Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Progressive Caucus "Peoples Budget" Voted Down. 108 Democrats in House vote against it!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 03:31 PM
Original message
Progressive Caucus "Peoples Budget" Voted Down. 108 Democrats in House vote against it!

On Agreeing to the Amendment: Amendment 2 to H CON RES 34
Number: House Vote #274 in 2011
Date: Apr 15, 2011 11:35AM
Result: Failed
Amendment: Amendment to H. Con. Res. 34: Establishing the budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2012...


Totals Democrats Republicans Independents All Votes

Aye: 77 (18%)
No: 347 (80%) 108 239 0
Not Voting: 8
Required: Simple Majority of 424 votes (=213 votes)

Democrats Yes 77
No 108

Republicans Yes 0
No 239

Not Voting Democrats 7 Republicans 1

Here's how they voted:


Alabama
No AL-1 Bonner, Jo
No AL-2 Roby, Martha
No AL-3 Rogers, Michael
No AL-4 Aderholt, Robert
No AL-5 Brooks, Mo
No AL-6 Bachus, Spencer
Not Voting AL-7 Sewell, Terri
Alaska
No AK-0 Young, Donald
Arizona
No AZ-1 Gosar, Paul
No AZ-2 Franks, Trent
No AZ-3 Quayle, Ben
Aye AZ-4 Pastor, Edward
No AZ-5 Schweikert, David
No AZ-6 Flake, Jeff
Aye AZ-7 Grijalva, Raul
Not Voting AZ-8 Giffords, Gabrielle
Arkansas
No AR-1 Crawford, Eric
No AR-2 Griffin, Tim
No AR-3 Womack, Steve
No AR-4 Ross, Mike
California
No CA-1 Thompson, C.
No CA-2 Herger, Walter
No CA-3 Lungren, Daniel
No CA-4 McClintock, Tom
No CA-5 Matsui, Doris
Aye CA-6 Woolsey, Lynn
Aye CA-7 Miller, George
No CA-8 Pelosi, Nancy
Aye CA-9 Lee, Barbara
Not Voting CA-10 Garamendi, John
No CA-11 McNerney, Jerry
No CA-12 Speier, Jackie
Aye CA-13 Stark, Fortney
No CA-14 Eshoo, Anna
Aye CA-15 Honda, Michael
No CA-16 Lofgren, Zoe
Aye CA-17 Farr, Sam
No CA-18 Cardoza, Dennis
No CA-19 Denham, Jeff
No CA-20 Costa, Jim
No CA-21 Nunes, Devin
No CA-22 McCarthy, Kevin
No CA-23 Capps, Lois
No CA-24 Gallegly, Elton
No CA-25 McKeon, Howard
No CA-26 Dreier, David
No CA-27 Sherman, Brad
No CA-28 Berman, Howard
No CA-29 Schiff, Adam
No CA-30 Waxman, Henry
Aye CA-31 Becerra, Xavier
Aye CA-32 Chu, Judy
Aye CA-33 Bass, Karen
Aye CA-34 Roybal-Allard, Lucille
Aye CA-35 Waters, Maxine
Aye CA-37 Richardson, Laura
Aye CA-38 Napolitano, Grace
Aye CA-39 Sanchez, Linda
No CA-40 Royce, Edward
No CA-41 Lewis, Jerry
No CA-42 Miller, Gary
Aye CA-43 Baca, Joe
No CA-44 Calvert, Ken
No CA-45 Bono Mack, Mary
No CA-46 Rohrabacher, Dana
No CA-47 Sanchez, Loretta
No CA-48 Campbell, John
No CA-49 Issa, Darrell
No CA-50 Bilbray, Brian
Aye CA-51 Filner, Bob
No CA-52 Hunter, Duncan
No CA-53 Davis, Susan
Colorado
No CO-1 DeGette, Diana
No CO-2 Polis, Jared
No CO-3 Tipton, Scott
No CO-4 Gardner, Cory
No CO-5 Lamborn, Doug
No CO-6 Coffman, Mike
No CO-7 Perlmutter, Ed
Connecticut
No CT-1 Larson, John
No CT-2 Courtney, Joe
No CT-3 DeLauro, Rosa
No CT-4 Himes, James
No CT-5 Murphy, Christopher
