E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSDemocratic congressional candidate Ron Barber, former aid to Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, is running to fill her seat. He joins The Daily Rundown to explain why he should win the race.
According to conventional wisdom, the lack of bipartisanship in Congress and the unwillingness of Democrats and Republicans to compromise is what’s preventing legislation from getting passed. Up to a point, that’s true.
But, despite the standoff on tax legislation and changes in entitlement programs, bipartisan legislation has moved ahead in Congress in recent weeks.
Consider, for example, the farm bill the Senate is debating this week, the product of a partnership between Agriculture Committee chairwoman Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., and ranking member Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kansas.
“The Agriculture Committee historically has been the least partisan committee in the Congress,” Roberts told C-SPAN on Sunday. He lavished praise on Stabenow, saying, “What’s the number one thing you hear back home: ‘Why can’t you all back there (in Washington) work together?’ Why can’t we get along and actually produce something – and we have.”
Consider also the FDA/drug shortage bill that Senate Health, Education and Labor Committee chairman Sen. Tom Harkin, D- Iowa, Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., shepherded to passage done a few weeks ago.
Although such smaller-scale bipartisanship might not impress people looking for the alluring “grand bargain” on taxes and spending, it’s important to those directly affected by it: in the case of the farm bill, not only farmers, but food processors, farm equipment manufacturers, the people who run food banks, etc.
But bipartisan compromise isn’t the only way to accomplish things.
There’s an entirely different model for passing big legislation, one which worked for Democrats on both the 2009 stimulus and the Affordable Care Act, two of President Barack Obama’s signature accomplishments. The formula: Win a really big majority in an election and then pass significant bills with the votes of just the members of your party – even if you run the risk that voters might boot out members of the majority at the next election.
The Supreme Court will soon hand down its decision on the landmark 2010 health care legislation. Steven Engel, a former clerk to Justice Anthony Kennedy, discusses the case.
Of the Democratic House members who voted for the Affordable Care Act in 2009, and who represented Republican-leaning districts, 14 were defeated in the 2010 elections – although another 14 voted “no” and that still didn’t save them from defeat. Nine who voted “no” survived, but only two who voted for the ACA won re-election in 2010.
In contrast, take the 1994 crime bill.
The House – in a bipartisan way – handed President Bill Clinton a stunning rejection of a first version of the bill on Aug. 11, 1994.
The opposition was a coalition of 58 Democrats and 167 Republicans: African-American Democrats who argued against the bill’s death penalty provisions, white Southern and rural Democrats from conservative districts who opposed the bill’s gun restrictions, and Republicans from all parts of the country.
Senate Republican Leader Bob Dole of Kansas derided the bill as “bloated” and “soft on crime.” And when Democrats argued that Republicans spitefully just wanted to deny Clinton a major victory, Rep. Dick Armey, R-Texas, said, “Your president is just not that important to us … .”
But bipartisanship prevailed again ten days later. After the bill’s first defeat and his angry initial reaction, Clinton worked to woo House members to back the legislation.
“With his presidency on the line, President Clinton spent the day on the line, pressing Democrats and Republicans by telephone to support his crime bill,” The Associated Press reported on the day the House voted to approve the legislation. "This is the way Washington ought to work and I hope it will work this way in the future," Clinton said after the vote in which 46 House Republicans joined 188 Democrats to pass the bill.
The Republicans who switched from “no” to yes” said they had persuaded Clinton to strengthen the measure.
“It was a tremendous compromise, and I think what we gave the American people last night is a crime bill that has a lot less spending – over $3 billion, mostly removed from social programs, a lot more money put into building prisons,” Rep. Susan Molinari, R-N.Y., told CNN on the day the House OK’d the bill. “We came up with a series of very tough legislative initiatives, such as the community notification of sexual predators, prior rules of evidence in rape and child molestation cases being admissible in courtroom trials … a whole series of initiatives … that make this bill an awful lot tougher for the American people.”
Another Republican who switched from ‘no’ to ‘yes’, Rep. Steve Horn of California said, "I am delighted to say that this is the first major bipartisan effort I have seen since NAFTA. I think it bodes well for the country … (Clinton) is at a crossroads in his presidency. We want him to be a successful president."
There are some lessons here:
- First, despite Armey’s taunt (“Your president is just not that important to us”), there were at least a few Republicans 18 years ago who were willing to say that they wanted Clinton to be a successful president. Quite rare to hear any Republicans saying that today about Obama.
- Second, districts and political alignments have changed: many of the centrist Republicans in Democratic-leaning districts who ended up voting for the crime bill in 1994 have been replaced by Democrats – for example the two Republican House members from Massachusetts, as well as Rep. Jim Kolbe of Arizona, Rep. Jim Leach of Iowa, and Rep. Mike Castle of Delaware.
- And, third, the Southern and rural Democrats who voted against the first version of the crime bill – such as Rep. Ike Skelton of Missouri – have since been ousted by Republicans.
The biggest change since 1994 is that conservative-leaning districts tend to be represented by Republicans and liberal-leaning districts tend to be represented by Democrats – which wasn’t always true in 1994.
Like the Affordable Care Act, the 1994 crime bill was challenged in the Supreme Court and part of it was struck down by the high court in 2000: the provision in the law that gave victims of gender-motivated violence a right to sue their attackers in federal court. The court ruled that the Commerce Clause – the same part of the Constitution at issue in the ACA litigation –does not give Congress to power to create such a right.
And as with ACA and the 2010 election, many of the Democrats who voted for the crime bill were swept out in the wave election of 1994.
“It probably helped to cause my defeat,” recalls Dan Glickman, who represented a Wichita, Kansas district from 1977 until he was beaten in the 1994 GOP wave.
“I lost my election probably for a myriad for reasons but one of them was clearly my vote on the crime bill because it irritated part of my historic base which was blue-collar working people,” he said.
“I remembered at the time some of the conservative Democrats wondered if this could become a problem,” but Clinton and party leaders such as then-Sen. Joe Biden, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, wanted the bill “and it probably cost us the majority or at least was one of the big factors.”
Glickman, who is now vice president at the Aspen Institute in Washington, recalls that he thought going into the 1994 election that his work in passing a bill to protect aircraft manufacturers from frivolous litigation – vitally important to Cessna and other firms in Wichita – would “insulate me” against damage on the crime bill.
But he saw something was afoot when he went door to door before the election and a union worker told him, “Great job on the airplane bill, Glickman, thanks so much, it helps our jobs – but I can’t vote for you.” His reason: the crime bill – especially its gun provisions. “The intensity of feeling on the gun bill trumped anything I did on the jobs side,” Glickman said.
