Those democrats sure do do what they were elected to do. Don't they?

56-43
they doin the best they can con, but that fillibuster is a mother fucker. Oh well, 60 seat majority for the dems is just around the corner :)

Remember the Republican whine "Just give us an up or down vote!!!" when the Dems filibustered.

Those republicans sure abandon their principles easily. Don't they?

Remember how the allegedly liberal "main stream media" was full of stories about how the dems were obstructionists when they filibustered?
Gosh, why haven't we heard the same response?

Rasta-
Liberal media.

"Those democrats sure do do what they were elected to do. Don't they?"

From 1980 through 2004 the GOP platform has included a call for a so-called "Human Life Amendment" to the US Constitution.

During that time the Republicans held the US Senate for 17 years, the US House of Representatives for 12 years, and the Presidency for 18 years.

Where's the "Human Life Amendment" to the US Constitution?

Those Republicans sure do do what they were elected to do. Don't they?

Hans

I thought a fillabuster was when they avoided cloiter (60 senetors present) to vote on an issue? Fillabuster???

"Those democrats sure do do what they were elected to do. Don't they?"

"Those Republicans sure do do what they were elected to do. Don't they?"

both stated sarcastically. And both reasons to vote Libertarian!!!

"I thought a fillabuster was when they avoided cloiter (60 senetors present) to vote on an issue? Fillabuster???"

How about getting back to us when there are 60 Senators present to vote on cloture. Otherwise we'll have to filibuster your comments.

Hans

Loony,

It takes 60 votes to close debate in the Senate. Congress is inherently a political animal, and they're all nose-counters. Less than 60 votes signals there will be a fillabuster, if it were to reach the floor. Even if debate is closed, and Congress passes the bill, a Presidential veto would then require 67 votes in the Senate to override.

Democrats can't even close debate, without at least some Republican votes.

Gosh, those Republicans sure do practice what they preach. Obstructionist is the new synonym for Republican.

Loony-
"cloture", "filibuster" and "senators".

I've said from the beginning that terrorists should be dealt with in the country where their crimes occured. If the Northern Alliance of Afghanistan had suffocated foreign Al Queda assholes in boxcars, nobody would have cared.

So while I don't believe that Gitmo should even exist, I also don't see how Federal courts have jurisdiction in any of these cases. A decent lawyer would get every single one of these prisoners freed if this went into our domestic courts.

Oh well, 60 seat majority for the dems is just around the corner :)

Doem,Well, 2008 would certianly be there best hope -- with so many GOP seats in play.

So the dems better hurry up and figure out how to lose this war in the next year --because anything resembling victory for America in Iraq and the Democrats are screwed -- they won't pick up any seats and may lose some.

Bowa-
re: So the dems better hurry up and figure out how to lose this war in the next year..

Why should they, when Bush is doing such a bang up job and has been for nearly five years?

So the dems better hurry up and figure out how to lose this war in the next year --because anything resembling victory for America in Iraq and the Democrats are screwed -- they won't pick up any seats and may lose some.

Posted by Bowa at 2007-09-19 09:24 PM

If you had any class at all, you'd offer to share some that sh*t you're smokin with the rest of us %-)

OCU

Bowa, You missed the new Kool Aid. Nobody is talking victory anymore. Especially the White House.

The plan is to keep the balls in the air long enough to give the whole abortion to the next loser-in-chief.

The same idiots who paid billions for worthless innocent prisoners to parade and torture, now want to deny them habeus corpus and all their other human rights. Lowlife scum sucking turds.

Republicans are even to blame for turncoat Democrats. Is there no stop to their evil persuasive powers?

Bowa, You missed the new Kool Aid. Nobody is talking victory anymore. Especially the White House.

Yeah, Bowa, haven't you heard -- Bush has changed the word to define his objective in Iraq to his lastest definition of winning -- "success." Listen to Bush's latest speeches and that's all you hear -- when we achieve "success" in Iraq our troops will come home.

No more setting his sights (or vocabulary) on a "win" or "victory" or "stay the course" -- nope, now it's "success" in Iraq as he hopes cover his disaster with the latest buzzword. You can put lipstick (or a new definition) on a pig, but it's still a pig and it's still his same old lost war.