Delaware
No DE-0 Carney, John
Florida
No FL-1 Miller, Jeff
No FL-2 Southerland, Steve
Aye FL-3 Brown, Corrine
No FL-4 Crenshaw, Ander
No FL-5 Nugent, Richard
No FL-6 Stearns, Clifford
No FL-7 Mica, John
No FL-8 Webster, Daniel
No FL-9 Bilirakis, Gus
No FL-10 Young, C. W.
No FL-11 Castor, Kathy
No FL-12 Ross, Dennis
No FL-13 Buchanan, Vern
No FL-14 Mack, Connie
No FL-15 Posey, Bill
No FL-16 Rooney, Thomas
Aye FL-17 Wilson, Frederica
No FL-18 Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana
No FL-19 Deutch, Ted
No FL-20 Wasserman Schultz, Debbie
No FL-21 Diaz-Balart, Mario
No FL-22 West, Allen
Aye FL-23 Hastings, Alcee
No FL-24 Adams, Sandy
No FL-25 Rivera, David
Georgia
No GA-1 Kingston, Jack
No GA-2 Bishop, Sanford
No GA-3 Westmoreland, Lynn
Aye GA-4 Johnson, Henry
Aye GA-5 Lewis, John
No GA-6 Price, Tom
No GA-7 Woodall, Rob
No GA-8 Scott, Austin
No GA-9 Graves, Tom
No GA-10 Broun, Paul
No GA-11 Gingrey, John
No GA-12 Barrow, John
No GA-13 Scott, David
Hawaii
No HI-1 Hanabusa, Colleen
Aye HI-2 Hirono, Mazie
Idaho
No ID-1 Labrador, Ral
No ID-2 Simpson, Michael
Illinois
Aye IL-1 Rush, Bobby
Aye IL-2 Jackson, Jesse
No IL-3 Lipinski, Daniel
Aye IL-4 Gutierrez, Luis
No IL-5 Quigley, Mike
No IL-6 Roskam, Peter
Aye IL-7 Davis, Danny
No IL-8 Walsh, Joe
Aye IL-9 Schakowsky, Janice
No IL-10 Dold, Bob
No IL-11 Kinzinger, Adam
No IL-12 Costello, Jerry
No IL-13 Biggert, Judy
No IL-14 Hultgren, Randy
No IL-15 Johnson, Timothy
No IL-16 Manzullo, Donald
No IL-17 Schilling, Robert
No IL-18 Schock, Aaron
No IL-19 Shimkus, John
Indiana
No IN-1 Visclosky, Peter
No IN-2 Donnelly, Joe
No IN-3 Stutzman, Marlin
No IN-4 Rokita, Todd
No IN-5 Burton, Dan
No IN-6 Pence, Mike
Aye IN-7 Carson, Andr
No IN-8 Bucshon, Larry
No IN-9 Young, Todd
Iowa
No IA-1 Braley, Bruce
No IA-2 Loebsack, David
No IA-3 Boswell, Leonard
No IA-4 Latham, Thomas
No IA-5 King, Steve
Kansas
No KS-1 Huelskamp, Tim
No KS-2 Jenkins, Lynn
No KS-3 Yoder, Kevin
No KS-4 Pompeo, Mike
Kentucky
No KY-1 Whitfield, Edward
No KY-2 Guthrie, Brett
No KY-3 Yarmuth, John
No KY-4 Davis, Geoff
No KY-5 Rogers, Harold
No KY-6 Chandler, Ben
Louisiana
No LA-1 Scalise, Steve
Aye LA-2 Richmond, Cedric
No LA-3 Landry, Jeff
No LA-4 Fleming, John
No LA-5 Alexander, Rodney
No LA-6 Cassidy, Bill
No LA-7 Boustany, Charles
Maine
Aye ME-1 Pingree, Chellie
No ME-2 Michaud, Michael
Maryland
No MD-1 Harris, Andy
No MD-2 Ruppersberger, C.A.
Aye MD-3 Sarbanes, John
Aye MD-4 Edwards, Donna
No MD-5 Hoyer, Steny
No MD-6 Bartlett, Roscoe
Aye MD-7 Cummings, Elijah
No MD-8 Van Hollen, Christopher
Massachusetts
Not Voting MA-1 Olver, John
No MA-2 Neal, Richard
Aye MA-3 McGovern, James
Aye MA-4 Frank, Barney
No MA-5 Tsongas, Niki
Aye MA-6 Tierney, John
Aye MA-7 Markey, Edward
Aye MA-8 Capuano, Michael
No MA-9 Lynch, Stephen
Not Voting MA-10 Keating, William
Michigan
No MI-1 Benishek, Dan
