Eh. The “6 for '06” proposals aren’t all that controversial, and the ones they’ve pushed thru so far got plenty of votes from the Republicans. Let’s give the Dems a few months to establish a track record and see how things work out. I just don’t see it as that big a deal that the Dems wanted to get their key agenda items voted on quickly. If there’s anything the Republicans have major heartburn over, Bush can veto it. Personally, I’m loving this whole divided government thing.
Quit being a douche.
If one of the biggest complaints from the left the last few years wasn’t, "the pubbies won’t play nice 
", then I’m Uncle Fester’s reincarnate.
All the OP is saying is, “Now that you guys have the power let’s see if you’ll play by the rules you claim the right should have been playing by this whole time.”
Simple really.
Sorry, I’m just frustrated that posters will get all up-in-arms over what the other side does, but when it appears that their guys are about to do the same things, it suddenly becomes alright. Of course that’s human nature, but I though most of the posters here were above that.
(BTW, I think the dems should ram it down the pubbies throats and vice versa. They don’t play nice together and it’s the only way to get the majority party’s ideas implemented. So no, I’m not bitter, I just think both sides ought to acknowledge this and quit pussy-footin’ around.)
In a sense, this boils down my whole OP. As I’ve stated previously in other threads, politics in the US are more about cheering on your team like in sports, not about what is “good” for the country.
Every argument we’ve seen in the Pit and GD over the past few years are about to be revived. It’s just that the party in question will be Dem instead of GOP, and vice versa.
Did you even read what you quoted? Specifically, “How about waiting to see how much the Democrats actually do abuse their power before damning them, hmmm?”
If, over the next few months, we consistently see the kind of shenanigans that the Republicans were famous for (holding open floor votes, holding secret committee meetings, keeping the contents of bills secret until the eleventh hour, improperly terminating debates) then I will join with you in decrying the bully-boy tactics of the Democrats.
But merely being partisan is not abusing power. And pretending that the Democrats are acting in bad faith from the get-go merely because they are aggressively advancing their agenda is disingenuous. The Democrats didn’t get elected because they promised to play nice with the Republicans. The Democrats got elected because they promised to fix what the Republicans had broken.
I rarely do this, but this deserves to be repeated, and you all really need to check the cartoon **Bosda Di’Chi of Tricor ** linked to.
You’re wrong. There’s a real difference between the Democrats and the Republicans. If the Democrats had controlled the government over the last 6 years would we be running record deficits? Would we be mired in Iraq? Would the prescription drug plan be such a fuck-up? Would New Orleans have been left to rot?
More Democrats in power and fewer Republicans is good for the country. More Democratic legislation passed and less Republican legislation passed is good for the country. Pretending there isn’t a difference is rubbish.
Yes, thanks, that’s why I followed up with the second post right away - to clarify.
Don’t cut the dems short, they held their ground pretty well. Minority?, sometimes I wonder if being the minority in congress doesn’t come with (greater) benefits.
Then you say that.
All that is is a set-up for future rationalisations. From now on you’ll simply say that the dems were right all along and that they should do whatever they possibly can to make things right again, even if that means playing unfairly, or nastily, or whatever the right was accused of.
Hard to say, but probably not.
Eventually, yes.
Probably.
Name one act the pubbies shot down where the dems had such chance at righting that ship?
Sure, for now. Then we’ll have to re-distribute the weight back to the port side (God, I wish there was a third choice…) again, otherwise all the Rum will spill into the ocean.
Bullshit. The Dems were elected on a promise to work with the “opposition” to work for the good of the “American People.”
Shutting them out may be what they see as payback for slights over the last 12 years. It doesn’t do a lot for the country.
If the Dems want to restore civility, more power to them. But you know damn well that ain’t gonna happen. It’s going to be more of the same, with a different party in power.
If you want to delude yourself, go for it.
Keep in mind, the GOP has had 12 years of studying the Dem’s gameplan while out of power to counter-attack.
Hope you enjoyed the high horse. It isn’t going to get any better. Unfortunately.
There’s a difference.
I don’t agree at all that the Democrats’ ideas are better. I believe that the Republicans are the better choice for steering the country.
But – at least for the next two years – the Democrats have their chance to steer; the people have spoken. I expect them do what they can to further their agenda… why shouldn’t they?
Yeah right, the democrat’s hearings on the Downing street memos and other items on the Iraq war sure were noticed or useful with no subpoena powers.
:rolleyes:
I need to tell myself that indeed one has to hate the bullshit not the bullshitter.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/11/08/politics/main2161309.shtml
Thankyou, exactly.
Example;
If a Chief Justice needs to be appointed let the ruling party give 'er. As long as he/she aint a total whack job, that is. Not every damned appointee needs to be a moderate for cripes sake!!
Keep those numbers handy, you might need them again in a few years. Just switch the parties around.
Nope. We’d have Viet Nam, double digit inflation, oil crises. 40 years of Democratic Congresses (with occasional Democratic Presidents) to take care of that pesky prescription drug annoyance.
A Democrat in charge of New Orleans responsible for the known hurricane risk, a Democrat governor responsible for state emergencies. You think it’s reasonable to blame someone in Washington for what the local government should have done?
They were elected to manage the local stuff. Washington (Bush could have done better), is not the first line of help. The Federal government is the last line of defense to protect people.
Where was Congress over the last 20 years to help out with dikes and flood mitigation? Where was the President over the last 20 years to help out with known flaws?
Why are the Pols in LA given a pass when they were elected to help protect citizens from such a massive disaster?
Why is Clinton (you’re blaming the President for a natural disaster) given a pass on the flood of '97 in Grand Forks? The flood that allowed Al Gore to stand in a hanger at the GFAFB preaching Global Warming to displaced residents as the cause of the flood? Nice posturing.
Guess what? Not a single lost life. Know why? Yes, you do. It’s because our local government was prepared for such a rare occurance and mobilized.
Our small town hick government prevented a single death, while the big time leaders of a city that knew a hurricane was likely to destroy much of the city sat on their asses and decided to deflect blame to those they thought should save them from themselves.
Yep. Democrats have the magic bullet. Good luck with that.
And when you grow up, maybe you’ll understand that neither party is the cure. It comes down to locality and your leadership.
And I do believe that on the whole no party in control of all branches of power is a good choice. It is only when they have the power to be on each other’s toes that the country can have the hope to get a responsible government.
The eternal vigilance of the people is needed today more than ever.
You are confusing me with someone else.
So, the Democrats take Congress back after 12 years out of power and after 6 years in which the Republican majority do everything they can to keep the Democrats utterly impotent. Refusing to allow democrats to offer amendments, using loaded conference committees to rewrite legislation as they saw fit, holding votes open until they can strong arm reluctant members of their own party to sign onto the leaderships bills, rewriting congressional documents to mock the democrats.
The new Speaker of the House announces that the Democrats, will, in fact, restore the old school of operating Congress- where even the eeee-vil opposition can participate in government.
But, the democrats will pass their first 100 hours of legislation first.
I guess they are just as bad.
Why is that?