'vote-a-rama'

Politics is showbix for ugly people!

Hey, broker1

More proof our education system is broken.

Did you, broker1, make it broke?

Good now we can see where people stand on the issues.

correction to #2.1

Politics is showbiz/showbix for ugly people!

.

doh!

... too much drama in 'vote-a-rama'.

This aspect of Congress is properly labeled as 'position taking,' it's all symbolism but no substance.

Symbolism but no substance, meaning not getting any work done, but still getting paid. Kind of like a little campaign holiday right from the office. They get to propose and vote and count, and then nothing happens at all. And these guys run the country?

Well said Dennis

In general, agreed, Dennis (#2.6),

.

but sometimes the constituents also want their sentiments voiced inside the Senate chambers by their senators or inside the Hosue by their house members.

Give someone a piece of their mind. Part of their duty, too.

What a shame they have to go through this charade when they KNOW the budget they are attaching them to has ZERO chance of passing the house. All so they can play "gotcha" with each other come November. It would be so nice if we had leaders who acted like adults instead of children and put the interests of the country above their own interest or those of their party. And this problem is with BOTH parties at virtually all levels. While the country flounders under a vacuum of true leadership, they play "voting games" so they can keep their cushy little positions. We should fire them all and elect people who want to come in and fix real problems.

This should prove to everyone that our Congress is more concerned with getting reelected than trying to fix the huge problems our country is facing right now. They want to pat themselves on the back on putting up legislation that appeals to their base and then they can say hey look the other side doesn't want thism, vote for us to get it!

Well, some of you are too harsh on our senators. The real boss is the people. These Senators are there do our bidding.. by doing things, including this 'vote-a-rama.'

Sound bite politics. This is a prime example of what is wrong with the system. There needs to be a new rule passed to prevent tacking on amendments that have nothing to do with the purpose of the underlying bill. This method of attaching unpopular amendments to bills that no one wants to vote against is how we have ended up with a lot of special interest laws and loopholes. Theses amendments get tacked on and money gets flushed down the toilet.

The Senators are not there for you and I. They are there for some selves!

Now is the time the Progressives will submit all their PORK BARRELED PROJECTS.

Publish ALL THE PORK so the American people will see what kind of Congressional representatives they voted into office, especially those screaming about what Mr. Obama's sequester is doing to their voting blocks.

I am a little confused. The Senate is allowing ammendments to a budget proposal to the House. The House sent a Budget proposal to the Senate and they rejected the proposal.

What does this circle jerk accomplish? The house has to pass a Budget proposal that the Senate will accept with advice and consent. After that the President accepts or rejects the compromise bill.

WHO IS DOING WHAT TO WHOM?

Does this mean that we operate one more year with NO Budget from congress? The Senate keeps the country funded thru continuing resolutions for operations. What is the House doing? The House just approved the temporary funding bill submitted by the senate. The House sent it to the President for signing. Again What is the House doing?

I am totally confused as to the function of the House of Representitives.

Can anybody help me out with an explanation of what the House's function is in the Government of the United States?

Carl - This particular House of Representatives appears to have the function of obstructing any accomplishment that might provide this President with anything resembling a success.

What we really find out is who can tell the biggest lies..no matter what they make statements of or on...when it comes time to vote for anything..it will be own particular party line that they will follow...no matter what. Talk about a waste of tax payers money. At a time when these politicans are suppose to be working on a budget...they will now talk about what suites them..and again, get nothing done.

OK, let me see if I got this straight . . .

The Senate is voting on amendments . . . that will NEVER be attached to a CR Bill . . . that will NEVER be passed, and these are going to determine the issues that both parties use to wage war on each other . . .

using way too much money, for campaign ads, that could have been used for better purposes . . .

so we can decide who to vote for???

This is not Progress . . . it's insanity.

a pox on both your houses . . .

we need to move . . .

.

FORWARD!

A compelling argument as to the utter insanity of the rules of the US Senate, ... is that the US Senate wrote the rules!

Nuff said.