No MI-2 Huizenga, Bill
No MI-3 Amash, Justin
No MI-4 Camp, David
No MI-5 Kildee, Dale
No MI-6 Upton, Frederick
No MI-7 Walberg, Timothy
No MI-8 Rogers, Michael
No MI-9 Peters, Gary
No MI-10 Miller, Candice
No MI-11 McCotter, Thaddeus
No MI-12 Levin, Sander
Aye MI-13 Clarke, Hansen
Aye MI-14 Conyers, John
No MI-15 Dingell, John
Minnesota
No MN-1 Walz, Timothy
No MN-2 Kline, John
No MN-3 Paulsen, Erik
Aye MN-4 McCollum, Betty
Aye MN-5 Ellison, Keith
No MN-6 Bachmann, Michele
No MN-7 Peterson, Collin
No MN-8 Cravaack, Chip
Mississippi
No MS-1 Nunnelee, Alan
Aye MS-2 Thompson, Bennie
No MS-3 Harper, Gregg
No MS-4 Palazzo, Steven
Missouri
Aye MO-1 Clay, William
No MO-2 Akin, W.
No MO-3 Carnahan, Russ
No MO-4 Hartzler, Vicky
Aye MO-5 Cleaver, Emanuel
No MO-6 Graves, Samuel
No MO-7 Long, Billy
No MO-8 Emerson, Jo Ann
No MO-9 Luetkemeyer, Blaine
Montana
No MT-0 Rehberg, Dennis
Nebraska
No NE-1 Fortenberry, Jeffrey
No NE-2 Terry, Lee
No NE-3 Smith, Adrian
Nevada
No NV-1 Berkley, Shelley
No NV-2 Heller, Dean
No NV-3 Heck, Joe
New Hampshire
No NH-1 Guinta, Frank
No NH-2 Bass, Charles
New Jersey
No NJ-1 Andrews, Robert
No NJ-2 LoBiondo, Frank
No NJ-3 Runyan, Jon
No NJ-4 Smith, Christopher
No NJ-5 Garrett, Scott
Aye NJ-6 Pallone, Frank
No NJ-7 Lance, Leonard
No NJ-8 Pascrell, William
No NJ-9 Rothman, Steven
Aye NJ-10 Payne, Donald
No NJ-11 Frelinghuysen, Rodney
Aye NJ-12 Holt, Rush
No NJ-13 Sires, Albio
New Mexico
No NM-1 Heinrich, Martin
No NM-2 Pearce, Steven
No NM-3 Lujan, Ben
New York
No NY-1 Bishop, Timothy
No NY-2 Israel, Steve
No NY-3 King, Peter
No NY-4 McCarthy, Carolyn
No NY-5 Ackerman, Gary
Not Voting NY-6 Meeks, Gregory
No NY-7 Crowley, Joseph
Aye NY-8 Nadler, Jerrold
No NY-9 Weiner, Anthony
Aye NY-10 Towns, Edolphus
Aye NY-11 Clarke, Yvette
Aye NY-12 Velazquez, Nydia
No NY-13 Grimm, Michael
No NY-14 Maloney, Carolyn
Aye NY-15 Rangel, Charles
Aye NY-16 Serrano, Jos
No NY-17 Engel, Eliot
Not Voting NY-18 Lowey, Nita
No NY-19 Hayworth, Nan
No NY-20 Gibson, Chris
Aye NY-21 Tonko, Paul
Aye NY-22 Hinchey, Maurice
No NY-23 Owens, William
No NY-24 Hanna, Richard
No NY-25 Buerkle, Ann Marie
No NY-27 Higgins, Brian
Aye NY-28 Slaughter, Louise
No NY-29 Reed, Tom
North Carolina
Aye NC-1 Butterfield, George
No NC-2 Ellmers, Renee
No NC-3 Jones, Walter
No NC-4 Price, David
No NC-5 Foxx, Virginia
No NC-6 Coble, Howard
No NC-7 McIntyre, Mike
No NC-8 Kissell, Larry
No NC-9 Myrick, Sue
No NC-10 McHenry, Patrick
No NC-11 Shuler, Heath
Aye NC-12 Watt, Melvin
No NC-13 Miller, R.
North Dakota
No ND-0 Berg, Rick
Ohio
No OH-1 Chabot, Steven
No OH-2 Schmidt, Jean
No OH-3 Turner, Michael
No OH-4 Jordan, Jim
No OH-5 Latta, Robert
No OH-6 Johnson, Bill
No OH-7 Austria, Steve
No OH-9 Kaptur, Marcy
Aye OH-10 Kucinich, Dennis
Aye OH-11 Fudge, Marcia
No OH-12 Tiberi, Patrick
No OH-13 Sutton, Betty
No OH-14 LaTourette, Steven
No OH-15 Stivers, Steve
