Senate Special Election in MA

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

Clearly Republicans need to stop fighting against legislation that is contrary to their principles as well as their constituencies principles.

[eunhye]

To sumarize, make the filibuster an opportunity to drive a death nail into the heart of the party rather than veiwing it as a real threat. Make the people hate the republican party again.
.

Or the democrats could've had balls to you know "ram" it through with their 60 plus majority, oh it's 59 now nevermind.

[Acturus]

Or the democrats could've had balls to you know "ram" it through with their 60 plus majority, oh it's 59 now nevermind.

Yes, because blind allegiance to party lines is exactly what this country needs more of.

[willriker]

Yes, because blind allegiance to party lines is exactly what this country needs more of.

From what i see coming out of the other side of the isle, i would argue that democrats need more blind party allegiance. The republicans definately have it. And they portray a solid, united fron. Then they polish the surface with mocking how democrats prefer to... debate among themselves.

Yeah, in a world where the act of debating on the best course of action is considered a weakness... more blind party allegiance is exactly whats needed.

[Cephius]

Germany, circa 1930s: "Boy, those Nazis sure portray a solid, united front!"

It's not always a good thing. Since when is debating considered a weakness? I always thought that's how civilized people handle things.

[Olo401]

They could still "ram" it through under reconciliation rules eunhye, and they don't even have to use the garbage Senate bill. Reid could bring up the House-passed bill during the budget process, and not even Brown, LIEberman or Ben Nelson would be able to stop it.

That would require Reid to grow some balls tho and I just don't see it happening.

[ZarakiKujata]

Germany, circa 1930s: "Boy, those Nazis sure portray a solid, united front!"

It's not always a good thing. Since when is debating considered a weakness? I always thought that's how civilized people handle things.

Hey man get your political analogies straight. Obama and the Democrats are nazis. the GOP are patriots fighting to preserve America.

[Acturus]

From what i see coming out of the other side of the isle, i would argue that democrats need more blind party allegiance. The republicans definately have it. And they portray a solid, united fron. Then they polish the surface with mocking how democrats prefer to... debate among themselves.

Yeah, in a world where the act of debating on the best course of action is considered a weakness... more blind party allegiance is exactly whats needed.

"Best course of action" being purely based on your opinion, of course.

Politics as usual has driven both sides of the aisle for a very long time. Changing that was one of many campaign promises Obama (and McCain, to be fair) offered the American people.

Blind party allegiance removes the need for 500+ representatives in our legislative body. All we would need is one Democrat, one Republican, and a fair contest between them to decide policy.

[willriker]

Germany, circa 1930s: "Boy, those Nazis sure portray a solid, united front!"

It's not always a good thing. Since when is debating considered a weakness? I always thought that's how civilized people handle things.

oh my, he played the Nazi card. Im going to ignore the Nazi card for many reasons, and i will move on to the second part of your comment.

You are absolutely right, actualy debating things is the method civilized people use to handle issues. I could not agree more. But, there really is no debating going on with this health bill. I see some debating about the bill within democratic rank and file. Then i see some peices of the bill just designed to buy votes. But, as for a bipartisan debate on health care?

I didnt even think i would have to state that it hasn't existed. And, it doesnt exist.

[eunhye]

[Effluo]

I guess the Illuminati really didn't like Obamacare. Kill a Kennedy and replace him with a Republican. Well played

[Acturus]

I guess the Illuminati really didn't like Obamacare. Kill a Kennedy and replace him with a Republican. Well played

It wasn't the Illuminati. It was the Knights Templar.

You should listen to this guy more:

Spoiler: show

http://www.clickthecity.com/img2/art...425-image4.jpg

[Cephius]

oh my, he played the Nazi card. Im going to ignore the Nazi card for many reasons, and i will move on to the second part of your comment.

You are absolutely right, actualy debating things is the method civilized people use to handle issues. I could not agree more. But, there really is no debating going on with this health bill. I see some debating about the bill within democratic rank and file. Then i see some peices of the bill just designed to buy votes. But, as for a bipartisan debate on health care?

I didnt even think i would have to state that it hasn't existed. And, it doesnt exist.

Yeah, I was just trolling with the Nazi comment. Trying to troll the neocons.

I'm still confused though, why are you blaming the Democrats for lack of bi partisan debate when they're the only ones doing the debating? Clearly the Republicans are going to fight it just on political basis alone. That still doesn't mean they should just ram through any old thing without debating about it.

[pohibaba]

Listened to this guy's press conference this morning, didn't seem like too bad a dude. Most likely, he'll be propped up as the Republican standard bearer for a few months, or however long it takes the Democrats to give up on health care (saying that the Republicans stopped it would be giving them more credit than they deserve), then he'll be pushed into the corner as a non-entity and remain there until he loses his re-election campaign.