@ Carl, the House does not have to pass a budget that the Senate will accept. Just like the Senate doesn't have to pass a bill that the House of Reps will accept. I have no idea where you get that tid bit of information from, as it is incorrect. This is how democracy works, and how laws are supposed to be made. The great thing about our nation is that the party(s) in minority have a say, otherwise we'd live in a Monarchy.

The House and Senate both pass budgets (something the Senate hasn't done since 2009, so kudos to them for FINALLY doing their jobs) Once both chambers pass their bills, it goes to conference ( a group made up of both Senate and House of Rep members). If the bills are similar then it gets pushed through with ease, if they are not similar, then that conference works to reconcile the two bills, they come to common ground and both chambers vote again on the new bill. When it's finally passed by both houses, generally by the time it comes out of conference its accepted by both houses, it then is sent to the president for his signature. He has three options at that point 1) sign it, and it becomes law and appropriations bills are created that actually make the spending happen. 2) veto any part or all of the bill and send it back to both houses of congress. or 3) do nothing, and after 10 days (I believe) it becomes law without the President's signature, and again the appropriations bills are created to make the spending happen.

Its time to END ALL Entitlements for Congress! They do not earn any until they get money out of politics and make lobbyist illegal, never again mention rape, abortion or say the American People Want.

Give them each a six-year term and be done with this absolute nonsense. Get on with the business of the people rather than the business of getting perpetually re-elected.

Steve in WA-2586156

Give them each a six-year term and be done with this absolute nonsense. Get on with the business of the people rather than the business of getting perpetually re-elected.

I can go for that, and extend that to the President as well. It's long enough to make people work together, and the single term takes re-election campaigns that start 2 years prior, which means currently congressional members are campaigning for the next election, as soon as they are elected.

Throw in some measures that doesn't allow amendments to bills that have nothing to do with the original bill, and now we are making progress!!!

I vote straight democrat.

Sent from my obamaphone

Well, some of you are too harsh on our senators. The real boss is the people. These Senators are there do our bidding.. by doing things, including this 'vote-a-rama.'

Is that why they do so much of this stuff late at night when few are watching? The problem is that just as they care most about their political positions and keeping themselves in power, most Americans are concerned primarily about themselves and their own pocketbooks. So while we decry government spending on the one hand, we elect the guy (or gal) who can go to Washington and channel as much money as possible back to our neck of the woods. We want responsible government IN THEORY, but when the checks are written we want to be near the beginning of the line.

Good God,

Pelosi and Reid are your leaders.Middle of the road.LMAO!

Our country is starving for some real leadership......

Our country is starving for leadership period!!

IMHO-2730490,

You have an interesting concept of "moderate" and "middle class" for the Democrats. I guess that explains Ms. Pelosi's demand/use of a Boeing 757 as her private mode of transportation while speaker of the house. May I assume that she would have demanded a Boeing 747 if she was elitist?

Yet you failed to realize that the Pelosi comment was total BS. Bush started the supplying aircraft to the Speaker. She requested one that could make the trip non-stop and didn't care what kind it was in fact.

Yet another trailer park manufactured rumor. If you bothered to check, the prior speaker lived in ILL. A trip easily made on the smaller aircraft. The C-20 wouldn't even fit her staff.

IMHO said,

"Yes, the democrats do it too, but we don't have the RWNJs running our party. We have moderates, more middle of the road, more middle class values, for a party that stands for all of us, not just the upper 1% and the Evangeliban religious right."

Reid & Pelosi moderates... Typical low information voter's comment!!

Yes, the democrats do it too, but we don't have the RWNJs running our party. We have moderates, more middle of the road, more middle class values, for a party that stands for all of us, not just the upper 1% and the Evangeliban religious right.

The reason we are in such shambles is because you dopes actually believe this load of crap.

the fact that people actually use this as fodder to attack another party is rediculous and shameful. take some ownership in who we are as americans and how we have failed...yes YOU have failed

I would hardly call George Soros middle of the road. The dems are the party of buy/cheat/steal the vote. Pandering to whatever group will get you elected and then reneging on promises seems to be the left trait. As long as they are throwing crumbs from the taxpayer table to those that do not contribute to the coffers nor the country you left lapdogs yip for them. The WH is the party of Hollywood Elite, Unions, Bankers, Hedgefund mgrs and yes BIG OIL (google who Barry and Tiger played golf with, which is why he didn't want the media there -- 2 guys from BIG Oil, one is a former ex from HALIBURTON -- odd you were all screeching about Cheney but not a peep from you hypocrites over this). So as you can see you have no credibility with your welfare paid for talking points from your master.