No OH-16 Renacci, Jim
No OH-17 Ryan, Timothy
No OH-18 Gibbs, Bob
Oklahoma
No OK-1 Sullivan, John
No OK-2 Boren, Dan
No OK-3 Lucas, Frank
No OK-4 Cole, Tom
No OK-5 Lankford, James
Oregon
Aye OR-1 Wu, David
No OR-2 Walden, Greg
Aye OR-3 Blumenauer, Earl
No OR-4 DeFazio, Peter
No OR-5 Schrader, Kurt
Pennsylvania
Aye PA-1 Brady, Robert
Aye PA-2 Fattah, Chaka
No PA-3 Kelly, Mike
No PA-4 Altmire, Jason
No PA-5 Thompson, Glenn
No PA-6 Gerlach, Jim
No PA-7 Meehan, Patrick
No PA-8 Fitzpatrick, Michael
No PA-9 Shuster, William
No PA-10 Marino, Thomas
No PA-11 Barletta, Lou
No PA-12 Critz, Mark
No PA-13 Schwartz, Allyson
Aye PA-14 Doyle, Michael
No PA-15 Dent, Charles
No PA-16 Pitts, Joseph
No PA-17 Holden, Tim
No PA-18 Murphy, Tim
No PA-19 Platts, Todd
Rhode Island
Aye RI-1 Cicilline, David
No RI-2 Langevin, James
South Carolina
No SC-1 Scott, Tim
No SC-2 Wilson, Addison
No SC-3 Duncan, Jeff
No SC-4 Gowdy, Trey
No SC-5 Mulvaney, Mick
Aye SC-6 Clyburn, James
South Dakota
No SD-0 Noem, Kristi
Tennessee
No TN-1 Roe, Phil
No TN-2 Duncan, John
No TN-3 Fleischmann, Chuck
No TN-4 DesJarlais, Scott
No TN-5 Cooper, Jim
No TN-6 Black, Diane
No TN-7 Blackburn, Marsha
No TN-8 Fincher, Stephen
Aye TN-9 Cohen, Steve
Texas
No TX-1 Gohmert, Louis
No TX-2 Poe, Ted
No TX-3 Johnson, Samuel
No TX-4 Hall, Ralph
No TX-5 Hensarling, Jeb
No TX-6 Barton, Joe
No TX-7 Culberson, John
No TX-8 Brady, Kevin
No TX-9 Green, Al
No TX-10 McCaul, Michael
No TX-11 Conaway, K.
No TX-12 Granger, Kay
No TX-13 Thornberry, William
No TX-14 Paul, Ronald
No TX-15 Hinojosa, Rubn
No TX-16 Reyes, Silvestre
No TX-17 Flores, Bill
Aye TX-18 Jackson-Lee, Sheila
No TX-19 Neugebauer, Randy
No TX-20 Gonzalez, Charles
No TX-21 Smith, Lamar
No TX-22 Olson, Pete
No TX-23 Canseco, Francisco
No TX-24 Marchant, Kenny
No TX-25 Doggett, Lloyd
No TX-26 Burgess, Michael
No TX-27 Farenthold, Blake
No TX-28 Cuellar, Henry
No TX-29 Green, Raymond
Aye TX-30 Johnson, Eddie
No TX-31 Carter, John
No TX-32 Sessions, Peter
Utah
No UT-1 Bishop, Rob
No UT-2 Matheson, Jim
No UT-3 Chaffetz, Jason
Vermont
Aye VT-0 Welch, Peter
Virginia
No VA-1 Wittman, Rob
No VA-2 Rigell, E.
No VA-3 Scott, Robert
No VA-4 Forbes, J.
No VA-5 Hurt, Robert
No VA-6 Goodlatte, Robert
No VA-7 Cantor, Eric
No VA-8 Moran, James
No VA-9 Griffith, H.
No VA-10 Wolf, Frank
No VA-11 Connolly, Gerald
Washington
No WA-1 Inslee, Jay
No WA-2 Larsen, Rick
No WA-3 Herrera Beutler, Jaime
No WA-4 Hastings, Doc
No WA-5 McMorris Rodgers, Cathy
No WA-6 Dicks, Norman
Aye WA-7 McDermott, James
Not Voting WA-8 Reichert, Dave
No WA-9 Smith, Adam
West Virginia
No WV-1 McKinley, David
No WV-2 Capito, Shelley
No WV-3 Rahall, Nick
Wisconsin
No WI-1 Ryan, Paul
Aye WI-2 Baldwin, Tammy
No WI-3 Kind, Ronald
Aye WI-4 Moore, Gwen
No WI-5 Sensenbrenner, F.
No WI-6 Petri, Thomas
No WI-7 Duffy, Sean
No WI-8 Ribble, Reid
Wyoming
No WY-0 Lummis, Cynthia

