[B]You can maintain anything you want. It doesn't make it true however.
I really don't see any point going the very points we've been arguing about for over a year now. Why don't I like Bush? As if I haven't gone over it in triplicate already.
He's clueless about the economy ( even some Greenspan has doubts about his approach ).
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
Even Greespan has doubts! wow these are really good democratic facts. And just because bush is foolish ebough to think that tax cuts will help the economy does not mean he is clueless. Or are all views other than your own clueless.
He started a war without real provacation.
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
remember 911, the other gulf war, I could go on but, you just choose to disbelieve everything your own gov tells you. I guess you opt top believe France, China, Russa and Germany because they are more moral and honest than us.
The fact that they seem to be having such a hard time finding WOMD proves that the supposed threat was way over blown at best. And SDW this means he lied about their " proof ' that Saddam had WOMD. If they had proof where are they? They should have been easy to find.
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
for 13 years Saddam has been hiding WOMD from the UN and everybody. He has taken great care to perfect this artform. why would you think that we would trip over them. the first thing any criminal does before he is cought is to hide the evidence. Its a desert. If I bury missles in the sand how long would it take you to find tyhem?
Most Bush supporters realize that now so they say " it doesn't matter. It was just good enough to get rid of Saddam. Forget our original reasons. "
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
I have not said that and i have never heard anybody say that, please do not put words in most bush supporters mouths. What many do say is that he had them. and that he hid them or they were blown up. But they will be found.
I could go on but what's the point? I don't even like his quasi religious good ol' boy approach!
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
I do not know. are you able to hear an opposing view as a fact or is everything that you dissagree with propaganda
You could present your list but who would believe you? After all your crazy ramblings only desperate Bush supporters.
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
yep, us desperate bush supporters are more than 70% of the country and growing thanks to arguments backed up by facts like yours
Come on! Tell us about the criminal liberal media again!
This really happened. Did you not hear about it? They literally hid out (and I think they are still there). I think the quorum was 100, too.
It's pretty ridiculous...but true!
Of course, but I don't think I need to point out the absurd errors in the paragraph I quoted.
It is ridiculous what the Democrats did, but there is some context:
1. What the Texas Republicans are doing is unprecedented in terms of the conditions under which they want to redistrict. What the Democrats are doing seems pretty weird, and of course it's what the "liberal media" are focused on, but the Republicans engaged in some pretty bad shenanigans to elicit this extreme response.
2. The Texas redistricting legislation is being directed by Tom Delay, a national Republican, rather than local Republicans. I'm sure Texans, if they're like all the other states right now, have their own local issues to worry about that don't involve helping federal congressional Republicans maintain their majority.
3. They apparently requested the Department of Homeland Security - you know, the folks who are supposed to be tracking down terrorists - to track down the Democrats. Is that outrageous? Maybe they were confused by the fact that Texas Republicans have been calling the Democrats terrorists, and even made out Ba'ath-party-style playing cards of them.
And the most important thing:
4. What the **** kind of a democratic system is it in which legislators can be arrested for refusing to show up to vote on a bill? Doesn't that sound more like something you'd hear about happening in Cuba or China?
4. What the **** kind of a democratic system is it in which legislators can be arrested for refusing to show up to vote on a bill? Doesn't that sound more like something you'd hear about happening in Cuba or China?
....brush up on Texas government history---this episode is not unique. Texas history is a real hoot.
1. What the Texas Republicans are doing is unprecedented in terms of the conditions under which they want to redistrict. What the Democrats are doing seems pretty weird, and of course it's what the "liberal media" are focused on, but the Republicans engaged in some pretty bad shenanigans to elicit this extreme response.
Well, it's not *quite* unprecedented. But you have to go back to the 19th century to find one.
Quote:
3. They apparently requested the Department of Homeland Security - you know, the folks who are supposed to be tracking down terrorists - to track down the Democrats. Is that outrageous? Maybe they were confused by the fact that Texas Republicans have been calling the Democrats terrorists, and even made out Ba'ath-party-style playing cards of them.