IMHO - get your head out of your azz. Democrats are moderates, really? How moderate is it to spend 1.2 trillion more than you take in each year then try to overtax the 50% of citizens that do pay federal taxes? How moderate is it to have 50 million people on foodstamps ? How moderate is it to have high unemployment year after year and never accept responsiblity? How moderate is it to never get rid of a federal program once it starts regardless of its continued need or performance?

The republicans in the house just voted to take food out of the mouths of children, health care away from old people to give tax cuts to the rich and you believe the republicans are on your side?

Instead of jobs we get the sequester, then instead of jobs the republicans vote for tax cuts for the rich.

Then you think we are low information voters because we believe what the republicans are actually doing instead of believing the lies coming out of their mouths.

Just like the lies that lead us to the Iraq war, the lies they are telling their gullible base today are no better for our country. It is really, really clear the republican party is fighting for their rich donor base and could not care less what happens to America.

Even the smaller government crap they are selling is for the rich to get richer. The government provides services at cost when they have rich friends who could be making profits off your suffering. It is just a con game to get the gullible to vote away their rights in the name of freedom.

Our country is starving for some evolution among roughly 47% of its citizenry.

Genetically defective and wholly unsatisfactory for any decision-making process, they continue to stamp angrily around in their dried up end of the pool hoping one day to make an actual splash again.

yeah yeah american

6 more trillion our government added to the debt while poverty rose. Yes our government has nothing but the best intentions.While you slobber along,our great government has been fighting poverty for over 60 years.Now run out there and ask a young black man what he thinks his chances of making it is.

Trying to change the meaning of GOP will only rile the feathers of every member of the Gerrymandered Old Party.

How conservative was it to start two unpaid for wars?

How conservative is it to create giant debt and then break our economy, bail out the rich and act like the blame belongs to hungry Americans?

If it weren't for all those people on food stamps caused by the republicans recession maybe you would have something to whine about.

The republicans have voted against jobs bill after jobs bill even one for veterans and yes I think it is time for the republicans to accept responsibility for the high unemployment and the high need for food stamps they have voted to keep in place to protect the rich from not giving back to the county that made them so rich.

YAWN- If you don't mind I'll wait for the new talking points.The Bush recession was over 4 years ago.The government has had 60 years to fix poverty.Its working really great don't you think.

Dotties girl - Remember when Soros threatened to leave the USA if Bush won a re-election? The fact that he's still here proves that those of his ilk can't be trusted to make a promise then keep it. Why haven't the Hollywood types that made the same promise as Soros left the country? More lies from people who have no intent on keeping the promises they make.

6 more trillion our government added to the debt while poverty rose. Yes our government has nothing but the best intentions.While you slobber along,our great government has been fighting poverty for over 60 years.Now run out there and ask a young black man what he thinks his chances of making it is.

How do you propose we handle this problem? Should we deny people food, shelter, basic necessities in the richest country in the world? If there was a better solution someone would have proposed it by now and it would have received great acclaim.

Adler...good point. What the GOP always ignores is that the money our government works on is the money of the middle-class. The majority population of this nation who are it's economic engine. When a political party in congress makes it's agenda clear to limit the term of a president congress will accomplish nothing. The GOP of the U.S. House has consistently blocked every effort put forth by the president. Bush and the GOP's economic recession will never be fully reversed until congress works with the president not against him. Funny, if President Obama's policies were all that bad then why not implement them and let them fail on their own merit. What is the GOP really afraid of?

Alder-273784

How do you propose we handle this problem? Should we deny people food, shelter, basic necessities in the richest country in the world? If there was a better solution someone would have proposed it by now and it would have received great acclaim

Alder, the only people denying people food, shelter, and basic necessities, are those denying people the ability to take care of themselves.

Here's where we start...