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2011-274

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 03:32 PM
Response to Original message
1. ...
:mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sakabatou Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 03:33 PM
Response to Original message
2. *facepalm*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 03:35 PM
Response to Original message
3. et tu, Nancy. (Pelosi). damn.

revealing and eye-opening. thanks for the state-by-state list.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HankyDubs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-18-11 07:17 PM
Response to Reply #3
85. Nancy is on the job!!!
I know that this is disappointing, but think about the big picture here. This budget has no chance of passing. Just count every (D) vote and you know there wasn't a snowball's chance.

Good leadership, which Nancy has provided, does not ask members to vote for tax increases unless there is a chance of accomplishing something. For members in tough districts, or those who are looking at statewide offices, asking them to vote for this is just a bad idea.

I doubt that Ellison and Grijalva are disappointed. They wanted to get this budget out in front of the people, and to some extent that was achieved. Praise the folks who joined them, but don't flame all of those who didn't.

This isn't Nancy stabbing us in the back, this is Nancy playing the long game. Think about it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Newest Reality Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 03:35 PM
Response to Original message
4. That speaks loudly
about progressive vs. Status Quo and who is invested in what. The why is obvious and this just underscores the reality check on our expectations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #4
13. Yep - shows how useless this party has become.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 03:38 PM
Response to Original message
5. Shows how much our Party Cares about "We the People"
those is my state not voting or voting no, will hear from me....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. i sure as hell am contacting Pelosi (my rep). not that i have any illusions, but... this pisses me o
ff.

:mad: :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #7
20. She got where she is by pleasing Diane Feinstein.
And Di Fi was spending more time hanging out with the George Schultzes than anyone else on the planet.

It's all one Big Money Party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #20
26. yep. The Money Party, the source of all our problems (to paraphrase Michael Collins).
:(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #20
48. OUCH! ...The truth hurts.
Though I'm not really sure whether to laugh or cry at that one. :dilemma:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DainBramaged Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #5
15. Stunning isn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. totally OT, but i *adore* the cat in your sig.
I wish the image was a little bigger, though. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
colsohlibgal Donating Member (670 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #5
59. Weiner voted No?
That totally shocks me. People like Waxman voting no? No surprise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 03:40 PM
Response to Original message
6. so, we're down to 77 Democrats. i don't care what letter the other 108 have after their name.
actions speak louder than empty proclamations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. Exactly my thought!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
8. No: DeFazio, Kaptur, Wasserman Schultz, Waxman, Weiner
Didn't DeFazio just tell the President to act like a Democrat?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. DeFazio? Weiner? the others are not surprising.

hmm, DeFazio, very interesting....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WHEN CRABS ROAR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-19-11 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #12
88. I was very disappointed by DeFazio as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoePhilly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
9. How can we blame Obama for this???
Or, rather than blame Obama ... perhaps we could use this example as a way to point out that Obama can not make the House or Senate Dems vote exactly the way progressives want.

If this vote does nothing else, it shows that the Dems in the House are not as progressive as folks here on DU think they are. And given that, there is no way Obama could "bully pulpit" them into all voting for many of the things we want.

Or ... we can just blame Obama for this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #9
14. no one said a word about Obama.
quit obsessing, ffs. this is about much more than Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoePhilly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #14
21.  My point is that Obama is regularly attacked for not getting
all of the House (or Senate) Dems to "line up".

This vote demonstrates WHY he can't get them to "line up" on other votes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenfrequed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. Stop changing the subject
This is about the house. I don't care what Obama gets blamed for right now. Stick to the subject at hand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoePhilly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. No.
When I point out that those who predicted that Obama would announce major cuts to Social Security and Medicare during his speech this week were WRONG, they change he subject and scream PUBLIC OPTION!!!!

My point stands.

Obama can not force a democratic House to be more progressive than it actually is, and this vote is an OUTSTANDING example of that fact.

Deal with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #25
32. Who on DU predicted Obama "would announce major cuts to SS and Medicare" during his speech?
Edited on Fri Apr-15-11 05:14 PM by Better Believe It
Links please.

If you're familiar with how Congress works you would know that no President can just "announce cuts" to any mandated programs without first having them passed by Congress and signing them into law.

Before his speech he did support major cuts to other government programs included in the budget agreement just passed by Republicans and Democrats in Congress.

And he will sign on to far deeper and broader cuts that will be proposed by his new 16 member bi-partisan congressional commission.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoePhilly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #32
36. You sound very defensive.
The claim that Obama was about to announce his support for HUGE cuts to SS and Medicare took place prior to the State of the Union speech, and then again this week. Both were wrong.

You can pretend that this is not the case.

I'm not going to go get the links because I do not need to, you confirm my point with your prediction in your your final sentence ... or should I call it your NEXT breathless prediction.

Why should I go find your old wrong predictions when you posted a new one right here???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #36
43. Can't find the links? I thought so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #43
76. i saw that prediction on the boards here
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #36
67. no he doesn't but you do.
quit projecting, will ya.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mike_c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #25
65. argument by misdirection...
Quick! Change the subject! :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 05:08 PM
Response to Reply #21
31. I don't think President Obama supported this liberal economic proposal. Am I wrong?