[Effluo]

It wasn't the Illuminati. It was the Knights Templar.

You should listen to this guy more:

Spoiler: show

http://www.clickthecity.com/img2/art...425-image4.jpg

The Templar are a schill for the Illuminati. Misinformation and misdirection.

I prefer this guy:

Spoiler: show

http://dangenbrack.files.wordpress.c.../john_todd.jpg

[willriker]

Yeah, I was just trolling with the Nazi comment. Trying to troll the neocons.

I'm still confused though, why are you blaming the Democrats for lack of bi partisan debate when they're the only ones doing the debating? Clearly the Republicans are going to fight it just on political basis alone. That still doesn't mean they should just ram through any old thing without debating about it.

I base this off the fact that republicans have not had such a strong seating in congress, with the presidency, for about 50 years. And, the republicans seem to push what ever they want through. And no, you didnt see any debating going on at that time either.

I am just pointing out that the republicans and the democrats are playing two entirely diferant games. It is obvious which side gets things through, and which side is adept at placing a defense against the others ideals. The republicans win on both accounts. If that is true, which i do not think can really be debated, the democrats need to either figure out a tactic which turns the republican strategy against themselves, or they need to pick up a few ideas from the republican play book.

Look at the 8 years of the Bush presidency. They were able to push through all kinds of legislature. Some of it the democrats resisted tooth and nail. But, almost all of it passed. Now the democrats have a super magority in congress, and the presidency... and still cant get anything done.

We all know that you cannot debate with some people. Various examples on this concept surface on this board alone. I would say that you cannot debatewith most republicans. They do everything possible to gain the winning position. Here is one example, i was visiting my wifes grandparents. They were watching Fox news. Fox was discuissing the healthcare bill and had a republican, and democrat, on the show to be 'fair and balanced'. The republican completely owned the democrat. And her grandparents chuckled at how badly the democrat got served. Why?

Well the republican was a senate seat holder for ~12 years. The democrat was an assistant to a house of representatives congressional member. Gee, i wonder who is going to hold up a better debate where the senate health bill is concerned. This wasnt a debate. Republicants dont debate on issues like this. They attack in one united, relentless, no holds barred front. hehe a blitzkrieg if you will.

[BunkMonk]

I'm really not anti-war, just making the point that your tax dollars don't always go to things that directly benefit you. But you still pay them. It's the cost of living here. Do you really think that things like social security, medicare, welfare, unemployment, etc are things that the working class shouldn't pay for? If not, then why is universal heath care the straw that broke the camel's back?

Our government doesn't seem to handle social programs well. As things are now with the bill, it will probably follow down the path of programs that mean well, but are bungled once put into action. Can you honestly say that there are not massive issues with Social Security, medicare, welfare, etc?

Also, it's one thing to grow-up with a broken program, it's entirely different to see a brand new one being proposed and sit idly by. In my case, and I'm assuming for the majority of BG people, the programs you mentioned above were placed in effect while I was a wee youngin. Couldn't really do much at the time, ya know?

[Cephius]

Our government doesn't seem to handle social programs well. As things are now with the bill, it will probably follow down the path of programs that mean well, but are bungled once put into action. Can you honestly say that there are not massive issues with Social Security, medicare, welfare, etc?

Also, it's one thing to grow-up with a broken program, it's entirely different to see a brand new one being proposed and sit idly by. In my case, and I'm assuming for the majority of BG people, the programs you mentioned above were placed in effect while I was a wee youngin. Couldn't really do much at the time, ya know?

Saying there are management issues with social security, welfare, etc is completely different from saying they shouldn't exist at all. If you're asking if I think they're needed, yes I do.

[BunkMonk]

Saying there are management issues with social security, welfare, etc is completely different from saying they shouldn't exist at all. If you're asking if I think they're needed, yes I do.

Not saying they shouldn't exist, just saying that it would be ridiculous for them to rush a bill without putting a decent bit of effort into working out details and closing loopholes, etc. To me, it seems like they just threw something out there to appease their voters, regardless of how jacked up it actually was.

[Leif]

You are absolutely right, actualy debating things is the method civilized people use to handle issues. I could not agree more. But, there really is no debating going on with this health bill. I see some debating about the bill within democratic rank and file. Then i see some peices of the bill just designed to buy votes. But, as for a bipartisan debate on health care?

You're absolutely right. Democrats have crushed every Republican bill proposed. "Transparency" and "open and honest debate" went out on day 1.

Saying there are management issues with social security, welfare, etc is completely different from saying they shouldn't exist at all. If you're asking if I think they're needed, yes I do.

If those bills were being voted on today, they would be in the same trouble Obamacare is in. Now that they have tens of millions of Americans getting $500 pieces of gum through these programs, nobody can afford to give it up. Not one of them would respond, boy, that's a great deal!