I don't know what's more disturbing about this: that they OHS was involved, or that they failed to find the plane they were looking for.
Quote:
And the most important thing:
4. What the **** kind of a democratic system is it in which legislators can be arrested for refusing to show up to vote on a bill? Doesn't that sound more like something you'd hear about happening in Cuba or China?
There's apparently some provision in TX that allows the speaker to have "delinquent" legislators arrested and brought back to congress. Go figure.
Don't get me wrong here. I think that what these Dems have done is fantastic. They're doing the only thing they can at this point to stop DeLay's plans for all but eradicating them at the state level.
But you're exactly right about the rhetoric coming from the TX speaker. You'd think they'll call anyone a terrorist these days.
Please show me the LAW that says it is illegal for the President to have an intern perform oral sex on him in the oval office. [/B]
how about he is MARRIED!!!! The left is trying to convince everybody that BUSH is AWOL because he had an honerable Discharge and you are going to stand there and tell me that it is fine and dandy for a married man to have sex with his interns
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
Clinton was impeached for lying about whether or not he'd had sexual relations with Lewinsky. In a deposition about a land deal. They couldn't stick the land deal, and so they went after his relationship with Lewinsky.
[/B]
Your funny the left gets so much milage with there PC rederic
. Lets call a spade a spade. His relationship was an affair
and its not that he was impeached for lying about whether or not he lied about having sexual relations. He did lie there is no doubt about it anywhere. He said on tv that he did not have sexual relations and then later after it was proven that he did it he admitted to it.
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
You analogy doesn't work, since he would be the boss(are you sure). He's going to fire himself? For having an affair? For engaging in consensual sex acts between two adults?
[/B]
remember the part about being fired or going to court? and again it is not consensual unless Miss Clinton is involved.
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
Please show me where in the constitution it says that the president has to have "moral values"? And who determines what those are? Is there some measure I'm not aware of?
[/B]
you are really really funny. Democratic campaign strategy is largely about attacking an opponet morally. they rarely debate issues. for crying out loud, Dems have brought up a DUI that bush got when he was in college. It is typical that you say this. because dems seem to critizse others for things that are non issues when it happens to their own
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
The one real danger of this tactic I'm hearing from the right--to claim the left has no policy--is particularly dangerous, since there's a powerful argument to be made that the current admin doesn't have any policy either. [/B]
4. What the **** kind of a democratic system is it in which legislators can be arrested for refusing to show up to vote on a bill? Doesn't that sound more like something you'd hear about happening in Cuba or China?
how about because its the LAW. they are breaking the law. they are supossed to show up to vote by LAW. they know this which is why they left the state. It is the job of a legislator to vote on bills. I do not know about you but i would be pissed if my tax dollars were being spent so that 58 democrats could enjoy a first holiday inn vacation. they are crippling the whole system just because the vote is not going to go their way. they are going to sit it out untill it is too late to vote it in. They are going against the voters because they only care about their own agenda. majority vote is supposed to rule. and yes i am also mad that this is costing money for police and everything.
and I do not know why i am surprised that you are defending them for this. Can a dem do no wrong in your eyes.
To compare someone lying about who they had sex with with someone lying about the reason to start a war is simply beyond any reason.
Bush defence: "Yes I may have lied to the american people and in the UN security council to be able to start the war. But at least when I say I have never cheated on Barbara Bush it is the truth." ***Applaus***
I would say Democrats are in denial over tax cuts.
The focus by democrats to focus on richer americans who get tax cut benefits in greater ratio as they pay in a higher rate in the first place. That is class politics and I hope the democrats play it to death as it will do them in once and for all.
I would submit the Treasury can issue bonds at a lower interest rate thus less "cost of money" than if average americans got back let's say $2,000.