We can start by cutting waste...this accounts for upwards of 100 Billion dollars per year in Federal government spending.

Next we move on to duplication. There is over 500 Billion dollars per year in Federal government spending spent on programs where there are other programs that do the EXACT SAME THING. Here are some examples

342 economic development programs;
130 programs serving the disabled;
130 programs serving at-risk youth;
90 early childhood development programs;
75 programs funding international education, cultural, and training exchange activities;
72 federal programs dedicated to assuring safe water;
50 homeless assistance programs;
45 federal agencies conducting federal criminal investigations;
40 separate employment and training programs;
28 rural development programs;
27 teen pregnancy programs;
26 small, extraneous K-12 school grant programs;
23 agencies providing aid to the former Soviet republics;
19 programs fighting substance abuse;
17 rural water and waste-water programs in eight agencies;
17 trade agencies monitoring 400 international trade agreements;
12 food safety agencies;
11 principal statistics agencies; and
Four overlapping land management agencies

Does no one think it's possible to streamline this a little bit? Anyone? Even if we could reduce half of that spending by streamlining these programs, we could largely leave the productivity of these programs unharmed while saving a boat load of cash, which would take a significant chunk of unnecessary spending out of the budget, and could make other programs more effective!

Lastly, we need to take a long hard look at all of the programs and spending that the federal government does annually. If a program or spending does not create a positive return, does not make our nation and/or government more efficient thus reducing future costs, does not create sustainable jobs, or any combination then perhaps it's not necessary spending, and if local and state governments want things, then let them handle it. We can also cut pork by requiring that no amendments shall be added to bills that have nothing to do with the main bill, this could reduce pork spending greatly. If politicians want to attempt pork spending, then it should be out in the open.

By reducing our deficit spending, we strengthen the programs that actually help those in need. However, many of those programs are in need of reform as well. The simple fact is, in the not so distant future, mandatory spending is going to sky rocket, and will get to a point where either taxes will have to be greatly increased, which means it will directly hit the middle class, or those mandatory spending programs will see large reductions, thus defeating their purpose, or we continue to beg borrow and steal and watch our interest payments double every ten years. We might be ok for the next ten years, but after that, things change dramatically, and to ignore that is disingenuous.

The vast majority of programs should have the end goal of independence. We don't have that now. I think most people would agree that the less people have to rely on government assistance, the better off both the government, the economy, and the people are. I believe in the old saying, "give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day, but teach a man to fish, and you'll feed him for a lifetime." We should be striving and instilling in people independence and personal responsibility. Sure it's easier to blame someone else for your problems, but until you pick yourself up, and start to change your life starting with yourself, then people will always be doomed to fail.

I think we need to help those who truly need help, but we should be doing what we can to help as many as we can to not need that help....and that requires more than just handing out a check, that in some cases provides more benefit than if that person went out and got a job in the current economy.

With the amount of money the DHS spends per year, you can feed the poor for 10 yrs.

Why does Obama and the DHS need 1.4 billion rounds of ammunition? Why do they need tanks? Are they planning a war against the American people?

Why do we need to spend $2 million on duck research? And the democrats want to add another trillion bucks to do these kind of things. We need to get rid of the 70 yr old senators, they are all corrupt.

barred from having ANY NON-GERMAIN amendments offered or attached to them.

"The G-damned Germans don't have anything to do with it!" (borrowed from Sheriff Buford T. Justus in Smokey And The Bandit) But I agree ~ and this should apply to ALL legislation, not just budgetary items. There should be no amendments, riders, or attachments of any form that are not openly identified and debated before a vote can be taken. Hell, more than half of the "pork" is approved by sneaking in riders to bills ~ the riders never seeing the light of day until AFTER the bill is passed.

Actually, many of these riders are slipped in during the markup stage of the bill as committees work out the final wording of the legislation, not through the open amendment process. However, I fully agree that this political garbage has to stop. If a bill can pass on its own merits, then pass it. If not, then you shouldn't spend tons of money to effectively bribe members of Congress to pass it.

"Zee Germans?"

Borrowed from Snatch

Michael - I have advocated that for many years. Legislation needs to pass own its own merit not pork added to appease one person or party into voting for it.

