House of Representatives took off for home to campaign without passing a budget.
Democrat Party majority in House;
Democrat Party majority in Senate;
Democrat Party President;
No budget, but plenty of time to campaign, fundraise and vilify the opposition; and
They have the nerve to seek re-election.
Priceless.
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,540
|
Post by DanMcQ on Sept 30, 2010 16:58:51 GMT -5
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Sept 30, 2010 18:31:40 GMT -5
Really, I'm just happy to have them out of town, the lot of them.
It makes for an quicker and easier commute, ergo, I get to sleep later.
And that's really all that matters.
|
|
SirSaxa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 747
|
Post by SirSaxa on Sept 30, 2010 20:14:47 GMT -5
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,392
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Sept 30, 2010 20:33:53 GMT -5
^^^ What he said. ;D
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Oct 1, 2010 10:12:00 GMT -5
The House of Representatives took off for home to campaign without passing a budget. Democrat Party majority in House; Democrat Party majority in Senate; Democrat Party President; No budget, but plenty of time to campaign, fundraise and vilify the opposition; and They have the nerve to seek re-election. Priceless. Could be worse. Could be bringing up slavery in every speech like Obama. Maybe Albert Haynesworth is his new speechwriter?
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Oct 1, 2010 10:50:47 GMT -5
Well played, Dan. I will not miss Rahm Emanuel. There is no better symbol in this WH of the epic failure of a strategy to reach out to the Republic Party. He was the voice of the DLC/Lieberman kind of moderation that was never going to attract votes from the other side anyway. He is responsible for cooking the public option (long after the Republicans left the table), among other things, which makes it all the more telling that he is almost universally hated on the right.
They need to find a hard-nosed, unapologetic liberal to replace him.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Oct 1, 2010 11:10:16 GMT -5
Just my opinion, but I don't think "hard-nosed unapologetic liberal" is going to go over too well after November.
The Clinton model is more advisable, IMO. It also has the precedent of being pretty successful.
But you have your opinion and that's cool. You're certainly not alone. Every time I tune into MSNBC (which is "invaluable," unlike that "destructive" Fox ;D ), they blame the administration's problems on not being liberal enough. I think that's way out of touch, but I'm just me.
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on Oct 1, 2010 11:21:57 GMT -5
They need to find a hard-nosed, unapologetic liberal to replace him. It's a pity Lenin's dead.
|
|
The Stig
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,844
|
Post by The Stig on Oct 1, 2010 11:25:30 GMT -5
Just my opinion, but I don't think "hard-nosed unapologetic liberal" is going to go over too well after November. The Clinton model is more advisable, IMO. It also has the precedent of being pretty successful. The Clinton-era Republicans were a different breed than the current GOP. The GOP that Clinton dealt with had a vision that wasn't completely incompatible with Clinton's own. When they agreed, they were more than happy to work together. On certain issues they clashed, but the 1990s GOP certainly wasn't the Party of No. For the current GOP leaders, working with Obama is tantamount to treason. There are a few more reasonable types that will work with the administration when they have shared interests (Olympia Snowe, Dick Lugar, a few others), but the leadership sees obstruction as their #1 goal, at least until the new Congress comes along.
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on Oct 1, 2010 11:29:18 GMT -5
Just my opinion, but I don't think "hard-nosed unapologetic liberal" is going to go over too well after November. The Clinton model is more advisable, IMO. It also has the precedent of being pretty successful. The Clinton-era Republicans were a different breed than the current GOP. The GOP that Clinton dealt with had a vision that wasn't completely incompatible with Clinton's own. When they agreed, they were more than happy to work together. On certain issues they clashed, but the 1990s GOP certainly wasn't the Party of No. For the current GOP leaders, working with Obama is tantamount to treason. There are a few more reasonable types that will work with the administration when they have shared interests (Olympia Snowe, Dick Lugar, a few others), but the leadership sees obstruction as their #1 goal, at least until the new Congress comes along. Working with Obama is tantamount to treason because lots of Obama's ideas are to the comfortable left of the mainstream - his notable health care overhaul, his signature accomplishment, isn't being mentioned by almost any candidates because it's remarkably unpopular. The Democrats can't continue to stereotype the Republicans as the "party of no" when their proposals are unpopular and bad for all concerned.
|
|
The Stig
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,844
|
Post by The Stig on Oct 1, 2010 11:33:39 GMT -5
I've got no problem with the GOP opposing the health care bill. What I've got a problem with is the extreme tactics they used to do so, capped off by filibustering a defense appropriations bill during wartime. Parties have blocked legislation before and that's all well and good, but the GOP took obstruction to a new level in the past 2 years.