If average americans get a tax cut of $2,000 and let's say they pay off high interest credit card debt to the tune of 20% that saves them $400 a year of interest. To me this adds value to the economy.
The democrats on the one hand think it is bad if the government has debt. But if individual citizens were to realize a tax cut and be able to pay off $2,000 of debt do the democrats turn a blind eye to that?
I think they do exactly that. And in the mean time they play the class card to smear past it with dumbed down americans who would entertain the class card.
Again to issue tax cuts would stimulate the economy to a greater level than if nothing is done. Be it that some citizens spend the money or pay off high interest credit card debt it is a plus for the country. So what if the country issues more treasury bonds that cost the government very little in terms of interest rate "cost of money" it is better for the individuals to take care of their individual situations.
So democrats think in the Macro "Government" it is good to lower debt. And of course it is... But in the Micro "individuals" paying off high interest credit card debt and or spending in the marketplace the democrats turn a blind eye.
Yet another reason I do not care for democrats and their "Government does it better than individuals" combined with the "class card" tactics they put forward.
It is tired and worn out and I believe future elections will show this clearly.
how about because its the LAW. they are breaking the law. they are supossed to show up to vote by LAW.
I'm glad you understand my point. That particular law would make the Ba'ath party proud.
Quote:
they know this which is why they left the state.
Oh, I see. It's all coming together for me now.
Quote:
It is the job of a legislator to vote on bills.
Right. And it is the job of the Office of Homeland Security to track them down if they don't.
Quote:
I do not know about you but i would be pissed if my tax dollars were being spent so that 58 democrats could enjoy a first holiday inn vacation.
Tax dollars aren't paying for them. And I believe all Democrats deserve a good vacation.
Quote:
they are crippling the whole system just because the vote is not going to go their way. they are going to sit it out untill it is too late to vote it in.
Oh, OK. Now I understand. This was just way too complex for me until your appreciation of the nuances of this situation, and your ability to boil it down into simple declarative statements, just put it all together for me.
Quote:
They are going against the voters because they only care about their own agenda.
Their constituents don't want this law passed. How are they going against them? And they have no duty to the other legislator's constituents.
Quote:
majority vote is supposed to rule.
No it's not. And the Texas legislature's rules are absurd. They either should give them the power to stop legislation without being arrested or they should take away their power to stop legislation in this fashion.
Quote:
and yes i am also mad that this is costing money for police and everything.
Me too. So why did the Republicans call them? And why did DeLay try to get the FBI involved?
Quote:
and I do not know why i am surprised that you are defending them for this. Can a dem do no wrong in your eyes.
Of course they can do wrong. Why the hell did they go to Oklahoma. I would've gone to New Orleans.
Their constituents don't want this law passed. How are they going against them? And they have no duty to the other legislator's constituents. No it's not. And the Texas legislature's rules are absurd. They either should give them the power to stop legislation without being arrested or they should take away their power to stop legislation in this fashion. Me too. So why did the Republicans call them? And why did DeLay try to get the FBI involved?Of course they can do wrong. Why the hell did they go to Oklahoma. I would've gone to New Orleans.
BRussell,
I will say that no one should have the power to stop legislation from being voted on just because they know they are going to lose.
Why have these various FEDERAL agencies been contacted about this? Because Texas cannot enforce it's laws in other states.
Oklahoma, I agree go someplace else.
California has been redistricted much like this. It is now overwhelmingly Democratic and has districts drawn in a manner that would make any abstract artist proud.
In matters related to both California and Texas, I wish there was some way to draw the district maps nationwide so that races would be competitive again.
I will say that no one should have the power to stop legislation from being voted on just because they know they are going to lose.
Well no ONE has that power. It takes many. Just like it takes many to pass the law in the first place. It's a filibuster, that's all, nothing more.
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
Why have these various FEDERAL agencies been contacted about this? Because Texas cannot enforce it's laws in other states.