But at least Glickman and his colleagues did get major legislation passed.
Regardless of who the winners are on Nov. 6, it appears unlikely either party will enjoy the super-majorities needed to get something done on their own; that means that any far-reaching bills will have to be the product of the same type of across-the-aisle cooperation that produced the ’94 crime bill and other pieces of lasting legislation.
Leave a Comment:
Highly thoughtful discussion, yet made at a time when in present terms the parties are at greater odds than ever before.
ONE BIG DIFFERENCE between Obama and Clinton; the economies of the time.
Clinton was president while America was at its peak, it is much easier to compromise when everyone is doing well.
Obama is president of a country in a decline, with corrupt masters, eager to keep the game going and the fate of the world declining.
There has consistently been too much subsidies in the farm bills in recent memory, which costs too much tax dollars, contributing to worsening federal deficits.
In the last few years, farming is one of rare bright spots in the economy, but members of congress from both parties are too scared to cut subsidies. Such bipartisanship hurts the country.
Someone has to study to figure out what subsidies are absolutely necessary, and cut subsidies that are unnecessary.
Rural America, which is large, clings to their Bibles and guns. This was seen in Wisconsin in which the NRA ran negative and false ads against Barrett claiming he was against guns -- When in reality Scott Walker had far worse a record on guns. No doubt this was a big reason Barrett lost rural votes.
But for this crap (guns or abortion, etc.) to be more important than restoring the American Dream for the middle class and working poor is the really sad commentary. Rural folks tend to be less educated or able to follow politics, and are easily persuaded with emotional lies. It will be even more difficult to overcome this post Citizen's United.
The rightwing have been brainwashed to believe that compromise means not having principles. To be a one-issue voter with this mentality is really a crock. You can give a little or get nothing at all. Cooperation = prosperity.
We don't need "Bi-Partisanship" in DC, we need "Non-Partisanship"...we need elected representatives who will go to Washington to advocate for their voters, not politicians who go to Washington to push their "Party" agenda...
and it wouldn't hurt if a few percent of them, had the intelligence to understand the consequences of the action...If they would do right for the Nation, re-election would take care of itself
The bottom line is that elected representatives of this country forget who they are representing. We should start by voting every member of Congress out to the unemployment line. They failed miserably in times when they needed to get it done............
Pigotry (rather appropriate) you just like so many cite the symptoms of the problem. To clarify things the actual problem is simply the lack of federal revenue. Republicans cite about all of these symptoms (social programs, i.e. government spending) more than anyone else which is nothing new. Republicans cited all of these things when Clinton was in office. Republicans tried to pass legislation during Clinton's administration to cut all of the "Social Programs" but failed because the federal budget was balanced (the government was paying it's bills) and there was additional revenue that was paying down the deficit. Clinton didn't do it alone though, Reagan actually started getting things on track after he realized that his initial tax cuts (for the wealthy) was hurting the economy and the people. Reagan actually raised taxes (after initially cutting taxes for the wealthy) more than any other president in history however he didn't finish the job and certainly isn't recognized by the Republican Party for his (tax increases) accomplishments. Then Clinton got elected and finished the job balancing the budget and was getting the deficit paid down. So when you think about it the Bush tax cuts was a crucial part to line things up for Republicans to take control and get legislation passed that they couldn't get passed before. Republicans have been very effective in passing blame and diverting responsibility to someone else (Democrats) for the economic downfall. Even as Republicans are primarily responsible Republicans are not solely to blame. That's because corruption resides on both sides of the isle. Democrats had a hand in the economic collapse too which just goes to show anyone who is actually paying attention that greed has no bounds and is not just a Republican trait. To the same token there are no previsions or safe guards in place to prevent politicians from passing legislation that results in economic disaster, financial system crash or legislation that promotes economic growth. To the same token there are no consequences for partisan politics which results in no action or counter productive action. Now politicians are clearly above the law, they cannot be prosecuted, jailed or imprisoned unless they commit an illegal act and even that don't mean that they will suffer any real consequences. I do on the other hand have a couple of ideas (that will never see legislation) that would prompt politicians to actually working toward positive economic growth and passing responsible legislation. If politicians salaries were directly related to a couple of the primary economic symptoms politicians may just find it within themselves to create and pass responsible legislation. Elected officials salaries would be based on unemployment and percentage of population income below the poverty level. First salary increases would have to be approved through a vote (70%) by the people on a ballot during elections every two years. Say if unemployment is less than 3% then elected officials may be eligible for a 3 to 5 percent salary increase if 30% or less of the population is below the poverty level. If unemployment is between 3% and 5% elected officials may be eligible for a 3 to 5 percent salary increase if 20% or less of the population are below the poverty level. If both conditions are not met then elected officials are not considered (no ballot and no vote) for a salary increase. If unemployment is above 5% at the end of the Fiscal Year (September 30th) then elected officials salaries are automatically cut by twice the unemployment rate. i.e. if unemployment is 6% then salaries are cut 12%. If unemployment is 7% then elected officials salaries are cut 14%. Like I said, I don't expect this to ever see the light of day much less proposed by any politician. However the most anyone can possibly hope for is to do away with the Bush tax breaks and that the wealthy and corporations pay their fair share.
The remaining Democrats will no longer have a master to kneel cowardly before after November 2012... and being Democrats their interest in maintaining their own personal power will cause them to start working with Republicans to undo the damage the last 4 years have wrought. If they don't they know they will be on the street in 2014, but then again since they are Democrats they probably will be anyway.
Brett, America was not at its peak when Clinton took office. We were mired in a recession that Bush, Sr. had heralded in. America reached its peak after Clinton took office. He settled bickering between the parties and got this country operating in a profitable way.
Do not discount what Clinton accomplished to make Obama look better. Clinton was a great President. Obama is a failure, one I rank just a little better than Jimmy Carter and GW Bush.
PJAM
You are a moron. Please keep up the entertainment.
Bipartisan ? I doubt it, the Right Wing Wacko's can't even spell it.
Look at their comments and the message from them . Their Doctrine shows us they are under educated, unable to form rationale thought, unable to form untethered individuality. These are people who will vote for havoc over common sense just because of belief with out evidence
Karl Rove for instance was one of the Architects of the Bush Cheney dynasty where we nearly lost everything we stand for and now they want to return to the economic free for all more wars, more division of the populace, a forced church state, less civil rights, class warfare, and the list goes on. At the rate the Republicans are going we will be a third world country in 10 years.
It is essential that every eligible voter possible go out and Vote for a Liberal Congress and Senate. This is where we can matter the most, this is where we can control our destiny. Romney is a moron looking for fame we can control him we only have to make him think he's great .