No no no. Not German, Germain! It's an entirely different country!

What one person considers as not germain another might consider as very germain to the bill. If you are talking about riders than I would certainly tend to agree. Riders that are attached to bills that have nothing in common are not good. Let the riders stand on their own. Up or down vote after the debate.

I love "Smoky And The Bandit".

lol

Or maybe because Democrats wrote the Bill and there is no need for amending their own legislation? This is the only free lesson you get. All the rest will be charged for.

Jim

What do you charge for blow jobs?

Jim

You should be paying us, considering the incorrect answer you gave and all.

Wrong again Jim

There are over 400 rapid votes today and not all are Republicans. If you are charging for lessons,people WILL be wanting refunds.

But party operatives on each side are keeping score – these votes are fodder for the campaign ads you’ll see in 2014.

I think the quote here from the article implies clearly that both sides of the aisle like to play bartender.

Think about it-3099387

"I find it interesting that the only two examples of amendments were from Republican Senators. Nothing on the Democratic Senators. It would seem to me with a Democratic majority in the Senate, there would be ample examples of amendments submitted by Democratic Senators. But alas, none are shown in the article. I wonder why? Maybe because NBC is a little bit biased?"

Morbid, horrifying train wrecks always get more attention than the routine freight train chugging through town... Everybody knows that! It's the big R ubbernecker syndrome.

You sound like a Fox reporter with that last ststement you made.

Well said. They may as well be playing wheel of legislation.

You have a point, Scalzo. Republicans are claiming that the actor chosen to play Lucifer in the History Channel's presentation of "The Bible" looks like Obama. David Letterman says of this ~"if conservatives can prove that Obama is Satan, they may be more inclined to cut a deal with him." He may be right!

Jim

The LEFT brought it up,not the Republicans.They thought it was distasteful.

Letterman??? He idolizes Rachel Maddow. Please!

Knowone is up in arms about needing ID to get weapons its required. Just as it is for everything else but to vote. As it should be to vote. Its not taking votes away from anyone by requiring an ID. It's said its disenfranchising Democrats but Republicans are in the same boat.

Photo ID is already required to by a firearm. Go to any gun shop in your town and see if you can attempt to buy one without photo id. Of course, if you're a convicted felon, still go ahead and try because the Feds won't press charges against you anyway even though you're violating existing federal gun control laws.

actually we are trying to stop the dems from voting more than once and the illegals from voting, guess those little facts escape you ignorant left lapdogs.

Anilof

My feelings exactly. I've never bought a gun WITHOUT showing my ID. But being a responsible gun owner, I only buy from responsible gun dealers.

And I show ID at my voting precinct too. I can't understand why that is such a big deal in an age of increasing identity theft.

How many times can a person vote in the same election? Just ask the woman who has been charged with voting 6 times for Obama because she wanted her vote to count.

Apparently Dottie girl you didn't hear about the republicans woman who thought the same thing as you and voted twice in the last election and was brought up on voter fraud charges.

Except for your republican friend, all the rest of the fraud was committed by hired republican voter registration groups and none by any of the voters. Even the claim of all the dead voters were proved false.

If it is true about the woman voting 6 times for President Obama, she was charged. Proving my point it is not so easy after all.

All this claim of voter fraud is the republican version of the weapons of mass destruction and they never found those either.

Except for your republican friend, all the rest of the fraud was committed by hired republican voter registration groups and none by any of the voters. Even the claim of all the dead voters were proved false

Demo-Socialist Weapon of Mass Denial.

Wooo.... you called me a name. That must make me wrong. What are you 13?

R. Scalzo

Sen. David Vitter, R- La., will offer an amendment to require photo identification for voting in federal elections

Yet if he required it to buy a firearm, everyone would be up in arms. Both protected by Constitutional amendments. Maybe the GOP can find another way to stop votors from exercising their rights.

After the voting rights act of 1965 was passed there were bus loads of people travelling south to ensure those eligible to vote got registered and did indeed vote. If photo ID was more than just a democrat talking point you lazy bums would be doing exactly the same thing.

