Where are you now, Ms. Pelosi?

[moe09]

I thought I'd take this moment to bring up a fact that, (I don't know, maybe because I've been out of the country for 6 months), seems to have been neglected, or at least I have not seen discussed all that much.

This fact is that Ms. Nancy Pelosi and her colleagues came into their new Congressional terms talkin' it up big. Things were going to change. This was going to be the start of something new. Things were going to get done, and they were going to get done now. Instead, I have never been more disappointed in a Congress. Ms. Pelosi crapped the bed big time. Unless I'm missing something, this Congress came in with more noise than any other, and yet has been absolutely silent.

I wanted to bring this up because, either since I've been out of the country I've missed the news of all the great things that this Congress has done (which seems unlikely considering I check the news now more than ever) and I wanted a correction from one of you, or maybe all of those promises from Ms. Pelosi were a dream, or maybe this Senate hasn't done crap, like it seems to me.

[hoyatables]

I'm pretty sure that Pelosi has been absent from the Senate because she's in the House.

Zoom zoom zoom!

[Deleted]

I'm sure the reasoning is something along the lines of...

"All the blame should fall solely at the feet of the obstructionist REPUBLICAN President who, along with his remaining cronies in Congress, has blocked every noble, altruistic, groundbreaking piece of legislation we DEMOCRATS have proposed. Once this tyrant is removed from office, and the Chosen One ascends to the highest office in the land, we will forever change the way America is run and viewed across the globe."

Man, I miss The Attorney General. He would be KILLING during this election.

[Elvado]

Not to fret, Madame Nancy's grand promises will all be fulfilled after Senator "Empty suit" Obama flies in on his mystical winged unicorn of change to rescue the world from the evil of American influence.

[Boz]

I've heard that the roses our Savior urinates (excretes? ejaculates?) can fuel a car for 200 miles and cause Israeli and Arab to join hands in peace.

slog.thestranger.com/files/2008/05/obama420.jpg

Actually I think the Rolling Stone cover was even worse.

But sorry for the hijack. The Harry & Nancy Show, which was the original subject of the thread, promised the following:

* Lower gasoline prices
* An end to US military presence in Iraq
* Cleaning up the "culture of corruption"
* A new strategy to win the war on terror
* Increase minimum wage - OK, check on that one

Actually, here is a list of 100 promises of the Democratic Congress: republicanleader.house.gov/brokenpromises/index.html

Now, now, before you start...yes, I know this is a Republican Web site. You don't have to pay attention to the Republican response to these issues (entitled "Broken Promise" after each item) at all. Admittedly, it is just the Republican side of the story.

But each of the promises is well sourced, often with quotes from the Congressional leaders themselves. You can decide for yourselves whether they have kept or broken those promises.

[Bando]

Jun 18, 2008 11:08:43 GMT -5 buffalohoya said:

I'm sure the reasoning is something along the lines of...

"All the blame should fall solely at the feet of the obstructionist REPUBLICAN President who, along with his remaining cronies in Congress, has blocked every noble, altruistic, groundbreaking piece of legislation we DEMOCRATS have proposed. Once this tyrant is removed from office, and the Chosen One ascends to the highest office in the land, we will forever change the way America is run and viewed across the globe."

Man, I miss The Attorney General. He would be KILLING during this election.

You're not too far off. Republicans last year actually set a record for the number of fillibusters. That is, most of the Democrats' agenda passed the House but stalled in the Senate.

And yes, Moe, it would be less laughable if you knew which legislative body Pelosi belonged to.

[Elvado]

As for Republican filibusters, paybacks, like Pelosi (or Hillary) are a bitch.

[Deleted]

Let's give them more than a year-and-a-half to prove themselves. Dick Armey waited 12 years to write the obituary to the Contract with America:

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/27/AR2006102701482.html

Of course, that's just the Republican side of the story...

[Deleted]

Jun 18, 2008 12:27:34 GMT -5 Boz said:

slog.thestranger.com/files/2008/05/obama420.jpg

That looks more like O.J. Mayo than Jesus H. Obama.

EDIT: But the "B" beltbuckle is a NICE touch!!!

[Boz]

Jun 18, 2008 13:24:20 GMT -5 @cam said:

Let's give them more than a year-and-a-half to prove themselves. Dick Armey waited 12 years to write the obituary to the Contract with America:

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/27/AR2006102701482.html

Of course, that's just the Republican side of the story...

