Remember Dems had control of the White House and Congress for two years. What did they do? They passed Obamacare and didn’t give a thought to jobs. Remember Obama’s first address to congress in 2009 promising to focus on jobs? How many times did Obama claim he was going to “pivot” to jobs? Did they care about the suffering caused?
No, they didn’t. They need 60 votes to control the Senate, and I think they had that for about two months.
Oh, so the GOP had control of the Senate? Got it. I wonder why they made Harry Reid their Majority leader? :rolleyes:
Yes, the Republicans controlled the Senate by the childish use of the filibuster. Don’t pretend otherwise.
The Senate is not controlled by the majority party.
The word you are looking for is supermajority. Dems had it for almost 5 months. What did they do with it? Oh yeah, they crammed Obamacare down our throats.
The use of the filibuster is hardly controlling the Senate. Don’t pretend otherwise.
Obama may have a D after his name but he governs like a Reagan Republican. He clearly does not care about jobs or the middle class. Sorry, it’s true. That said, his benign indifference beats the hell out of the active malignance of current Republicans toward the middle class.
Gee, that’s practically two years. :rolleyes:
Ummm…I said control, not supermajority. Supermajority seems to be your definition of control.
Not with Kennedy on sick leave, and Lieberman being Lieberman, they didn’t.
What’s with the obsession about having things crammed down your throat?
If it can be used to defeat anything, then yes, it is. By what reasoning do you arrive at any other conclusion?
Your definition of control seems to be a super majority as well, since you are holding Democrats responsible for not doing anything but Obamacare for two years. Without a super majority, nothing gets done. That is the very meaning of no control.
If it takes a supermajority to get anything done, then how is it not a good definition?
I think they could have been more productive had they not tried so desperately to get Obamacare passed. Maybe they could have done something that Democrats consider good for the economy.
No, the Republicans held the stimulus hostage.
Let’s not pretend that “Obamacare”, as you like to put it, was the reason for the Republican resistance. Obama was the real reason, and any programs pushed forward by this administration would have produced the same result. If the administration had focused on the economy the Republicans would have labeled it something stupid like “Obamaconomy” and we’d be having the same partisan politicking.
Well, if supermajority is the new control then why care who has the majority in the Senate? The majority can do a lot more than the minority party when it comes to setting the agenda, delaying or burying legislation, refusing to take votes on particular matters, etc.
Let’s not forget that majority leader Reid refused to change the rules concerning filibusters in this new Congress. I wonder why? I guess you have only one man to blame for giving “control” of the Senate to the Republicans.
I didn’t even come close to claiming that Obamacare is the reason for Republican resistance. I said they wasted valuable time pushing it through while neglecting the economy. The Dems wasted their supermajority on Obamacare and lost their supermajority because of Obamacare.
I could have sworn we passed a stimulus bill.
We did, by vote of 61 to 37, with three Republican votes. If it had be high enough to make a difference, Republicans threatened to withdraw support. It should have been three times as large.
Sigh…The stimulus didn’t do shit and 3X more stimulus would have done 3X more shit. And just imagine how high the budget baseline would be…an additional 2 trillion per year.
I was thinking that, since the stimulus has not been removed from the baseline, we have, in fact, spent 3x the total stimulus. So, you got your wish after all. And the economy is still in the shitter.