We actually do have to show a photo ID to vote in this woo begotten state of Louisiana. Louisiana is as much under the stupidity of Faux Noise as any other southern state. Republicans are lying if they ever say they care about anyone but the wealthy. They are lying if they ever say they want laws that will protect us from guns being sold to anyone and everyone. They are lying if they say they want to protect Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid. They aren't even willing to support Head Start or the free lunches to students who come from poor families and need that food. No real Christian attitude in most republicans just the lies and evil told to them by those who hate everyone but the wealthy.

unfortunately I don't work for the fed government nor am I Geitner -- I have to pay my taxes or I get penalize and possible jail -- at the very least the IRS would make MY life a living he!! but that's because I'm middle class private sector.

DG

I am a CPA. I have seen it for 37 years.

diogenes22,

Did you read the whole article?

Some will go up and some will go down.

Lets look at the last two paragrahs:

"Health and Human Services officials say competition among insurers, as well as provisions to limit their financial risk from attracting high-cost consumers, will exert downward pressure on premiums, and point to the tax subsidies that will limit many consumers' costs.
Subsidies will be available on a sliding scale for people with incomes of up to four times the federal poverty level—currently $45,960 for a single person and $94,200 a year for a family of four. More than half of the 35 million people expected to be in the individual market by 2016 are likely to qualify for credits. People whose incomes are around the poverty level could see almost all of the cost of their insurance subsidized, while people at the upper end will get only a small discount toward their premiums."

Has your state set up the exchanges yet?

Here in MN, the health excange law was signed by our governor this week.

We are on schedule to provide affordable heath insurance for many of the uninsured in our state.

From the same article"

"The company (United Healthcare) said the estimates were driven in part by growing medical costs not directly tied to the law.

Jeff Alter, who leads UnitedHealth's employer and individual insurance business, said the numbers represented a "high-end scenario," not an average. "

@NorthstarDFL

"More than half of the 35 million people expected to be in the individual market by 2016 are likely to qualify for credits."

OK. There are 310 million people in the US, of that only 17.5 million will benefit? Meanwhile the rest of us who pay for insurance (either directly or indirectly through our employers) get screwed? And you think that's going to be a winning formula for Democrats?

"Here in MN, the health excange law was signed by our governor this week. We are on schedule to provide affordable heath insurance for many of the uninsured in our state."

While that might sound nice, look to history of State exchanges, most notably Massachusetts:

"...the state has the highest individual market premiums in the country at an average of $437 per person per month"

http://www.kff.org/healthreform/upload/8311.pdf

Premiums are going to go through the roof for most people. There will be a reaction at the ballot box.

@Re-Elect-it-pains-my-fingers-to-type-the-rest ;-)

"...the estimates were driven in part by growing medical costs not directly tied to the law."

well, from the same article...

"Both numbers included 10 percentage points tied to medical-cost inflation"

Anyone who pays their own insurance knows how bad the rate increases have been over the past few years. 10% is bad enough, but when the Insurers are saying that rates will go up 35% to 109%? Well, like I said, a bloodbath for Democrats.

Insurance rates are regulated at state levels. Those states whose governors or legislatures don't like Obama or the AHCA will allow their insurance commissioners, maybe even instruct them, to allow rates for health incurance to soar in those states. Where the governors and legislatures are indifferent or favor the AHCA premiums are likely to be held at current levels or rise as they normally would regardles but at a smaller rate.

More people will have coverage. The insurance companies can't excluede people due to pre-existing conditions and much more.

@Adler

"The insurance companies can't exclude people due to pre-existing conditions and much more."

OK. Health Insurance companies, on average, operate with a 3.5% profit margin, one of the lowest margins of any industry...

http://biz.yahoo.com/p/sum_qpmd.html

So, somehow, they're going to be picking up the costs for these more expensive patients and not pass the costs on to the other policy holders? Are you serious?

It doesn't matter whether the States regulate the premium costs or not. They will be wholly and completely justified in getting any increase that they need to cover the added cost. To claim that

"Those states whose governors or legislatures don't like Obama or the AHCA will allow their insurance commissioners, maybe even instruct them, to allow rates for health insurance to soar in those states."