Dick Armey (one homophobic slur aside) is also a smart man.

Not as smart as Newt (then again, who is?), but smart nonetheless.

[EasyEd]

I don't recall any Republican filibusters. I do recall the Democrats not being able to get 60 votes on things so the threat of filibusters was there. In most cases the Democrats knew they would not get 60 votes but they went ahead with a measure anyway rather than being willing to compromise to get 50 or 75% of what they wanted rather than 100%. I recognize this required that Republicans also be willing to compromise. Both parties must learn that legislating is not cramming things down the other party's throats but negotiating with them. This has been the problem with both Republican and Democratic majorities in the Congress. And, it might be nice if that willingness to compromise started in the campaigns rather than what we are hearing on both sides. Examples: are the Republicans (McCain) willing to give in and agree that "saving Social Security" will involve raising the income level where the tax applies? Are the Democrats (Obama) willing to give in and agree that "energy independence" will involve drilling offshore and in the ANWR? These are just two examples where the candidates are drawing a line in the sand rather than being willing to rule.

[moe09]

Jun 18, 2008 13:12:09 GMT -5 Bando said:

Jun 18, 2008 11:08:43 GMT -5 buffalohoya said:

I'm sure the reasoning is something along the lines of...

"All the blame should fall solely at the feet of the obstructionist REPUBLICAN President who, along with his remaining cronies in Congress, has blocked every noble, altruistic, groundbreaking piece of legislation we DEMOCRATS have proposed. Once this tyrant is removed from office, and the Chosen One ascends to the highest office in the land, we will forever change the way America is run and viewed across the globe."

Man, I miss The Attorney General. He would be KILLING during this election.

You're not too far off. Republicans last year actually set a record for the number of fillibusters. That is, most of the Democrats' agenda passed the House but stalled in the Senate.

And yes, Moe, it would be less laughable if you knew which legislative body Pelosi belonged to.

Ouch on the laughable. So I accidentally switched the House and the Senate one time having been out of the country for half of the year. Sue me. If you pay attention to this board, Bando, you'll know that I'm a liberal just like yourself. Mainly I posted this because of my sheer disappointment, and nothing else. I only hope that it's true, with a change in office and the evil one leaving, that things will turn around.

Another reason I bring it up is simply because of all the talk Pelosi put behind it. As a Democrat, she really gave me hope that things were going to change, and they were even going to change under he who must not be named. Instead, nothing. That's what's most disappointing overall. If she hadn't made all of these grand promises, and hadn't raised my hopes to ridiculous levels, I would never have made this post, waiting for a change in the Oval Office. Instead, she did, and as a Democrat, I was extremely let down.

Did I know that these delusional conservatives would make all of these posts? Sure. (There's no doubt in my mind that this Congress is at least a million times better than a Republican Congress would be. In fact, I'm starting to wonder how sane some of these people are that continue hanging on to the Titanic). Did I post anyway because I can criticize my own party? Yes.

[hoyarooter]

Jun 18, 2008 15:24:51 GMT -5 EasyEd said:

I don't recall any Republican filibusters. I do recall the Democrats not being able to get 60 votes on things so the threat of filibusters was there. In most cases the Democrats knew they would not get 60 votes but they went ahead with a measure anyway rather than being willing to compromise to get 50 or 75% of what they wanted rather than 100%. I recognize this required that Republicans also be willing to compromise. Both parties must learn that legislating is not cramming things down the other party's throats but negotiating with them. This has been the problem with both Republican and Democratic majorities in the Congress. And, it might be nice if that willingness to compromise started in the campaigns rather than what we are hearing on both sides. Examples: are the Republicans (McCain) willing to give in and agree that "saving Social Security" will involve raising the income level where the tax applies? Are the Democrats (Obama) willing to give in and agree that "energy independence" will involve drilling offshore and in the ANWR? These are just two examples where the candidates are drawing a line in the sand rather than being willing to rule.

This is a pipedream, although one that I very much wish would come true.

Just as an aside, though, it's worth pointing out that Governor Terminator (who is still a Republican) took about three seconds to roundly reject Bush's offshore drilling suggestion yesterday.