But the Feds can enforce TEXAS law in other states? How is that even conscionable to the conservatives around here? Oklahoma has every right to let people hang out at a Holiday Inn. They've broken no federal laws. If any conservative/republican around here tries to say the Feds should be involved your credibility is crap.
Well no ONE has that power. It takes many. Just like it takes many to pass the law in the first place. It's a filibuster, that's all, nothing more.
But the Feds can enforce TEXAS law in other states? How is that even conscionable to the conservatives around here? Oklahoma has every right to let people hang out at a Holiday Inn. They've broken no federal laws. If any conservative/republican around here tries to say the Feds should be involved your credibility is crap.
I didn't say it was conscionable. It was asked why they contacted federal agencies. Disputes that cross state lines have to be handled by the federal government. Did the federal government drag them back there? No.
As for being a filibuster, I don't believe this involved a senate type body. The only way they were stopping action was by not having a quorum present.
As it was they accomplished their aim (the Democrats) and life is back to normal (for now.) It will be interesting to see if the Republicans do any patented California Democratic moves in a last minute attempt to bring this about again. Things like stripping all the language out of a bill and throwing in the redistricting language, etc.
Again I think in the future we need something impartial to assign congressional districts. Though I haven't thought of what that could be.
Disputes that cross state lines have to be handled by the federal government. Did the federal government drag them back there? No.
The federal gov't doesn't have to get involved, though. In a clearly local political dispute like this, I still find it pretty amazing that federal Congressional Republicans would want to involve the FBI or the Department of Homeland Security. Don't you? And now the Feds are saying that basically the Texas Republicans tricked them into believing the plane was "lost," as in crashed, so they would get invovled.
To compare someone lying about who they had sex with with someone lying about the reason to start a war is simply beyond any reason.
Bush defence: "Yes I may have lied to the american people and in the UN security council to be able to start the war. But at least when I say I have never cheated on Barbara Bush it is the truth." ***Applaus***
You state wild and unproven accuasations as if they are facts and think you are making a point
I'm glad you understand my point. That particular law would make the Ba'ath party proud.Oh, I see. It's all coming together for me now.Right. And it is the job of the Office of Homeland Security to track them down if they don't.Tax dollars aren't paying for them. And I believe all Democrats deserve a good vacation.Oh, OK. Now I understand. This was just way too complex for me until your appreciation of the nuances of this situation, and your ability to boil it down into simple declarative statements, just put it all together for me.Their constituents don't want this law passed. How are they going against them? And they have no duty to the other legislator's constituents.No it's not. And the Texas legislature's rules are absurd. They either should give them the power to stop legislation without being arrested or they should take away their power to stop legislation in this fashion.Me too. So why did the Republicans call them? And why did DeLay try to get the FBI involved?Of course they can do wrong. Why the hell did they go to Oklahoma. I would've gone to New Orleans.
well you obviously understand the situation and approve of the democratic party going around the law to get there way.
it is very sad to me that they can get away with this. The systems is designed to work and one should not be able to affect the ruling of laws through illeagle means.
California has been redistricted much like this. It is now overwhelmingly Democratic and has districts drawn in a manner that would make any abstract artist proud.
YEs, and now California and californians are going broke. this state is in serious trouble business is dieing
The government isn't a business and shouldn't be run as one. Anyone who thinks it should has no business being anywhere near the government.
the government should know how to get value for a buck.
fireing policeman and paying 25 thousand dollars for a speaker for one day is bad biz practice. and if the economy is not treated as a biz the budget will never balance
Comments
[B]You can maintain anything you want. It doesn't make it true however.
I really don't see any point going the very points we've been arguing about for over a year now. Why don't I like Bush? As if I haven't gone over it in triplicate already.
He's clueless about the economy ( even some Greenspan has doubts about his approach ).
Originally posted by jimmac
Even Greespan has doubts! wow these are really good democratic facts. And just because bush is foolish ebough to think that tax cuts will help the economy does not mean he is clueless. Or are all views other than your own clueless.
He started a war without real provacation.
Originally posted by jimmac
remember 911, the other gulf war, I could go on but, you just choose to disbelieve everything your own gov tells you. I guess you opt top believe France, China, Russa and Germany because they are more moral and honest than us.
The fact that they seem to be having such a hard time finding WOMD proves that the supposed threat was way over blown at best. And SDW this means he lied about their " proof ' that Saddam had WOMD. If they had proof where are they? They should have been easy to find.
Originally posted by jimmac
for 13 years Saddam has been hiding WOMD from the UN and everybody. He has taken great care to perfect this artform. why would you think that we would trip over them. the first thing any criminal does before he is cought is to hide the evidence. Its a desert. If I bury missles in the sand how long would it take you to find tyhem?
Most Bush supporters realize that now so they say " it doesn't matter. It was just good enough to get rid of Saddam. Forget our original reasons. "
Originally posted by jimmac
I have not said that and i have never heard anybody say that, please do not put words in most bush supporters mouths. What many do say is that he had them. and that he hid them or they were blown up. But they will be found.
I could go on but what's the point? I don't even like his quasi religious good ol' boy approach!
Originally posted by jimmac
I do not know. are you able to hear an opposing view as a fact or is everything that you dissagree with propaganda
You could present your list but who would believe you? After all your crazy ramblings only desperate Bush supporters.
Originally posted by jimmac
yep, us desperate bush supporters are more than 70% of the country and growing thanks to arguments backed up by facts like yours
Come on! Tell us about the criminal liberal media again!
Originally posted by jimmac
your doing fine without my help
Originally posted by SDW2001
^
This really happened. Did you not hear about it? They literally hid out (and I think they are still there). I think the quorum was 100, too.
It's pretty ridiculous...but true!
Of course, but I don't think I need to point out the absurd errors in the paragraph I quoted.
It is ridiculous what the Democrats did, but there is some context:
1. What the Texas Republicans are doing is unprecedented in terms of the conditions under which they want to redistrict. What the Democrats are doing seems pretty weird, and of course it's what the "liberal media" are focused on, but the Republicans engaged in some pretty bad shenanigans to elicit this extreme response.
2. The Texas redistricting legislation is being directed by Tom Delay, a national Republican, rather than local Republicans. I'm sure Texans, if they're like all the other states right now, have their own local issues to worry about that don't involve helping federal congressional Republicans maintain their majority.
3. They apparently requested the Department of Homeland Security - you know, the folks who are supposed to be tracking down terrorists - to track down the Democrats. Is that outrageous? Maybe they were confused by the fact that Texas Republicans have been calling the Democrats terrorists, and even made out Ba'ath-party-style playing cards of them.
And the most important thing:
4. What the **** kind of a democratic system is it in which legislators can be arrested for refusing to show up to vote on a bill? Doesn't that sound more like something you'd hear about happening in Cuba or China?
Originally posted by BRussell
4. What the **** kind of a democratic system is it in which legislators can be arrested for refusing to show up to vote on a bill? Doesn't that sound more like something you'd hear about happening in Cuba or China?
....brush up on Texas government history---this episode is not unique. Texas history is a real hoot.
1. What the Texas Republicans are doing is unprecedented in terms of the conditions under which they want to redistrict. What the Democrats are doing seems pretty weird, and of course it's what the "liberal media" are focused on, but the Republicans engaged in some pretty bad shenanigans to elicit this extreme response.
Well, it's not *quite* unprecedented. But you have to go back to the 19th century to find one.
3. They apparently requested the Department of Homeland Security - you know, the folks who are supposed to be tracking down terrorists - to track down the Democrats. Is that outrageous? Maybe they were confused by the fact that Texas Republicans have been calling the Democrats terrorists, and even made out Ba'ath-party-style playing cards of them.
I don't know what's more disturbing about this: that they OHS was involved, or that they failed to find the plane they were looking for.