No more setting his sights (or vocabulary) on a "win" or "victory" or "stay the course" -- nope, now it's "success" in Iraq as he hopes cover his disaster with the latest buzzword. You can put lipstick (or a new definition) on a pig, but it's still a pig and it's still his same old lost war

The general slant I've been hearing from the left is that Bush wants to draw the war out until past the next election so that he doesn't get blamed for the loss. If that's the case, why the change in rhetoric? Why not keep using victory words?

If that's the case, why the change in rhetoric? Why not keep using victory words?

Because Bush can't define "victory" and he's being pressured more and more by everyone -- not just your imaginary "left" -- to say what does he mean by "victory." So, he's lowered the bar (as he gets closer to getting out of office) and by lowering the bar for what he hopes people will consider as his achieving something in Iraq, Bush can say he accomplished something with his illegal war.

What sounds tougher to you -- a "victory" or a "success"

Not the best analogy (but give me a break, it's 2:00 a.m.) -- You can have a business meeting with your biggest competitor and come away saying your meeting was "successful." On the other hand, if you came away from that same business meeting with your top competitor and said it was a "victory" it gives the outcome a whole different perspective and also means you actually achieved a better outcome for your company than was achieved by your competition. (told you it wasn't the best analogy but you get my drift)

Goat --

Just curious -- did you ever have a chance to read "The Great Iraq Swindle" that AU and I have been linking for a week or so in a number of threads? I'll make a deal with you -- if you read it for me, I promise never to ask you your opinion or anything else about it except your word that you did read it. Deal?

coward

Those democrats sure do do what they were elected to do. Don't they?

Posted by Incubus_Con



Hey asshole ... they voted in FAVOR of it. They don't have enough votes.

Don't you think that we all KNOW this? Your dumbass little posts tell more about you than about the issue.

Nice...

I've said from the beginning that terrorists should be dealt with in the country where their crimes occured...

So while I don't believe that Gitmo should even exist, I also don't see how Federal courts have jurisdiction in any of these cases. --Sully

I don't think you really believe this. If you did, you'd think the U.S. had no cause for legal action in the beheadings of U.S. citizens in the M.E., in hostage situations, etc.

In the case of 9/11, are you arguing that the U.S. has no cause for action against Bin Laden because he was on foreign soil when setting it up?

The headline is misleading.

A better one would be....

GOP Blocks Bid on Rights Of Detainees

Whatever happened to the Republitard mantra of "straight up or down votes"?

Just another example of right wing hypocrisy in action.

And the retards here just lap it up.

Those republicans sure abandon their principles easily. Don't they?

Posted by RastaCyborg at 2007-09-19 08:48 PM

Their only principle is to loyalty to the party no matter what the cost.

The headline is misleading.

A better one would be....

GOP Blocks Bid on Rights Of Detainees

Don't you mean "KILL" as it is in the Soldiers thread?

Robby,

How about addressing the hypocrisy of the 'up or down vote' bullshit that we heard from the republic senators?

How about addressing the hypocrisy of the 'up or down vote' bullshit that we heard from the republic senators?

Posted by JimmyWallback


that was about judges... the much talked about nuclear option was only about juries...

Whoops... only about judges...

Sorry I'm listening to an OJ story.

the magna carta's for fags

the magna carta's for fags

Posted by truthhurts


Not with the color paper they chose to write it on...

rob its a shame you werent cooler, I have the COOLEST website that i could share with you, free movies, including first run, but such is life.

I'm cool

With so many seditionists in public office, I wonder that there is not a military coup. The denigration of General Petraeus by the "harpies of the shore," the sunshine patriots who seem unconcerned regarding the welfare of our country, and are apologetic if we undertake to defend ourselves from enemies, is pathetic.

Have we become a nation of wimps? Why do we try to create situations that aid and abet those dedicated to harming us? These concessions seem to be a program devised by madmen among us to make us vulnerable to harm.

We need to postulate, not seek to justify our worthiness, and as axioms recognize that anything we do for our benefit is right, and anything that impairs our ability to defend ourselves is wrong.

Pax American.

rob check your yahoo account for an email with no subject.
go to that link and thank me later.

do not spread it around.