Put up the signs get out the vote we need the House and Senate to keep this country free and for the people.
Given the choice between Obama and Romney there is no choice. The JOBS programs Obama tried to create have not happened thanks to the Republicans blocking his every effort.. Can't find a job? Thank the Republicans. They have done their best to destroy this economy over the last four years. "I hope he fails" has been the Republican motto no matter which average American gets hurt. Raise taxes on the very rich: "Never". Cut services not just for the poor but for the middle class as well: "Of course".
LMAO...isnt uaw cute! Such a great american the great he/she it is. Wisconsin has them worried, even the big union get out the vote didnt work. In fact I believe many union members voted for the right and no longer belong to the union. Your all going to have to hope every inner city urban person votes 3 times. I personally observed 3 buses leaving michigan headed for Wisconsin last week so they obviously have a plan. Maybe its to use the 17,000 registered Detroit voters that no longer live in Detroit to vote in their new suburban homes and then catch a free ride to their old polling station to vote again. Gosh..... How smart does one need to be to figure out the liberals point of attack.
I think it exposes a lot when you see a story from MSNBC indicating the need for bipartisanship. Even it knows that the Republicans will claim the Presidency, the House , and the Senate.
Like I've said in other posts, if we had a Clinton or Reagan as president, we'd be in much better shape economically. Clinton and Reagan succeeded because they both knew how to work with people from "the other side" and reach compromises for the good of the country.
Obama does not seem to have this ability. You can argue that it's the Republicans fault, but Obama even had a hard time getting the health care bill passed when his party had the House and Senate. Obama is a great campaigner and possibly the best speech giver I've seen in my lifetime - but he's not a leader.
Partisanship? To a large degree the fault of the mainstream media which can no longer simply report the facts, political ideology determines the angle of the article. Or political ideology determines what gets reported and what doesn't. Obama supporters espouse that Democrats equal good and Republicans equal bad. Takes a pretty narrow mind to believe politics can fit neatly in that sort of box.
The simple truth is the voters are too blame. Voters keep sending the same people to Washington but expecting different results. How idiotic. Party line voters are just as idiotic. Start kicking incumbents out of office routinely and watch how fast Washington changes. Right now they know if they can get elected once, they are set for life. So they turn to pocketing IOU's and political favors since elections are now a foregone conclusion.
Washington is a cesspool of corruption. Political pandering, endless favors, handouts, giveaways, and career building with taxpayer funding. Really, why would people raise millions of dollars, have their life scrutinized in the media, and all for 174,000.00. They wouldn't put themselves through that process if the perks and the benefits of serving were not worth a whole lot more.
Representative Chellie Pingree from Maine is married to a billionaire hedge fund manager, who really believes she is there serving in the best interest of the people from her state when she flies her husbands private jet between Washington, the Virgin Islands, and occasionally to Maine. Pingree's husband owns all the major newspapers in Maine, see any conflicts of interest in that formula?
The former Senator from Maine George Mitchell took roughly six months to become a multimillionaire after he left office. Appointed to cushy board of directors positions, huge stock options, and all for what, serving in the best interest of the people or corporations? Minor examples of a major issue, electing people for the right reason, but having them serve for the wrong one. Voters are too blame.
True Patriot, what conservatives have come to understand, is that what dem leftys mean when they say compromise is , "be quiet and hold still, while we feed on you"
We saw it all, when Obama had an absolute majority, we have come to understand that keeping the inept liar in the white house from spending money is as good as it gets.
JOLLY OLD SOUL may not be so jolly after Nov.
Your just another talking head it has nothing to do with unions ,I could care less if they did away with them all, it has no bearing on me.
what i do care about is your party's destruction of the American middle class and their intent on destroying anyone or thing that doesn't think like they do .
It didn't work with Bush and it wont work with Romney if the Democrats take the house Romney will be a Republicrat.
Unions, thats all you idiots cry about and you don't even know why, who the hell cares. I live in the north east we dont live in poverty
Colorado-Man,
Obviously, it could not possibly be because bipartisanship is exactly what the country needs right now, it has to be a power play /S
The only help we can get now has to be through congress and that would have to be bipartisan. This country needs to have a jobs bill and needs to rehire public employees. All of the Republican administration recessions since Ronald Regan (who had a very bad recession himself.) public sector hiring went up. This can be fact checked; I don't do that kind of stuff so you will have to Google it yourselves but it is the truth.
Public Sector has loss close to 700,000 jobs, good paying jobs with benefits. The type of jobs we would want our children to be able to get when they graduate a trade school or college. This coountry is still hiriing trained workers and unless we are facing the end of the world here and I do not believe we are, I absolutely think things will turn around if we give the economy a little boost. If you added a infrastructure bill, that would create even more jobs.
Get enough people working and my gosh raise everyones taxes if we have too; to get that debt reduced. More revenue is the only solution to the debt problem without hurting seniors, children, and, the working poor. All of this seems so simple and if one of you nuts calls me a communist, I am going to puke.
To do any of my little wish list of course would take a little less hate and a little more compromise, but, when you have an unelected leader like a Gover Norquist who has all this power over the base it is incredible. Told us he just needs a President that would sign the bills I guess he would put forward and if you don't do what he says he will somehow have the power to remove you from office?
With the tea party ... I want services but don't want to pay for them ... I want my medicare but I don't want to pay for it ... I want my social security but don't want to pay for it ... I want a strong constitution but leave out "separation of church and state' ..................
What in the hell are you going to do!
Why in the world would they NOT want the President to be successful, regardless of what political party he's in? If he fails, our COUNTRY fails. Such short term thinking is pure stupidity.
Alex Le, you underestimate the abject hatred some people have for the idea of someone not like them being successful.
I mean, the GOP flat-out admitted that their only priority was to make Obama a one-term President, and that motive has been transparent in everything they have done. And yet, they somehow still convince people to support them.
If it is all the Republicans fault, why was Clinton able to get things done ? Obama couldn't get it done when He had a super majority, couldn't even get a vote on His budget. How long before You admit the Guy is a complete failure as President. He has divided this country as never before. Clinton was smart enough to move to the middle when He lost His majority, Obama just can't figure this whole thing out. Anyhow, the Dems. will be out of office for another 8 years just like every time except the Clinton years. Look back, they never get reelected!
I'm glad that Jeb Bush has taken aim at his Fellow Republicans, such as the radical right, and their failure of bipartisan support to get things done.
I agree but am not going to bet on it. Republicans have brought american politics to a highest degree of dishonor and dysfuction. See nothing on the horizon showing they want to regain honor. They all (congress) will bring us all down one way or the other. Our good ol days are over, theirs will simply continue (and they wont have to work at it as hard).