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Oct 1, 2010 11:34:31 GMT -5
The Clinton move was also a recognition that his coalition of voters was fairly centrist, notwithstanding the shrill tone of the politics at the time suggesting he was Lenin, a murderer, socialist, etc.. He, like Rahm, was a DLC-type Democrat, so it only makes sense that he would move toward the center in a Chief of Staff pick.
Obama's coalition is tougher to get a read on. He attracted Republicans who probably remain Republicans today but voted for him out of recognition of the failures of the Bush administration. His supporters even in the primaries tended to be independent Democrats and liberals but nothing in between - Hillary's constituency.
The problem with the political center right now is you simply can't count on it. Obama cannot count on Olympia Snowe, even to negotiate after HCR. He can at least count on Lugar to be reasonable, but he can't count on his vote. * * * HCR is unpopular because it does not go far enough. See recent polling on that. What made it unpopular is the dropping of the public option at requests of the political center and Republicans, and Obama, unfortunately, took the bait.
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on Oct 1, 2010 11:38:39 GMT -5
I've got no problem with the GOP opposing the health care bill. What I've got a problem with is the extreme tactics they used to do so, capped off by filibustering a defense appropriations bill during wartime. Parties have blocked legislation before and that's all well and good, but the GOP took obstruction to a new level in the past 2 years. Do you mean the defense appropriations bill that included the illegal immigration OK and that OK'd gays in the military, both shoved in as a last-minute sop to key Democratic constiutencies? THAT threatened filibuster? Who's really playing politics?
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Oct 1, 2010 12:07:19 GMT -5
I've got no problem with the GOP opposing the health care bill. What I've got a problem with is the extreme tactics they used to do so, capped off by filibustering a defense appropriations bill during wartime. Parties have blocked legislation before and that's all well and good, but the GOP took obstruction to a new level in the past 2 years. Yeah, look how our military has suffered because of that specific maneuver.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,450
|
Post by TC on Oct 1, 2010 12:09:26 GMT -5
Do you mean the defense appropriations bill that included the illegal immigration OK and that OK'd gays in the military, both shoved in as a last-minute sop to key Democratic constiutencies? THAT threatened filibuster? Who's really playing politics? No, he's referring to the one back in December 2009 that got filibustered in order so that the HCR Senate vote would take place late at night so that Republicans could complain it happened under the cloak of darkness.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Oct 1, 2010 12:57:54 GMT -5
Having started this thread in a somewhat tongue-in-cheek manner, I'd like to ask a serious question of my friends (presumptuous I know) on the left. Is it at all possible that no budget was passed because the Democrat majorities can not tell the electorate what they actually intend to do and still retain hope of victory?
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,450
|
Post by TC on Oct 1, 2010 13:18:10 GMT -5
I laughed at the serious question part.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Oct 1, 2010 13:27:49 GMT -5
I laughed at the serious question part. So I'll take that as yes. If Democrats in this country were proud of their record and accomplishments, they'd be running on them. If they believed that their plans for next year's budget were in any way aligned with the wishes of the American electorate, they'd express them. P.S. Nice to see Barry O out there playing the slavery card at his rallies. Is nothing beneath him?
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Oct 1, 2010 13:37:48 GMT -5
Elvado - what line in the stump speech are you referring to? The line about "we shall overcome" has been in there since the early stages of the 2008 primaries, so it should not be surprising. To my knowledge, it has always been placed in the middle of other challenges that this country has confronted.
Perhaps it is presumptuous to think that we have really overcome, and I think that is a fair point.
|
|