If only around 70 or 80 members of the House can be considered liberals on economic issues is it OK if President Obama opposes them and seeks bi-partisanship agreements with the Republicans on deficit cuts?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoePhilly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #31
39. Why could they not get more votes?
Did Obama need to help them?

Or ... does this vote give all of us a sense of where the House is??

That is my point.

For all of the screaming about the evil Obama ... this vote was a simple House vote. And if you think the Dems in the House are very Liberal, this vote should make you take pause and consider that view. They are NOT.

And THAT is why Obama was not able to force a public Option. It was NOT that Obama did not try, it was because the House (and the Senate) do not have sufficient votes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 10:22 PM
Response to Reply #39
52. Point 1. Obama clearly didn't help them. Point 2. Because he doesn't support a liberal budget.

Point 3. Most Democrats in the House and President Obama are not very liberal.

Point 4. Obama didn't want any kind of public option in the health insurance industry bill. That would have violated his back door deal with the insurance industry and big Pharma.

Are you unfamiliar with that deal?

Point 5. Please stop making excuses for President Obama's failure to support liberal and progressive causes.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 07:53 PM
Response to Reply #21
50. and you missed my point altogether:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #9
16. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
JoePhilly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #16
22. "Welcome to Ignore" ... sounds like a party ... did you think you hurt my feelings?
My point is a simple one.

There is endless screaming here on DU that Obama should "force" House and Senate Dems to vote in particular ways. This vote is a great example as to why he can't.

As for knee jerk ... where was Obama's announcement that he was cutting Social Security and Medicare this week. DU was ablaze with that prediction this week. Yet it did not happen. Kind of like the days prior to the State of the Union, when the same prediction set DU on fire, and yet the announcement did not come.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #22
34. Who has screamed on DU that Obama should "force" members of Congress to vote for liberal legislation
Edited on Fri Apr-15-11 05:19 PM by Better Believe It
Links please.

I think that view misrepresents and distorts what DU'ers and other progressives have actually wrote.

Please try to be more accurate.

Thanks.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoePhilly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #34
37. During the last few days ...
I had one "very liberal" DU member tell me that Obama should use the DOJ to dig up dirt on members of Congress, and then use that to black mail them.

And then another said that Obama should be bribing them with "pork" ... Ben Nelson was the target, but the person was apparently not familiar with the corn husker kick back uproar.

The claim that Obama is not using the bully pulpit to "force" members of congress to act as Obama would like is yet another common DU attack on him.

And your claim that you don't notice this, is not a surprise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #37
56. So two posts indicating Obama should use his "bully pulpit" constitutes "endless screaming" on DU!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mattylock Donating Member (36 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-18-11 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #37
83. I've seen exactly what you're talking about.
Thanks for making a very cogent point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoePhilly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #9
19. moved ...
Edited on Fri Apr-15-11 04:19 PM by JoePhilly

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 07:49 PM
Response to Reply #9
49. I'll take your flamebait: Did he speak out in support of the progressive budget?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dionysus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #9
77. actually, it's becoming not just a constant campaign against obama, when all is said and done,
it'll be a campaign against all dems...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
abelenkpe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 03:48 PM
Response to Original message
11. Waxman voted no?
What the heck?

sadness.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #11
18. Waxman gets a lot of his money from Big Pharma.
And his positions can be one way one day, and the next they can blow the other.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
white_wolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 04:34 PM
Response to Original message
24. Nevermind, he voted yes.
Edited on Fri Apr-15-11 05:22 PM by white_wolf
One of the posts above said he voted no.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niyad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #24
45. in the table in the OP--he voted no
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
white_wolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #45
51. In this link he is listed under Aye
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 09:14 AM
Response to Reply #51
55. Your link is a different roll call vote on a different amendment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
white_wolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #55
62. Ahh, my bad.
So does anyone know why he voted against it? This isn't like Weiner, he is usually very progressive. Has he issued a statement or anything?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 04:55 PM
Response to Original message
27. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MedleyMisty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 04:55 PM
Response to Original message
28. Keep talking about recalls and voting in 2012
and *working within the system* while our country dies.

How many people have to die before you realize that the system doesn't work? How many people have to die before we rise up?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
white_wolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 04:58 PM
Response to Original message
29. Where is the link? The list ends with Maryland.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 05:16 PM
Response to Reply #29
33. Try it again.

Click on the link and try it again.

It just worked for me.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2011-274
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 05:04 PM
Response to Original message
30. 23 members of the Democratic caucus voted against the 2012 Democratic Budget
Edited on Fri Apr-15-11 05:06 PM by ProSense
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 05:17 PM
Response to Original message
35. Thank you. These two are going to hear my wrath. DeGette, Diana
Polis, Jared

:nuke:

They bill themselves as "progressive".

:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niyad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 07:14 PM
Response to Reply #35
46. same here-- I was disgusted to see them voting "no"
not surprised about lamborn, of course.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 07:17 PM
Response to Reply #46
47. Coffman surprised the HELL out of me!!!!111!!!!
:sarcasm:

:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chorophyll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
38. Great. My Rep, Nita Lowey (D, NY) didn't vote at all.
She'll be hearing from me. x(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ramulux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 05:54 PM
Response to Original message
40. The democrats who voted yes on this
Deserve all of our unwavering support. They have made it clear that they are the only members of congress who have any desire to reduce the deficit. The democrats who voted no, deserve to be primaried, end of story.

There are some dems who voted no that I literally cant understand. Why the fuck did Weiner and DeFazio vote no?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #40
60. Although I'm grateful and glad that my rep voted aye
There are some pretty good reps on the nay list- as you noted- and before I condemn them I'd like to know why they voted against it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheKentuckian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 06:30 PM
Response to Original message
41. Damn it Yarmuth, remind me why I worked to get you re-elected again?
Lally being a dumpsterfire isn't the answer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Overseas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 06:39 PM
Response to Original message
42. Were Dems who were committed to voting for President Obama's budget "as is "
Edited on Fri Apr-15-11 06:40 PM by Overseas
then unable to vote for this one?

That's what I suspect. They may have had to choose either the official President Obama Budget or The Progressive Budget, and wanted to be sure our president had their full support.

I wish President Obama's Budget and The Progressive Budget were one and the same, and I wish we had a majority voting for the progressive plan which our country really needs. A majority would have made that a good starting point to negotiate from with the extremely cruel GOP vision.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #42
44. They are free to vote for both the liberal "amendment" to the budget and the bi-partisan one.
Edited on Fri Apr-15-11 07:06 PM by Better Believe It
They did not make any pledge to President Obama that they would oppose on the floor and in their votes the liberal budget proposal that I'm aware of.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ReggieVeggie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 06:56 AM
Response to Original message
53. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blindpig Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 08:49 AM
Response to Original message
54. And there ya are...

tribunes of the working class, ha!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #54
57. Yeah... Huh ???
The Democrats are becoming experts in cutting the baby in half, and calling it "compromise".

:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autumn Colors Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
58. Your link goes to DIFFERENT AMENDMENT VOTE
Edited on Sat Apr-16-11 01:25 PM by Autumn Colors
Your OP (and listed votes in OP) says that list is for House vote #274 on Amendment #2 of the budget.

The link you posted downthread leads to a page that says it's for House vote #257 on Amendment #3 of the budget.

Do you have a link to the vote/amendment listed in your OP?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #58
61. That is the correct link for Congressman Grijalva's amendment # 3 and the vote.
Edited on Sat Apr-16-11 03:06 PM by Better Believe It
An amendment to H. Con. Res. 34: Establishing the budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2012 and setting forth....

Offered: Apr 15, 2011
Sponsor: Rep. Raul Grijalva
Actions: Apr 15, 2011: Amendment (A002) in the nature of a substitute offered by Mr. Grijalva.
Apr 15, 2011: On agreeing to the Grijalva amendment (A002) Failed by recorded vote: 77 - 347 (Roll no. 274).

Number: House Vote #274 in 2011
Date: Apr 15, 2011 11:35AM
Result: Failed
Amendment: H.Amdt. 257: An substitute amendment numbered 3 printed in House Report 112-62 to eliminate the deficit by 2021, while putting America back to work, restoring America's economic competitiveness, implementing a fair tax system, keeping Americans healthy and bringing our troops back home.
amending H. Con. Res. 34: Establishing the budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2012...

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2011-274

The earlier link had a misprint indicating it was amendment #2. That's been corrected.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #61
63. so, is the state-to-state list posted in the op incorrect? please clarify. thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #63
64. The state-to-state list in the OP is 100% correct but you can cross check it if you wish with ....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #64
66. no, i trust you, i just wanted to confirm that there wasn't any mix up, given some reactions in this

thread.

thanks! :yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #66
69. At least one poster was looking at the wrong amendment for the vote results.

But, they corrected their mistake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
68. This vote tally begs the question WHY did so many Dems vote against it?
Especially Dems like Kaptur, Weiner, DeFazio.

Has there been any explanation by those individuals?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #68
71. They don't agree with the budget proposal. It's probably too liberal for their tastes.
Edited on Sat Apr-16-11 04:00 PM by Better Believe It
And they agree with President Obama and want to find common ground with Republicans to reach a compromise bi-partisan agreement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #71
80. Ya know, I just don't buy that the proposal is TOO liberal for Kaptur or Weiner
or DeFazio. They are LIBERALS of the best sort.