Although I am wholeheartedly on the side of the Dems on the tax break issue (since I see it as THE compromise for Bush era Tax cuts that sent jobs overseas ....so don't feed me that job creation BS) - I think the radical left has done their fair share of withholding compromise too. The "turn a blind eye" approach to illegal immigration, and mandated purchase of health insurance are good examples of this. There has to be a better solution than either of those!!!
Lolly? The mandated health insurance requirement was a "Republican" idea. The Democrats wanted a Public Option....The Heritage Foundation is VERY right wing, and it was originally proposed by them.
Lolly1192 -- No, that's false equivalency. Data shows the rightwing has lurched to the far-Right by as much as 20 points on certain issues. The Left, if anything has had to move to the center (per the plotting and planning of rightwingers moving the goal posts).
Dubya and Republican administrations "turned a blind eye" to illegals just as much if not more, because the pro-Business stance of the rightwing favors cheap labor (and also Dubya won with the Hispanic vote due to social conservative positions that appeal to Catholics). In reality, President Obama has done a much better job of enforcing the law.
In regard to ACA, once again, the Dems went with the mandate for health care because the mandate was a Republican idea -- So the Dems thought they would get Republican support for it. It's amazing how much the GOP/TP get away with "repeal and replace" BS. They never propose a "replace" solution, and rightwing supporters never ask. They don't think past their hate.
Jeb Bush . Really ....Really. Wow this country is amazing. Its called working to make your side look better to grab at power. Jeb bush? Really.LMAO
I think both parties are being obstructionist right now, and I think this is a result of Obama's leadership style. Clinton and Reagan were able to govern effectively when the other party had control of congress because they respected the opinions of others and were able to find common ground. Obama does not appear to have these qualities. It's very disappointing for me since the main reason I voted for him in 2008 was because I thought he would be a consensus builder.
Jeb Bush won't run because he is a true conservative not a wanna be hack from the party of of no and he is embarrassed by them.
uaw,
What's your definition of a true conservative?
I'm from FL, and I don't think he did a particularly good job when he was governor. He wasn't horrible, but he wasn't anything special either.
you don't feel he's better than his brother or Romney>
Actually the Republican Party is so bad right now i can't figure out how any of them get elected
Ron, the huge mistake Obama made as a candidate was giving Republicans in Congress too much credit for actually having the best interests of the country in mind. He didn't realize they'd be so petty as to make their ONLY priority getting him out of office. But, if their gambit fails and he wins re-election anyway, maybe then they'll realize they have nothing left to lose by actually letting the country improve.
Ash it's not going improve with Obama ! He had a super majority when He got in office, for 2 years. You remember the trillion dollar stimulus that was going to save us ? It was to keep unemployment below 8 percent, shovel ready jobs etc... The money was wasted, sent to his union buddys, Solondra, and God knows where else. It's time to try someone new, anything, anybody! Surely anyone can do a better job at reuniting this country, never have I seen it so divided in My life. The president has to take some responsibility for that.
If bipartisanship is our only hope, then we are doomed. But I think this country is doomed anyway now that it has morphed into a feudal society where we, the middle class, are nothing but serfs for the big corporations and cannon fodder for the military industrial complex.
In the new feudalism I'm trying to decide if I'm going to be a serf or a vassal.
I wish to be a Bannister
I sincerely hope that, for the good of our nation and our children, our elected officials in Washington again start working together as they have in the past.
It's terrible that pride and spite seem to be the prevailing emotions of Congressman -- a desire to simply deny any bill or suggestion put forth by the opposition regardless of its validity or necessity.
Please, some show care for the people that put you in your respective positions -- not just a wish to belittle your opponent.
Agreed, but you could probably lay an egg quicker.
This is not 1994 and a fight between political parties and politicians. This is a fight being funded by corporate money and businesses. The GOP are their pawns. Pawns can only move in one direction.
Apparently you missed the kickbacks to big Pharma in Obamacare, the bailout and tax gifts to GM, the billions thrown at any dysfunction company calling itself "solar" or "green", the government position of "jobs czar" handed to the CEO of GE, etc.... and that's not even including the ownership of Obama by Wall Street and bankers.
WM
Well said. This is the great depression all over again. Corporate America try to run anything that does not feed the greed. Like Dupont and the coup they tried to commit. Now you are thinking .
* Irenee Du Pont - Right-wing chemical industrialist and founder of the American Liberty League, the organization assigned to execute the plot.
* Grayson Murphy - Director of Goodyear, Bethlehem Steel and a group of J.P. Morgan banks.
* William Doyle - Former state commander of the American Legion and a central plotter of the coup.
* John Davis - Former Democratic presidential candidate and a senior attorney for J.P. Morgan.
* Al Smith - Roosevelt's bitter political foe from New York. Smith was a former governor of New York and a codirector of the American Liberty League.
* John J. Raskob - A high-ranking Du Pont officer and a former chairman of the Democratic Party. In later decades, Raskob would become a "Knight of Malta," a Roman Catholic Religious Order with a high percentage of CIA spies, including CIA Directors William Casey, William Colby and John McCone.
* Robert Clark - One of Wall Street's richest bankers and stockbrokers.
* Gerald MacGuire - Bond salesman for Clark, and a former commander of the Connecticut American Legion. MacGuire was the key recruiter to General Butler.
The plotters attempted to recruit General Smedley Butler to lead the coup. They selected him because he was a war hero who was popular with the troops. The plotters felt his good reputation was important to make the troops feel confident that they were doing the right thing by overthrowing a democratically elected president. However, this was a mistake: Butler was popular with the troops because he identified with them. That is, he was a man of the people, not the elite. When the plotters approached General Butler with their proposal to lead the coup, he pretended to go along with the plan at first, secretly deciding to betray it to Congress at the right moment.
What the businessmen proposed was dramatic: they wanted General Butler to deliver an ultimatum to Roosevelt. Roosevelt would pretend to become sick and incapacitated from his polio, and allow a newly created cabinet officer, a "Secretary of General Affairs," to run things in his stead. The secretary, of course, would be carrying out the orders of Wall Street. If Roosevelt refused, then General Butler would force him out with an army of 500,000 war veterans from the American Legion. But MacGuire assured Butler the cover story would work:
"You know the American people will swallow that. We have got the newspapers. We will start a campaign that the President's health is failing. Everyone can tell that by looking at him, and the dumb American people will fall for it in a second…"
The businessmen also promised that money was no object: Clark told Butler that he would spend half his $60 million fortune to save the other half...
Mine - I am very familiar with the facts of the coup attempt and still to this day I have wondered why those involved were never tried for treason.
