GOP caught in a vise

[Taichiliberal]

what will get passed will benefit medical and insurance industry far more than consumers.

Most likely, given Obama's insistence upon bi-partisanship despite the GOP wall of refusal to negotiate. Add to this the Dixiecrats/Bluedogs obeying their corporate contributors to the letter, and IMHO it'll be a miracle if ANY real reform or the groundwork for such comes through.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Most likely, given Obama's insistence upon bi-partisanship despite the GOP wall of refusal to negotiate. Add to this the Dixiecrats/Bluedogs obeying their corporate contributors to the letter, and IMHO it'll be a miracle if ANY real reform or the groundwork for such comes through.

i guess there's just no possible way you'd accept that the bluedogs are wanting to keep their seats in fiscally conservative states/districts, will you? it just HAS to be corporate contributors and not the constituents.

 

[Taichiliberal]

i guess there's just no possible way you'd accept that the bluedogs are wanting to keep their seats in fiscally conservative states/districts, will you? Who said I didn't? I just gave ONE reason that I saw as important. Once again, you ASSUME something and build on that assumation as fact.....which proves to be your undoing. it just HAS to be corporate contributors and not the constituents.

Wake up, toodles. It's a nasty combination of the two.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Several of the dems in congress are suckasses too.

Also, little neocon dopes like to forget that the Dems did NOT have a lock on the House and the Senate during Slick Willy's two terms.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Who said I didn't? I just gave ONE reason that I saw as important. Once again, you ASSUME something and build on that assumation as fact.....which proves to be your undoing.

Wake up, toodles. It's a nasty combination of the two.

LOL, pot, kettle, black

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by SmarterThanYou
i guess there's just no possible way you'd accept that the bluedogs are wanting to keep their seats in fiscally conservative states/districts, will you? Who said I didn't? I just gave ONE reason that I saw as important. Once again, you ASSUME something and build on that assumation as fact.....which proves to be your undoing. it just HAS to be corporate contributors and not the constituents.

Wake up, toodles. It's a nasty combination of the two.

LOL, pot, kettle, black

Once again, when I prove you wrong on a point, you try to detour the conversation to a personal slam fest. Your last sentence here doesn't even make sense given the last sentence of my previous response. Grow up.