In this game of chicken I am betting on the democrats taking the cowardly route

[no limit]

During the Bush administration Republicans packed defense budget bills with things that were in no way related to defense. They got them all through because the democrats were too scared to filibuster a defense spending bill (for a war they said they didn't support). Now that the Republicans have filibustered this defense bill anyone that knows democrats knows they will be total cowards in this game of chicken and eventually drop the provision.

During the Bush years the democrats didn't filibuster any defense sending bills along with all these other key Bush policies:

Iraq war
Patriot Act
No Child Left Behind
Partial-Birth Abortion Ban
Bankruptcy Reform
Military Commissions

The argument back then was that the republicans had a majority and the democrats couldn't do anything to stop any of these disastrous policies. Now that republicans are filibustering everything the democrats do what is the argument? Well we can't do anything about this filibuster so we just have to cave in to their demands.

And I'm supposed to support these fucking assholes? All of this is starting to seem like it's all for show.

[DJ13]

1. If (big IF) the GOP regains one or both houses of Congress our side has no excuse

Its obvious the minority can actually wield more power than the majority if they choose to.

The excuses why they cant do anything as a minority wont work anymore.

[Blue Owl]

2. Led by Mr. Spineless himself

Harry Ried, a.k.a. Captain Cave.

What's really sickening is when they do manage to out-vote the Repukes, they STILL find some way to fucking lose.

It is shameful, harmful, and pitiful.

[RandomThoughts]

3. Listen to comments from Nancy Pelosi, Al Frankon, and Alan Grayson.

They are not there for show.


Although if someone can get you to think it is all for show, you might enter a despair state, and give up and not try.

I am not saying better things will always happen, nor even that they have to. But lose or win, fail or succeed, I am not going to let someone get me to live in despair, nor am I going to give up believing that I can make a difference somewhere.


I sometimes worry about censorship of posting, or even that people might take something I say to use for there own gain, and not for some better good. I don't let that despair get to me either.

There are trip wires everywhere, and as they go off they reveal many things, and keeps things focused, yet still no beer, no travel money. But does that really matter, no, but knowing that I will have those things, even while other ways to get them would not be better, does matter.

Does that make sense?


Side Note, I could get beer and travel money many ways that would not be worse, or might even be better, but that is not a choice I make, since there are more important things not to do. :)

[no limit]

7. mmm...beer

:)

[Greyhound]

10. A question;

Nancy Pelosi, Al Franken, Alan Grayson.

Which one is not like the others?
:hi:

[RandomThoughts]

21. They all have differences.

yea, I know what you are probably saying, but that is not the point.

[gateley]

4. I remember the Dems saying they had to vote for (whatever) in order to get

funding and support for the troops. If they hadn't the Repubs would have beat on the "Democrats don't care about our troops" drum.

Their noise machine is so much better than ours, people would have listened. Now, though they're doing the same thing, and a FEW people have mentioned that this affects the troops and the Pentagon, nobody is listening. We don't make enough noise, and I don't understand why. We give too much, but that's not news.

I have to say that we should support our people because they DO vote the right way, anyway (except for the predictable few). If I don't support Patty Murray and Dino Rossi gets in, for example, there goes one Democratic vote. There's no way in today's divided political climate there would be any Repubs voting against party lines. With us having the Democratic (teensy weensie) majority, and a Democratic WH, I don't think we'll see more issues like you cite coming to a vote, hopefully I'm not excusing anybody for anything, but I think we would have it much worse if we let the Republicans back in power. I do believe the majority of our people are trying, and instead of pulling our support, we have to give them more to enable them to accomplish what we, and they, ultimately want.

IMO, natch. :7

[Kat45]

17. Why aren't the Democrats now saying "the Republicans don't care about our troops"?

I sure haven't heard it.

[gateley]

20. I know. That's my complaint and frustration too. That's why I posted what I did -

we don't have the Noise Machine that they do. I'm guessing some Dems are saying it, they're just not getting coverage like the Republicans seem to be able to do. I don't know how to fix that.