Shows a willful blindness to economic facts, preparing to blame everyone except Mr. Obama and the Democrats for what is coming down the pike.

(and I haven't even mentioned the new taxes that will hit just about everyone in some way, shape or form... http://www.irs.gov/uac/Affordable-Care-Act-Tax-Provisions )

Diogenese22,

Insurance companies are just the middle men between the patient and the doctor.

They make a nice 3.5% profit is just fine.

In MN, they have to have reserves and if they raise preminums they have to prove their case. At my organization our preminum for next year did not incease one nickel. It was 0% increase. And this was with Blue Cross.

Speaking of nonsense riders ... how is this relevant to the article?

and one "beast", the car flown over to parade Obeyme around.

too bad some idiot put diesel fuel in a limo designed to use gas...

John-1802062

Speaking of nonsense riders ... how is this relevant to the article

Not a fan of critical commentary I see. The relevance is that while the POTUS is orchestrating his royal tour with 600 tag-alongs, Harry Reid is running a daycare back in the Senate Chamber.

600?

That's a lot of party.

There are approximately 600 people in Obama's travel party to the Middle East.

So!

Do you expect him to travel alone? No one to carry the "football"? No secret service? No media to report what is happening? No aides? Anyone of his importance will have a large enterage. If Romney had won the election and was making the same trip he is likely to have the same or close to the same number of people traveling with him.

and one "beast", the car flown over to parade Obeyme around.

too bad some idiot put diesel fuel in a limo designed to use gas...

The presidential limo offers safety where vehicles supplied by other nations might not. It has all the communication gear too so the president can be in touch with the White House at all times. No matter who the president is that would not change.

Presumably this nonsense practice has been going on for years. This is also hardly the first time a US president has traveled to Israel. I'm wondering if you looked up the the personnel and security that went on those trips. Either way if the POTUS had stayed and told the legislative circus they shouldn't be doing this everybody would cry dictator. Either way it's irrelevant.

Adler.

600 seems like quite a large party.

If you can give me a manifest of the names and their reasons for being there, I will accept your self-righteous indignation as informed about the situation.

Even at that, I respect your right to your sycophantic opinion about the need for 600 "accompanyists" even if it is extremely decadent.

Your condescending insult is no less detectable when you attempt to mask it with some BS about you thinking like a conservative in a past life.

Thinking and bulletman do not belong in the same post.

Well,If you actually said anything that mattered,I might Think more of everything you say is a
Iie.

If the McCain of 2000 ran in 2008 he would be sitting in the whitehouse. Instead he came with version 2.0 and sunk the final nail with his VP pick.

Instead he came with version 2.0 and sunk the final nail with his VP pick

Yes, the failed Palin patch for the V2.0.

If you think John McCain is a conservative, even in 2000, then you have no idea how conservatives think. McCain is a liberal Republican long past his usefulness to our nation. Not trying to be disrespectful to the man but he, along with a few others, are the argument for the repeal of the seventeenth amendment.

Start a petition in your area today. Bring sanity back to the senate the way our founder's intended.

The seventeenth amendment happened because of the need for reform that enough leaders recognized to actually pass the seventeenth amendment into law. The founders could not possible foresee all problems.

But hey bringing back the original bad ideals is now sanity for all the forward thinking republicans trying to bring America to the dark ages.

McCain nailed Sarah Palin??

Yes they have been dumbed down by republican stupidity and they are gullible for the lies and for the hate. So easy to hate everyone who just needs some help and education so that they can stand on their own.

yah, why would you talk about the past with a nominee? So crazy.

You wouldn't want to review any of his past record, you would just want him to tell you what he wants to do in the future, with no way of knowing if any of it's true.

Great point. Solid thinking.

President Obama Job Approval

Average of 8 national polls

RCP Average
3/4 - 3/21
Approve
48.0
Disapprove 47.4
+0.6

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html

Rasmussen is a conservative leaning poll.

Begich

Who,are the dead beats?

We just put 94% of them back into office. We do this over and over again, year after year.It's almost impossible to get an incumbent out of office. They have the money, the lobbyists, corporations. What we don't have is well educated voters.

Tha games began when Odumbass was elected. Aren't you tiring of the circus yet?