My opinion at the very least all involved should have been stripped of their wealth and given to the most poor members of society they despised so much.
Couldn't agree more!
And we can thank Saint Ronald Reagan and the Supreme Court for what this country has become: The Corporate States of America, of the wealthy, by the wealthy, and FOR the wealthy!
When it comes to "far-reaching" bills, maybe it's time to take a break and an impasse is not the worst thing that could happen. After all the legislative "triumphs" of 2008-2010, a playing field that doesn't change every 2 to 4 years and create entirely new winners and losers certainly seems attractive.
Start with the American Jobs Bill. Nothing far-reaching, it contains proposals that Republicans used to support. Since the President proposed it, however, they refuse to debate it or bring it up for a vote. And we the American people suffer.
Calling dog meat "steak" does not make it so, nor does calling stimulus "jobs bills" make them any less wasteful.
Wm.-375815
I got news, BOTH parties are now pawns to the big corporations. To wit: During the 2008 election, Obama was the number one recipient of money from the health professional industry and, during the same election, he was the second highest recipient of money from the insurance industry. Is it any wonder he took the "Public Option" off the table before debate on the Affordable Care Act even started? He knows who his masters are!
There simply is not a viable party in this country that represents the middle class and the working poor. Period. And, as the gap bewtween rich and poor continues to grow (and it will), this 200+ year old Republic will fall. Not a prediction I like making but it is what I believe.
The goal is not to get things done but to blame your opponent for his failure to compromise.
I thought it was to blame your predecessor (It's Bush's fault).
Or when you do something unconstitutional you can also blame your opponent (Romney actually created Obamacare for me)
It used to be that the GOP was for good government and the Dems were for progressive policies that counter balanced the power of private business and created more access to the political process.
But once again, mr grover, the gop, & the rushbo show that they can get elected but cannot govern. The number of bills passed was 50 in two years. The lowest ever in over 50 years. And why. Because they will tell you that they do not need govt telling mr grover, the gop, & the rushbo what to do. That govt is baaad.
I tell you mr grover, the gop, & the rushbo will do away with our form of govt soon. Just like the bushman nearly did after he crashed the passenger jets into the wtc & pentagon on 911. The wealthy upper 1% do not need the govt taking their money & giving to the poor & needy or telling them what they can & cannot do. No. No.
But pray for those who suport those in the upper 1% who sponsor mr grover, the gop, the rushbo, & romney. Scripture says that for the wealthy like billionaire romney & the wealthy upper 1% to go to heaven, will be more difficult than for a camel to pass thru the eye of a needle. And i have seen soooo many pictures of the places they call heaven & not in heaven. Not in heaven doesn't look like fun. Nobody's ever smiling when in such a place. Instead, people there have a look of horror on their faces.
And it's because corporations are people too. Most would laugh but romney himself insisted upon it. But i tell you this is a very, very serious matter. There isn't a corporation today that you know about that isn't international. You need to make up your own mind by reading the book 'Corporations Are Not People: Why They Have More Rights Than You Do and What You Can Do About It' [Paperback]by Jeffrey D. Clements. He says that mr grover, the gop,& the rushbo answer to real people & international corporations, but not in that order.
Reid will not even entertain bringing the House bills for discussion and up or down votes. Guess you think that is leadership and governing.
Do you do nothing but hop into threads and post blatant lies, most of which are Republican talking points?
If you were being intellectually honest, you'd have done some basic research and seen what legislation has been brought to the Senate floor. I can't post a link since MSNBC won't allow me too, but if I could it'd be a lmgtfy one.
How has the Senate Minority Republican Party set a record for uses of the Filibuster if there's no votes being brought to the floor of the Senate? Did you not read the article you commented in about Bills that are being passed?
Since I am an independent, you can get off the Republican label. Reid ignores the House bills. Prove otherwise. As to Obama's jobs bill....spend more money for government employees, state, federal or local to boost the jobs numbers. Where is the money coming from to pay their salaries and obscene benefits? Local governments are waking up to the fact that services are being cut because the money had to go to employee benefits.
Yes, an "Independent", I'm sure.
You must be a very misinformed one.
HR 2072 Passed 15/May (6 Separate Votes)
Want me to list more? I don't think so, I don't need to do your research for you. Maybe you could, you know, go to the US Senate Site yourself and do some research before you post your "facts".
President Obama has overseen a very low increase in the size of Gov't. Go look at the MarketWatch study.
I didn't say you were Republican, I said you're using Republican Talking Points. You seem to use alot for being an Independent.
Let me guess, Both Sides are Bad so Vote Republican?
I voted for Obama. He thinks everything is "fine". Sorry, I do not agree. I can find studies that will be on both sides of growth in government and just about everything else. You are the one who has been brainwashed. Educate yourself rather than falling for every dem perspective.
Yes, I've been "Brainwashed". Was I brainwashed when I provided the evidence you asked for, yet you provide none to back up any of your statements?
You voted for Obama? Sure you did. :) Suuurrreee you did. MSNBCIndie(tm)
Find Studies. Post them. Back up your Statements.
Why bother since you have called me a liar? I did vote for Obama. And Clinton. You will be ignored.
I'm calling you a liar because you lied (See your Harry Reid hasn't allowed any HR's to come to a vote on the Senate floor). I called you out on it, posted the evidence you requested, and since then you've done nothing but turn tail and run.
Why bother since I called you a liar? You lied. It's in your post up above. Admit you were misinformed and just spewing talking points or deal with being a liar.
You may be ignoring me, but every other poster in here is seeing that you're just another Republican Talking Point Shill. And like most other current Republicans (notice I'm not using the term "Conservative", because the current Republican party doesn't warrant the label) when confronted with facts and then asked to back up your assertions, you turn tail and run.
Toodles.
Sometimes I have to wonder is a stalemated Federal government isn't desirable. Government has become too large. The government is really incapable of controlling the economy or passng legislation that ensures our personal freedom. It can protect our borders if the military is properly underwritten. Health care..forget it. A stalemate is ok as long as it does not become checkmate.
I personally am only rooting for bipartisanship in 2013. Why??? Because then we will be rid of the fiscal mess that are the Bush tax cuts and the sequester and can finally deal with the economy without deficit hawks bitching about the budget shortfall.
OBAMA BIDEN 2012
The Democratic party died in 2004 when they couldn't even defeat the worst President this country has EVER seen. They made themselves obsolete.
My wish for 2008 was that Barack Obama would lose the election , because then the DNC would have been absolved of the financial ruin that GW Bush & his gang got us into with the unfunded wars & bank bailouts - and the GOP would have been forced to deal with the crisis that was handed to Obama at the beginning of his term.
We all know what would have happened if they had been forced to "put their money where their mouth is " so to speak, and fix the problems that happened in 2008. We know that they would have fallen flat on their pointy little heads , and then we would have had our revolution.
The DNC Party is dead & irrelevant - and the GOP would have been right behind them - forever.
Now it will take the disaster of the Ultra-right wing Taliban and their corporate cronies to win the Presidency and ultimately kill themselves off. It will be painful but it will happen.
Bank on it.
"The DNC Party is dead & irrelevant"
You got that right. When you are not only willing, but actually use the Justice Dept. against your own citizens, to allow foreign criminals to flood into the country just because you desperately want to buy their votes, you have no future.
pjam09 - but you have no problem with the Ultra rightwing Taliban and their cronies ? Figures.
Join with the Teabeaggers and the New Republican Norquists and you become part of the problem.
It's going to be a long bumpy ride , but for the USA to survive they ALL have to go.
Why in the f-ing world is these folks in the media keep saying that both parties don't want to compromise? The fact is simply that the GOTP has moved so far to the right that they have banned the usage of the world "compromise" from their vocabulary. John Boehner couldn't even whisper it in an interview with Lesley Stahl (contributor in the CBS TV show "60 minutes"). He "rejects" that world. The GOTP wants the Democrats to submit to their right-wing radical ideology like taking away women' rights or defunding Planned Parenthood.
After the 2008 elections, the Democrats won big and had a mandate that should have allowed them to implement their policies. Unfortunately, in the spirit of "compromising", Harry Reid allowed Mitch McConnell (who's main goal, he said, is to "not allow President Obama a second term") to set a new record of filibusters in the Senate.
http://newsjunkiepost.com/2010/03/02/republican-obstruction-at-work-record-number-of-filibusters/
What rights are being taken away? And I do not want to pay for multiple abortions for some women who cannot figure out birth control.
You mean aside from a Womans Right to Choose?
How about Voting Rights for the poor?
No, they haven't quite yet managed to take away our rights, but not from lack of trying. Based on how your commenting on these threads, you seem to be nothing but a Republican shill.
Paying for multiple abortions? Whose abortions have you paid for? Is this back to the patently BS Planned Parenthood talking point? The Hyde Amendment is specific on what can be paid for from Medicaid regarding abortions. Rape, Incest, and Dangerous to the Mother are the conditions IIRC. Not some "welfare-queen-who-just-wants-to-have-sex-with-random-people" though that's what's implied in your post.
Rowe vice wade has not been repealed. There are people on the voting scrolls that are not eligible for voting. It is not in the numbers the Repubs claim but never the less exists. Rape, incest, etc I agree with. But we know Planned Parenthooh has stretched it.
Planned Parenthood has spent no Government money on Abortions.
Please provide citations to prove your statement that it has.
No one said they've taken our rights, even in my post I said they're trying.
Yes, the "Voter Fraud" epidemic, which has been proven multiple times to be a bunch of horsesh*t. Why don't you go ahead and trot out the ACORN thing.
Not in the numbers Republicans claim? That's the understatement of the year. Since Voter Fraud is such a tiny, tiny issue, why do we need to make voter laws that are going to keep MORE legitimate voters from voting, then prevent the Fraudsters?
Ed, it seems that Lulu has a problem with anyone getting an abortion for any reason. She has a problem with Rowe vs Wade, not government funded abortions. It's ok for the right to take away anyone else's rights that they do not agree with.
Jax, that's because the current batch of Republicans in office are Party before Country. It's blatantly obvious to anyone who looks at what they've done since Obama has come into office. Starting with the Senate Minority Leaders statement about their main goal being making Obama a one-term President.
Any person who is supporting the Republican Party at this point seriously needs to look at their priorities and what they want. What's best for their Party, or what's best for their Country.
We passed the Affordable Care and Accountability Act and the Frank Dodd financial reform bill.
That's swell but I'm afraid I cant vote for you because of your stance on Gay "marriage", trying to give terrorists responsible for thousands of American deaths the same rights as American Citizens, Turning a blind Eye as "Occupier's"s break into public buildings, causing millions of dollars in damage to public and private property, Burning the U.S. Flag, Shutting down ports performing economic terrorism and holding cities hostage.
The political paybacks to your Green energy buddies which have cost the U.S. taxpayers billions of dollars such as the $535 million dollar loan to Solyndra, the $450 million dollars of taxpayers money to create Jobs in China because they will be making the equipment and managing the windfarm in China. The millions of dollars the taxpayers are paying for Obama to fly to all his campaign fund raisers, more trips than the last five Presidents combined.
Thousands of people are dying in Syria every day.
Over 50,000 Hispanics Have died in the Mexican drug war since 2006 because of the cartels fighting for the best drug smuggling routes into America. Mexican is our Neighbor and friend and yet the problem is incompetently ignored by this administration while Syria which is half a World a way gets all the attention.
Iran is belligerent as ever towards America, the rest of the Worlds Views of America is a Joke, How well do you think the "First Gay President", Newsweek's declaration not mine, will be received when he goes to negotiate with the Arabs, A.K.A. the Muslim nations of the Middle East...
What was it again he did to earn the Noble Peace Prize?
3.5 years later and Unemployment is still 3 tenths higher than when Obama took office and its only cost us an $837 Billion dollar stimulus, $1.2+ trillion dollar, record setting deficit spending for the last four years, $1.7 trillion dollar ACA, The federal Dept will be $16 trillion dollars by the end of this year.
I will judge you by your own words Obama!
http://geekpolitics.com/obama-on-raising-the-debt-ceiling/
It shouldn't be all about Democrats or Republicans!
It should be about doing the right thing for our country and the majority of its citizens. I consider myself an independent voter, but going back to the Reagan days and with the only exception having been Perot, I’ve always voted Republican. But all this single-minded, left versus right, ideological one dimensional bull has got to go! This is the problem with our country. It shouldn't be about Democrats or Republicans! It should be about Americans, especially our elected officials, doing the right thing for our country and its citizens.
Both parties have sold out the bulk of the American citizens, who they're supposed to represent, by allowing the "out-sourcing" floodgates to open wider and wider without taking any sensible measures to stem the tide. (Under Clinton jobs to China, Under Bush I & II influx of illegals or cheap easily abused labor into the US and jobs to Mexico/NAFTA) Our leaders are elected by the Citizens of the United States of America to represent the interests of those citizens and the country itself. They are NOT elected by the Global Market Place or foreign citizens!
We need whoever wins the next election to Start Protecting American Jobs and do whatever it takes to bring back the jobs they let go. They've got to give us somebody who will stand up for the American people.
We need to bring manufacturing back to the United States of America and both parties are ignoring tariffs as a way to level the playing field, raise money and bring jobs back home. Let's guess why. Oh that's right, tariff is a dirty word. Hum, maybe it’s that our so called leaders (political leaders) are beholden to the same people who are exporting our jobs.
I guess we should keep letting Corp Boards, Wall Street, CEOs and Foreign Lobbyists promote sending US jobs to countries where they work for slave wages, no benefits, no OSHA safety standards or no real environment regulations. How's that been working for us?
The so called “Global Market Place” is not a level playing field. Companies may have made higher profits by "out sourcing", but they've been putting middle class Americans who are a good part of the world’s customer base out of work. I’m not a lefty or member of any union. I run a business that employs over 20 people and produces products that are purchased by customers that do manufacturing and packaging. I’m just an average Joe, but I've been saying this for more than 10 years now. If I can see it, so can our so called leaders (political leaders) who are beholden to the same people who are exporting our jobs.
We need to add tariffs that are proportionate to the inequities in wages and regulations in the country where the goods were produced and or where we’re importing them from. We could then use the money raised by these tariffs to help companies build state of the art manufacturing plants here in the USA, which would create more jobs here at home for US citizens, which would then in turn increase our income tax revenue.
The people with all of the excuses as to why we can’t or aren’t willing to manufacture products here in the US are the same people who have provided us with the thinking that’s gotten us into this mess in the first place.
Over the past 15-20 years, I've seen too many of our customer's close manufacturing plants here in the USA and move those plants to different countries, decimating entire areas here in OUR COUNTRY. And I'm not alone. Returning jobs to American Citizens will provide income tax revenue to OUR Government versus our government having to pay unemployment benefits to those who would be jobless instead.
Bringing manufacturing back to the US not only gives jobs to the US citizens who would be working in those manufacturing facilities, but to the people that would be working in the businesses that would spring up all around them. This should also include the safe harvesting, production and distribution of our own natural energy here in the USA, rather than paying for fuel from countries where they hate us. Let’s keep that money and those jobs here in the US.
These so-called “free trade agreements” have to go. It was obvious when they were passing these agreements as to what was going to happen and sure enough it did. Our leaders had to have known this as well when they were passing these bills. It’s just common sense. We also need to bring customer support services back to the United States of America and staff them with employees who are US Citizens.
The “Global Market Place” is not a level playing field! The whole idea of the tariffs is so we can pay our factory workers a decent wage and not be blown out by these other countries where they don’t play by the same rules.
We may have to pay a bit more for products made here in the USA by US citizens, but at least we'll still have jobs and a future for our children.
The bottom line is that “Our Government” has to protect American industry and the jobs that those industries provide. If they do that, the rest will take care of itself.
All this single-minded, left versus right, ideological one dimensional bull has got to go! This is the problem with our country. It shouldn't be about Democrats or Republicans! It should be about Americans, especially our elected officials, doing the right thing for our country and its citizens.
It doesn’t matter who fixes it – Just Fix It.
The only realistic solution is to get Old Whorehouse Harry Reid to allow all the bills that the House has crafted and passed to the Senate floor for discussion. This is how our system is supposed to work. The Senate can then make changes to these bills and send them back to the House. This is how we arrive at compromise.
Reid has decided that anything and everything that comes out of the House will be tabled. No discussion, no voting. He is a one-man road block to anything getting done.
This is not progress, this is anarchy by the Democrats.
@Joseph - Why didn't you ask Mitch McConnell to stop filibustering bills that were passed by the House Democrats in 2009-2010 and brought for a debate on the senate floor? Over 120 bills (including jobs bills - different from the WH's jobs bill) were filibustered by Mitch during that time. Mitch McConnell and the GOTP have set a new record in filibusters in the Senate. It's clear that you would like to see the silly agenda of the radical and retrograde right become law of the land, than progressive policies move this country forward.
http://newsjunkiepost.com/2010/03/02/republican-obstruction-at-work-record-number-of-filibusters/
So two wrongs make a right? This all has to stop if we are to make any progress. By your comment, I guess you only want the left wing agenda to be brought forth.
Here's the way I see it,,, If Romney happens to win in November I hope Harry Reid has the balls to stand up and say " Our number one job is to see that President Romney is a one term President". Seems fair to me!
Maybe fair but here does it get us? Four more years of stalemate.
I see, but you don't call out the Republicans on causing stalemate now. Independent, huh?
Remember 10:1 Spending Cuts to Revenue Increases?
But it's the DEMS who are stopping everything, right?
This is not progress, this is anarchy by the Democrats.
That's total bull. BOTH side are to blame and it you don't see that --- you're either blind or stupid. And NOTHING is going to change regardless of who wins in November.
Both sides are to blame? What, pray tell, have the Democrats done to cause the stalemates in place? Is it the Democrats filibustering everything hitting the Senate? Is it the Dems in the House who are attaching Riders they know will be rejected by the Senate?
Was it the Dems who rejected the 10:1 compromise?
Was it the Dems that threatened Gov't Shutdown unless they got their way on Tax cuts?
Was it the Dems who pitched a fit over the Nuclear Arms Treaty renewal with Russia?
Was it the Dems who held the country hostage with the Gov't shutdown unless we kept the Bush Tax Cuts for the wealthy?
Was it the Dems who's idea of "budget cutting" was defunding Planned Parent Hood and NPR - Using BS reasons to do so?
This is just a small list.
I'm in agreement that both sides have issues, but to act like they're equally bad is just a blatant falsehood.
Check out this thought provoking piece over at WaPo. I wish MSNBC would have pushed this.
http: www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/lets-just-say-it-the-republicans-are-the-problem/2012/04/27/gIQAxCVUlT_story.html
It's written by:
Thomas E. Mann is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, and Norman J. Ornstein is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.
These two are noted non-partisan Congressional watchdogs, one conservative and one liberal. They collaborated on this book.
Note the recent statements by Jeb Bush about how Reagan or Bush the Elder wouldn't be accepted in the current Republican party. And Reagan is someone they hold up as a Hero.
Just to reiterate. Both sides do have issues. But they are not equal. Not by a long shot.
And don't forget that mr grover, the gop, & the rushbo & romney do one and one thing only. They make the rich richer, the poor poorer. The upper 1% already own 50% of the wealth & it's growing with the bushman's tax cuts & soaring multimillion dollar ceo pay. I tell you pray for those who support attacking the poor, weak, the hungry, the elderly because for those supporters to go to heaven, will be more difficult than for a camel to pass thru the eye of a needle. Ask your local minister.
Why would anyone vote for Obama
Why would anyone vote for Romney?? The ONLY solutions he has to fix the economy, more tax cuts for the richest of the rich and more deregulation, are the very same policies that crashed it in the first place. His record in MA showed more taxes (fees) poor job growth and increasing debt.
Why would anyone vote for Obama ..hes done nothing to help the economy or put people to work...I believe all hes done is campaign and make promises he hasn't kept like closeing Gitmo...shovel ready jobs and so on.
"According to conventional wisdom, the lack bipartisanship in Congress and the unwillingness of Democrats and Republicans to compromise is what’s preventing legislation from getting passed. Up to a point, that’s true."
LIES, LIES AND MORE LIES. First of all, the President has presented bills, ie. Jobs Bill that have received approval in the past in a bipartisan way and are now rejected by the GOP. So don't think the public is stupid. We are not. Even your conservative polls show that Americans blame the GOP since they do not believe in compromise. Their only goal is to defeat the President so that they can implement their libertarian ideology which ONLY benefit the wealthy and takes from the rest of us. So stop writing these distortions and lies or you will soon become irrelevant. Many of us turn to other sources for fair and balance news since we cannot find this information through the conservative mainstream media.
Joe66,
Neveragain in our lifetimes will Americans be sooooo stupid as to elect an inept, socialist, "community organizer" to such a high office. What were we thinking??
Like electing a dog-catcher to President. No experience, radical Reverend Wright mentality, moving the whole country backwards.
Time to ditch this disgusting dog-eater and elect a REAL President for the next eight years.
@Joseph Elephant - You hate so much this African-American president that you believe that everybody in the country shares your silly views of him. You are seriously delusional, probably due to the hallucinogenic mushrooms you've been smoking since John McCain was defeated in 2008. On November 6th, you will wake up from that delusion when President Obama will be reelected in a landslide for 4 MORE YEARS.
That day, we will send the out-of-touch liar, tax-evader, flip-flopper, Mitt Rmoney to retirement in the chateau he is building in along the coast of California.
@Bulboja.. His being African American has nothing to do with his not being reelected. He gets to evolve, not flip flop. Please provide evidence that Romney is a tax evader. You sound envious of his success. Obama has not delivered on the issues most impacting the US.
Joseph, So you would rather have a fence sitting, magic underwear wearing, dog roof, corporate front man as president...No Thanks.
There is only one word that can describe obama's job as president. Great. The guy will be rated as high and much higher than fdr, lincoln, kennedy, clinton ... all of them. And why.
The guy has done the nearly impossible. Take ending the war on terror. It is a war with an invisible enemy. It is a war with no beginning nor end. Obama changed all that. The war on terror is ending. He killed the world's #1 & #2 terrorists. Something that neither the bushman nor regan could do. But those people were merely puppets. Not true presidents like fdr & lincoln.
Obama brought back the economy from freefall. Compared to fdr, who took over 20 years, use of two nuclear bombs, and a world war to bring the country back. Obama did the same in just three years. The stock market is at near all time highs. It's because you cannot directly compare today's dow with the dow before foxnews bought the indes. Foxnews who owns the dow and hates obama because he is black, needs to either add apple to the dow and raise the dow by at least 1,000 pts or lower the dows historical data before they bought the dow by over 1,000 pts because the world's #1 industrial company is no longer included in the dow. They screwed it up after they bought the dow jones company just a few years ago. What's the point of an index if you cannot compare it to historical values.
Obama has done more to level the playing field for gays, hispanics, women than just about any president. I tell you it's all in the constitution. But mr grover, the gop, & the rushbo will tell you that these people need to be discriminated against. No. No. Sure it took courage and obama has it what it takes.
Because all of this and more is why obama will be the top rated president historically. And why mr grover, the gop, & the rushbo who hate our country and our constitution and the people of this country want to see obama defeated as their top priority.
You must be smoking something. FDR was dead when the bombs were dropped by Truman. The rest of your rant is just as suspect.
Hmmm, the MSNBC Independent(tm) at work again.
Just once I'd like to see a post supported by facts, MSNBCIndie. Just Once.
Both Sides are Bad, so Vote Republican, right?
@ed. You are a total a$$. I have repeatedly said I voted for Obama but will not do so again. I voted for Clinton, happily. Your perspective is always vote Democrat. And you think I am the one not capable of thought. Look in the mirror. And FDR was dead when the bombs were dropped. Does your little mind dispute that as well?
I'm an a$$? Why? Because I'm calling you out for you making BS statements and not backing up A SINGLE ONE OF THEM with ANY citations?
You can say you Voted how you want. I don't really care, and based on your lack of evidence for your Republican Talking Points, I don't believe you.
I voted for Regan. I voted for Bush 1 the first time. I don't always vote Dem, but my eye's are open enough to see how dysfunctional the Republicans are at this point in time. Mainly because they have so many people who blindly follow them (staring really hard at you right now, lulu) without researching on their own and checking independent sources.
Want to prove me wrong? Post some links.
Hey now folks, let's not slam Slick Willie Clinton too hard. He made me look at cigars in a whole different way. LOL
I wonder if Hillary could taste the difference when they kissed. Assuming he could bring himself to actually kiss....that.
The Republicans have NO INTENTION of compromising on legislation that will benefit Americans. They've been at this obstruction game since Jan 2008. As a matter of fact, at a time of crisis, with the country’s entire financial system near collapse, with the economy collapsing, with the stock market collapsing, with unemployment skyrocketing, with people losing their jobs and retirement money, the GOP announced that their NUMBER 1 PRIORITY was to assure that Pres. Obama was a 1 term president---- even BEFORE he was sworn in!!! The basically gave Joe American the finger!
They abandoned their duty to the American people for the sake of sabotaging a new president taking office in the midst of the greatest crisis since 1929.--- for the sake of political gain! I don’t know if that fit’s the legal definition of treason, but it sure smells like it and is at the very least, un-American and unpatriotic. Never before have I seen a political party abandon it’s country in time of crisis! NEVER!
Why isnt MSNBC reporting on THAT?? or "starve the beast"?? Or holding the unemployment benefits extension hostage to insure that the bush tax cuts for the rich and corporate loopholes were extended for 2 years??
The media has also abandoned its responsibility to inform the American people of the real issues.
lmao..... starve the beast! Thats one of my favorite liberal counters! Look what the democrats are doing to Detroit this week. We should call that "F the beast"
Working together would be nice to see. I'll believe it when it happens. I think first we need all the newly elected tea party to be 1-term members. They have produced nothing, done nothing and brought chaos to govt. You don't get anything done by their hard line, my way or highway tactics. It was a failed mission. I think many people from both parties would support govt reform, but not govt elimination. We need a federal govt.