[FrenchieCat]

31. Cause the media is who spreads the word,

and they ain't about to spread that.
It would mess up their plan for corporate America,
of which they are a part of.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Chulanowa]

6. Are you supposed to support these assholes?

I wonder the same thing when I consider donating to DU and read stuff like this.

[no limit]

8. You do know DU is a public message board right?

And thanks for your extremely detailed explaination of why my post offends you so much.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

13. Actually, it is a PRIVATE message board.

Since it is owned by a private individual who can do anything he wants, set any rules he wants, delete any posts he wants and can control who posts on it.

[no limit]

14. A private message board open to the PUBLIC

[SemiCharmedQuark]

16. The public can read it, but it is not open to the public to post.

Otherwise it wouldn't have a lot of banned people and it would allow Republicans to post.

[no limit]

25. Anyone that follows some basic rules can register and post instantly

it's a privately owned board opened to the public.

[Chulanowa]

35. Those rules happen to include support for Democratic party politicians

Do you have to like them? Nope. But if you want to thump your chest about how fucking magnificent and independent you are and how godawful and terrible Democrats are and how you won't back them... Well, the GOP has a messageboard, too, and they'd be welcoming of such invective. Star off with "I'm a lifelong Democrat BUT..." and you'll be belle of the ball.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Scurrilous]

9. I'm betting this thread gets locked.

:P

[chimpymustgo]

11. Hope not. It's something we need to talk about - today's game of chicken that our dear leaders will

duck on. They're disgusting.

[HowHasItComeToThis]

12. JUST A CREATION OF DICKLESS ARMEY

testing

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

18. Like Life Insurance. It's like betting on a sure thing and hoping you lose.

With apologies to Dick Gregory.

[onenote]

19. you might try to find some better examples of stand alone bills that weren't filibustered

I agree that Democrats didn't force the issue on budget bills, And you are right that a number of stand alone bills opposed by a majority of Democrats were not successfully filibustered and, in fact, most weren't even subjected to a cloture vote (although several were). But here's the problem with your examples of the latter group -- the reason that bills like No Child Left Behind, the Partial Birth Abortion ban, etc. were not successfully filibustered is that there were significant numbers of Democrats who actually supported passage of the bills. For example, 17 Democrats voted for final passage of the partial birth abortion bill; no child left behind had even broader support among Democratic senators -- only two voted against passage (six repubs voted no). While I haven't checked the other examples you give, I suspect the same is largely true --the bills weren't filubustered because in order to sustain a filibuster, a whole lot of Senators who supported the legislation would have had to vote against it.

This doesn't excuse the Democrats who voted against moving forward with the DADT repeal, but it suggests that not every situation is comparable.

[AnArmyVeteran]

22. How many words can we use to describe their cowardice?

[FrenchieCat]

30. As many as will help us, as Democrats, keep the majority in 40 days I presume?

So how many words would that be?

[bigwillq]

23. Some DEMS are cowards

and quite a few Repukes are. That's fairly common in politics. Wish it weren't true but it is.

[no limit]

24. Some? I guess that some includes their majority leader

[bigwillq]

26. I agree

I think Reid is a coward at times. Reid is who you're talking about, right?

[no limit]

28. Yup.

[SoCalDem]

27. yep.. we are the rubber chicken vs FogHorn Leghorn n.t.

[FrenchieCat]

29. Are we supposed to be like the Republicans now?

Cause the news media will always be owned by Republicans,
so it doesn't really matter what Democrats say....
cause you can't hear a tree fall in the forest
if you're in the city in front of your Television.

As for who the real assholes are,
you are barking up the wrong tree!

[opihimoimoi]

32. COWARDLY??? BS>>>If anyone is Cowardly...its the GOPers

Bullies are cowards and thats what the GOP is...all fluff n Bluff

[no limit]

33. That's why as soon as the GOP threatens a filibuster the Dems cave

seriously, stop it.

[opihimoimoi]

34. I suspect its a bit more complicated than we perceive...there has to a reason unknown to us

Then again, maybe not and you are correct ref to the Dems as Cowardly wimps...

Their long term goals seen so far reflects more Pos than Neg and thats good for me

Perhaps I am too kind with Benefit Of Doubt

[no limit]

36. I think you are being too kind. But lets wait and see what happens.