WHY are they not voting for this? These are people who usually stand up for what I believe in. So I'd like to know exactly why they are voting NO.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-17-11 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #80
82. What other reasonable explanation is there? Many so-called "liberals" will wind up voting for ....
Edited on Sun Apr-17-11 12:11 PM by Better Believe It
whatever bi-partisan deficit cutting agreement is reached in June or July.

Some will make the record and vote against the agreement knowing that their vote won't make a difference and a no vote will help their re-election chances. I'm not cynical, that's just the way "practical politics" works today in Washington.

Progressives could write to those and other representatives asking why they voted against the liberal deficit cutting legislation but I expect that with rare exceptions they will not respond to that question.

Write and see what kind of response you get, if any.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #68
72. i'd love to see an explanation, too. post if you find any, will you?

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 03:59 PM
Response to Original message
70. WTF is wrong with them that they can't even stand on principle on a vote they know they'll lose?
Mine, Maloney, also a No. UGH.

77. Would be encouraging, if we had a system of proportional representation and parliamentary coalitions. Instead of plurality takes 100 percent, and everyone else gets zero.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 04:27 PM
Response to Original message
73. No. 108 NeoDems voted for it.
They have infested our party and worship at the feet of grover norquist. They are not Democrats. They just run as Democrats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
libmom74 Donating Member (577 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 04:59 PM
Response to Original message
74. Wow 77.
Well it is a start, do you think we can we convince them to leave the left hand wing of the republican party and start a real progressive party?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 05:45 PM
Response to Original message
75. Illinois is horribe except for chicago
Aye IL-1 Rush, Bobby
Aye IL-2 Jackson, Jesse

Aye IL-4 Gutierrez, Luis

Aye IL-7 Davis, Danny

Aye IL-9 Schakowsky, Janice

Hmmm, a lation, a person with polish roots, and 3 black men, all in the progressive conference. blacks, latinos and white catholics in illinois seem to support the progressive caucus, i wonder how white protestants fare.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shagbark Hickory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 06:39 PM
Response to Original message
78. Yeah. Woo hoo.
Edited on Sat Apr-16-11 06:39 PM by Shagbark Hickory
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
steelmania75 Donating Member (836 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 06:44 PM
Response to Original message
79. Hey, at least my congressman has the right idea. GO MIKE DOYLE OF PITTSBURGH!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Citizen Worker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 08:36 PM
Response to Original message
81. I noticed that in the state of WA the one liberal democrat, Jim McDermott, voted Yea. The rest are
proud members of the DLC. I say, fuck 'em!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-18-11 12:23 PM
Response to Original message
84. Sad. You'd think that they could have at least made a statement
with their vote.

Huh...come to think of it, I guess they did.

Even sadder.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-18-11 08:11 PM
Response to Original message
86. Its a good barometer of determining which representatives are on
Edited on Mon Apr-18-11 08:13 PM by mmonk
your side if you are a progressive. It is important for progressives to disavow themselves from the failed policies of Reganomics. Afterall, when it fails, liberals and progressives get the blame for the condition of the economy but yet its the Reagan disciples of both parties creating the failure. We must quit letting antiprogressive politicians use the word to describe themselves as well. It plays into the general lies in this country and confusion among the electorate. I am a progressive. The word Democrat is just used to register.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Plucketeer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-18-11 08:56 PM
Response to Original message
87. Is there a
BERNIESANDERSUNDERGROUND.COM Website? That's where I belong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-19-11 05:40 PM
Response to Original message
89. The yeas are just a list of Democrats who feel secure about next year's election.
Some part of this bill will be quoted by the Repuglican opponent of the 'yea' Congresspeople next year in the campaign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iwishiwas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-19-11 05:55 PM
Response to Original message
90. Tammy Baldwin-WI AYE!! Paul Ryan NO
Wisconsin
No WI-1 Ryan, Paul
Aye WI-2 Baldwin, Tammy
No WI-3 Kind, Ronald
Aye WI-4 Moore, Gwen
No WI-5 Sensenbrenner, F.
No WI-6 Petri, Thomas
No WI-7 Duffy, Sean
No WI-8 Ribble, Reid
Wyoming
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Modern_Matthew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-19-11 06:01 PM
Response to Original message
91. They are complete failures and there's no valid excuse for their hypocrisy.
I don't care about any explanation regarding chess or some complex long con against the GOP. You vote YES, always, if you agree with it. Even if it costs you a seat. They do not agree with these principles and do not deserve a seat at the table.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Jul 22nd 2014, 06:39 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC