Yeah they have the house... and look what they have to do to get their "popular" bills passed.
"Never before has the House of Representatives operated in such secrecy:
At 2:54 a.m. on a Friday in March, the House cut veterans benefits by three votes.
At 2:39 a.m. on a Friday in April, the House slashed education and health care by five votes.
At 1:56 a.m. on a Friday in May, the House passed the Leave No Millionaire Behind tax-cut bill by a handful of votes.
At 2:33 a.m. on a Friday in June, the House passed the Medicare privatization and prescription drug bill by one vote.
At 12:57 a.m. on a Friday in July, the House eviscerated Head Start by one vote.
And then, after returning from summer recess, at 12:12 a.m. on a Friday in October, the House voted $87 billion for Iraq.
Always in the middle of the night. Always after the press had passed their deadlines. Always after the American people had turned off the news and gone to bed."
Could you pick one of those and give us a little more insight into it? I don't mean to sound cynical but I have heard 3% growth instead of 5% growth called a cut so many times I am a little wary to believe. Especially since this president has been spending like crazy.
That's quoting by an article written by a congressman.
Ask the congressman to qualify. I think it's obvious what his point was... have the close and controversial votes late at night... away from prying eyes.
btw, I don't have the link but I heard that recent polling suggests Dean losing Vermont to Bush as well. The Dems need to nominate a moderate....but they won't.
IMHO, the President needs to be the foreign-policy aware face, while the VP is better suited to domestic policy. Clark has the foreign creds, Dean has pretty solid domestic ideas.
Dean as a foreign policy maker is just frightening, and I think Clark needs a bit of help on the domestic side. Together, they could be a hell of a team.
A paper that loses millions every year because no one wants to advertise in it. It can't report on the weather without making fun of Hillary. It's drivel.
If Dean gets the nomination... it will be a very very close race.
Well I certainly think Dean would probably lose to Bush, but I don't think this poll means anything in that regard. Dean gets 30% against Bush? It wouldn't surprise me if not much more than 30% of the country has heard anything at all about Dean. If Dean gets everyone who's heard of him to vote for him, I think he'd do pretty well.
Ever notice that everything slightly to the left of Republican is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! I mean, CENTER is to the left of the Republicans. So, pretty much anyone NOT a Republican is a threat to our society and therefore will be mocked, ridiculed, scoffed and dismissed. So, for SDW to claim that the Dems need to nominate a moderate is so disengenuous it's laughable because Dean IS a centrist.
If anyone here believes that ANY of the Dems are "acceptable" to SDW and his ilk, then I've got some ocean-side property in Arizona I'd like to sell you.
Republicans don't want to govern. They want to rule.
... If anyone here believes that ANY of the Dems are "acceptable" to SDW and his ilk, then I've got some ocean-side property in Arizona I'd like to sell you.
And just how "acceptable" has Bush been to the left?
Quote:
Republicans don't want to govern. They want to rule.
Quit your whining and start figuring out why Dean's a weak candidate. Btw, I think Dean will probably do a LOT better in the general election than many think but he still will probably lose.
btw, I don't have the link but I heard that recent polling suggests Dean losing Vermont to Bush as well. The Dems need to nominate a moderate....but they won't.
I really hate agreeing with him, but he's right. Hardcore liberalisim is dead.
Comments
Great piece, as usual.
Originally posted by chu_bakka
Yeah they have the house... and look what they have to do to get their "popular" bills passed.
"Never before has the House of Representatives operated in such secrecy:
At 2:54 a.m. on a Friday in March, the House cut veterans benefits by three votes.
At 2:39 a.m. on a Friday in April, the House slashed education and health care by five votes.
At 1:56 a.m. on a Friday in May, the House passed the Leave No Millionaire Behind tax-cut bill by a handful of votes.
At 2:33 a.m. on a Friday in June, the House passed the Medicare privatization and prescription drug bill by one vote.
At 12:57 a.m. on a Friday in July, the House eviscerated Head Start by one vote.
And then, after returning from summer recess, at 12:12 a.m. on a Friday in October, the House voted $87 billion for Iraq.
Always in the middle of the night. Always after the press had passed their deadlines. Always after the American people had turned off the news and gone to bed."
http://www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/9587
Like thiefs in the night.
Could you pick one of those and give us a little more insight into it? I don't mean to sound cynical but I have heard 3% growth instead of 5% growth called a cut so many times I am a little wary to believe. Especially since this president has been spending like crazy.
Nick
Ask the congressman to qualify. I think it's obvious what his point was... have the close and controversial votes late at night... away from prying eyes.
http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/13258.htm
btw, I don't have the link but I heard that recent polling suggests Dean losing Vermont to Bush as well. The Dems need to nominate a moderate....but they won't.
However i would be happy, if the number of threads dealing with Dean do not multiply
IMHO, the President needs to be the foreign-policy aware face, while the VP is better suited to domestic policy. Clark has the foreign creds, Dean has pretty solid domestic ideas.
Dean as a foreign policy maker is just frightening, and I think Clark needs a bit of help on the domestic side. Together, they could be a hell of a team.
A paper that loses millions every year because no one wants to advertise in it. It can't report on the weather without making fun of Hillary. It's drivel.
If Dean gets the nomination... it will be a very very close race.
Bush is not.
Nyah nyah.
What is Nyah Nyah's position? I need to know!!!!!
'Cause she's kinda cute!
Originally posted by ShawnJ
More Dean threads!
Yea! More Dean threads! Woo hoo!
To quote Bill Mahr, "Look at me, I'm in a flight suit, look at me! Why even bother with an election?"
If anyone here believes that ANY of the Dems are "acceptable" to SDW and his ilk, then I've got some ocean-side property in Arizona I'd like to sell you.
Republicans don't want to govern. They want to rule.
Originally posted by Northgate
... If anyone here believes that ANY of the Dems are "acceptable" to SDW and his ilk, then I've got some ocean-side property in Arizona I'd like to sell you.
And just how "acceptable" has Bush been to the left?
Republicans don't want to govern. They want to rule.
Quit your whining and start figuring out why Dean's a weak candidate. Btw, I think Dean will probably do a LOT better in the general election than many think but he still will probably lose.
Dean is a strong candidate. Dean would stomp Bush in a debate.
It'll be fun to see Bush try to defend his policies when Dean goes after him face to face.
Originally posted by SDW2001
He may win the nomination...but he will be slaughtered in the general election.
http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/13258.htm
btw, I don't have the link but I heard that recent polling suggests Dean losing Vermont to Bush as well. The Dems need to nominate a moderate....but they won't.
I really hate agreeing with him, but he's right. Hardcore liberalisim is dead.