And the most important thing:
4. What the **** kind of a democratic system is it in which legislators can be arrested for refusing to show up to vote on a bill? Doesn't that sound more like something you'd hear about happening in Cuba or China?
There's apparently some provision in TX that allows the speaker to have "delinquent" legislators arrested and brought back to congress. Go figure.
Don't get me wrong here. I think that what these Dems have done is fantastic. They're doing the only thing they can at this point to stop DeLay's plans for all but eradicating them at the state level.
But you're exactly right about the rhetoric coming from the TX speaker. You'd think they'll call anyone a terrorist these days.
Cheers
Scott
Originally posted by midwinter
Please show me the LAW that says it is illegal for the President to have an intern perform oral sex on him in the oval office. [/B]
how about he is MARRIED!!!! The left is trying to convince everybody that BUSH is AWOL because he had an honerable Discharge and you are going to stand there and tell me that it is fine and dandy for a married man to have sex with his interns
Originally posted by midwinter
Clinton was impeached for lying about whether or not he'd had sexual relations with Lewinsky. In a deposition about a land deal. They couldn't stick the land deal, and so they went after his relationship with Lewinsky.
[/B]
Your funny the left gets so much milage with there PC rederic
. Lets call a spade a spade. His relationship was an affair
and its not that he was impeached for lying about whether or not he lied about having sexual relations. He did lie there is no doubt about it anywhere. He said on tv that he did not have sexual relations and then later after it was proven that he did it he admitted to it.
Originally posted by midwinter
You analogy doesn't work, since he would be the boss(are you sure). He's going to fire himself? For having an affair? For engaging in consensual sex acts between two adults?
[/B]
remember the part about being fired or going to court? and again it is not consensual unless Miss Clinton is involved.
Originally posted by midwinter
Please show me where in the constitution it says that the president has to have "moral values"? And who determines what those are? Is there some measure I'm not aware of?
[/B]
you are really really funny. Democratic campaign strategy is largely about attacking an opponet morally. they rarely debate issues. for crying out loud, Dems have brought up a DUI that bush got when he was in college. It is typical that you say this. because dems seem to critizse others for things that are non issues when it happens to their own
Originally posted by midwinter
The one real danger of this tactic I'm hearing from the right--to claim the left has no policy--is particularly dangerous, since there's a powerful argument to be made that the current admin doesn't have any policy either. [/B]
you mean no policy you agree with
Amazing.
Originally posted by BRussell
4. What the **** kind of a democratic system is it in which legislators can be arrested for refusing to show up to vote on a bill? Doesn't that sound more like something you'd hear about happening in Cuba or China?
how about because its the LAW. they are breaking the law. they are supossed to show up to vote by LAW. they know this which is why they left the state. It is the job of a legislator to vote on bills. I do not know about you but i would be pissed if my tax dollars were being spent so that 58 democrats could enjoy a first holiday inn vacation. they are crippling the whole system just because the vote is not going to go their way. they are going to sit it out untill it is too late to vote it in. They are going against the voters because they only care about their own agenda. majority vote is supposed to rule. and yes i am also mad that this is costing money for police and everything.
and I do not know why i am surprised that you are defending them for this. Can a dem do no wrong in your eyes.
Bush defence: "Yes I may have lied to the american people and in the UN security council to be able to start the war. But at least when I say I have never cheated on Barbara Bush it is the truth." ***Applaus***
The focus by democrats to focus on richer americans who get tax cut benefits in greater ratio as they pay in a higher rate in the first place. That is class politics and I hope the democrats play it to death as it will do them in once and for all.
I would submit the Treasury can issue bonds at a lower interest rate thus less "cost of money" than if average americans got back let's say $2,000.
If average americans get a tax cut of $2,000 and let's say they pay off high interest credit card debt to the tune of 20% that saves them $400 a year of interest. To me this adds value to the economy.
The democrats on the one hand think it is bad if the government has debt. But if individual citizens were to realize a tax cut and be able to pay off $2,000 of debt do the democrats turn a blind eye to that?
I think they do exactly that. And in the mean time they play the class card to smear past it with dumbed down americans who would entertain the class card.
Again to issue tax cuts would stimulate the economy to a greater level than if nothing is done. Be it that some citizens spend the money or pay off high interest credit card debt it is a plus for the country. So what if the country issues more treasury bonds that cost the government very little in terms of interest rate "cost of money" it is better for the individuals to take care of their individual situations.
So democrats think in the Macro "Government" it is good to lower debt. And of course it is... But in the Micro "individuals" paying off high interest credit card debt and or spending in the marketplace the democrats turn a blind eye.
Yet another reason I do not care for democrats and their "Government does it better than individuals" combined with the "class card" tactics they put forward.
It is tired and worn out and I believe future elections will show this clearly.
Fellowship
Originally posted by JC
how about because its the LAW. they are breaking the law. they are supossed to show up to vote by LAW.
I'm glad you understand my point. That particular law would make the Ba'ath party proud.
they know this which is why they left the state.
Oh, I see. It's all coming together for me now.
It is the job of a legislator to vote on bills.
Right. And it is the job of the Office of Homeland Security to track them down if they don't.
I do not know about you but i would be pissed if my tax dollars were being spent so that 58 democrats could enjoy a first holiday inn vacation.
Tax dollars aren't paying for them. And I believe all Democrats deserve a good vacation.
they are crippling the whole system just because the vote is not going to go their way. they are going to sit it out untill it is too late to vote it in.
Oh, OK. Now I understand. This was just way too complex for me until your appreciation of the nuances of this situation, and your ability to boil it down into simple declarative statements, just put it all together for me.
They are going against the voters because they only care about their own agenda.
Their constituents don't want this law passed. How are they going against them? And they have no duty to the other legislator's constituents.
majority vote is supposed to rule.
No it's not. And the Texas legislature's rules are absurd. They either should give them the power to stop legislation without being arrested or they should take away their power to stop legislation in this fashion.
and yes i am also mad that this is costing money for police and everything.
Me too. So why did the Republicans call them? And why did DeLay try to get the FBI involved?
and I do not know why i am surprised that you are defending them for this. Can a dem do no wrong in your eyes.
Of course they can do wrong. Why the hell did they go to Oklahoma. I would've gone to New Orleans.
Originally posted by BRussell
Their constituents don't want this law passed. How are they going against them? And they have no duty to the other legislator's constituents. No it's not. And the Texas legislature's rules are absurd. They either should give them the power to stop legislation without being arrested or they should take away their power to stop legislation in this fashion. Me too. So why did the Republicans call them? And why did DeLay try to get the FBI involved?Of course they can do wrong. Why the hell did they go to Oklahoma. I would've gone to New Orleans.
BRussell,
I will say that no one should have the power to stop legislation from being voted on just because they know they are going to lose.
Why have these various FEDERAL agencies been contacted about this? Because Texas cannot enforce it's laws in other states.
Oklahoma, I agree go someplace else.
California has been redistricted much like this. It is now overwhelmingly Democratic and has districts drawn in a manner that would make any abstract artist proud.
In matters related to both California and Texas, I wish there was some way to draw the district maps nationwide so that races would be competitive again.
Nick
Originally posted by JC
They have no concept of running a business that can make a profit.
The government isn't a business and shouldn't be run as one. Anyone who thinks it should has no business being anywhere near the government.
Originally posted by trumptman
I will say that no one should have the power to stop legislation from being voted on just because they know they are going to lose.
Well no ONE has that power. It takes many. Just like it takes many to pass the law in the first place. It's a filibuster, that's all, nothing more.
Originally posted by trumptman
Why have these various FEDERAL agencies been contacted about this? Because Texas cannot enforce it's laws in other states.
But the Feds can enforce TEXAS law in other states? How is that even conscionable to the conservatives around here? Oklahoma has every right to let people hang out at a Holiday Inn. They've broken no federal laws. If any conservative/republican around here tries to say the Feds should be involved your credibility is crap.
Originally posted by bunge
Well no ONE has that power. It takes many. Just like it takes many to pass the law in the first place. It's a filibuster, that's all, nothing more.
But the Feds can enforce TEXAS law in other states? How is that even conscionable to the conservatives around here? Oklahoma has every right to let people hang out at a Holiday Inn. They've broken no federal laws. If any conservative/republican around here tries to say the Feds should be involved your credibility is crap.
I didn't say it was conscionable. It was asked why they contacted federal agencies. Disputes that cross state lines have to be handled by the federal government. Did the federal government drag them back there? No.
As for being a filibuster, I don't believe this involved a senate type body. The only way they were stopping action was by not having a quorum present.
As it was they accomplished their aim (the Democrats) and life is back to normal (for now.) It will be interesting to see if the Republicans do any patented California Democratic moves in a last minute attempt to bring this about again. Things like stripping all the language out of a bill and throwing in the redistricting language, etc.
Again I think in the future we need something impartial to assign congressional districts. Though I haven't thought of what that could be.
Nick
Originally posted by trumptman
Again I think in the future we need something impartial to assign congressional districts. Though I haven't thought of what that could be.
A consistent method would be good enough for the time being.
EDIT: Just so you know, the 'credibility' comment I made wasn't directed at you. That was meant as a more general comment.
Originally posted by trumptman
Disputes that cross state lines have to be handled by the federal government. Did the federal government drag them back there? No.
The federal gov't doesn't have to get involved, though. In a clearly local political dispute like this, I still find it pretty amazing that federal Congressional Republicans would want to involve the FBI or the Department of Homeland Security. Don't you? And now the Feds are saying that basically the Texas Republicans tricked them into believing the plane was "lost," as in crashed, so they would get invovled.
Originally posted by Anders the White
To compare someone lying about who they had sex with with someone lying about the reason to start a war is simply beyond any reason.
Bush defence: "Yes I may have lied to the american people and in the UN security council to be able to start the war. But at least when I say I have never cheated on Barbara Bush it is the truth." ***Applaus***
You state wild and unproven accuasations as if they are facts and think you are making a point
Originally posted by BRussell
I'm glad you understand my point. That particular law would make the Ba'ath party proud.Oh, I see. It's all coming together for me now.Right. And it is the job of the Office of Homeland Security to track them down if they don't.Tax dollars aren't paying for them. And I believe all Democrats deserve a good vacation.Oh, OK. Now I understand. This was just way too complex for me until your appreciation of the nuances of this situation, and your ability to boil it down into simple declarative statements, just put it all together for me.Their constituents don't want this law passed. How are they going against them? And they have no duty to the other legislator's constituents.No it's not. And the Texas legislature's rules are absurd. They either should give them the power to stop legislation without being arrested or they should take away their power to stop legislation in this fashion.Me too. So why did the Republicans call them? And why did DeLay try to get the FBI involved?Of course they can do wrong. Why the hell did they go to Oklahoma. I would've gone to New Orleans.
well you obviously understand the situation and approve of the democratic party going around the law to get there way.
it is very sad to me that they can get away with this. The systems is designed to work and one should not be able to affect the ruling of laws through illeagle means.
we will just have to agree to dissagree on this
thanks
Originally posted by trumptman
California has been redistricted much like this. It is now overwhelmingly Democratic and has districts drawn in a manner that would make any abstract artist proud.
YEs, and now California and californians are going broke. this state is in serious trouble business is dieing
how are things in texas?
Originally posted by bunge
The government isn't a business and shouldn't be run as one. Anyone who thinks it should has no business being anywhere near the government.
the government should know how to get value for a buck.
fireing policeman and paying 25 thousand dollars for a speaker for one day is bad biz practice. and if the economy is not treated as a biz the budget will never balance