i am not sanguine about

[Damocles]

Show the vote. Show me even a scintilla of evidence that the Democrats in the Senate blocked a regulatory bill and prevented it from passing.

Look, I know where you got your bullshit information on this one. Don't be coy. Just post the link to the Kevin "DOW 36,000" Hassett Bloomberg op-ed and we can all move on.

Again, disingenuously pretending that you can't figure out what a Whip does, only later to explain it in detail when it suits your fancy.

It is just another example of what lengths the religiously partisan will go to protect their own.

Nothing you have done in this thread has done anything but cement the idea that "easier to spot" was probably the most inane post this board saw today.

Even if you were right (you're not) and I was defending Rs, it would still be just more evidence that I was one of those people. Anything at all, you will defend.

The only reason that I bring up the Ds was because of how "easy to spot" it would be and to give a direct and actual easy to spot example of how she's lying to herself.

 

[Bonestorm]

Again, disingenuously pretending that you can't figure out what a Whip does, only later to explain it in detail when it suits your fancy.

It is just another example of what lengths the religiously partisan will go to protect their own.

Nothing you have done in this thread has done anything but cement the idea that "easier to spot" was probably the most inane post this board saw today.

I think it hilarious that you accuse me of "protecting my own" when all you are doing is pushing the failure to regulate on the Democrats in the absence of any evidence that the Democrats blocked the regulations or that the Senate Republicans actually tried to get a bill passed.

Showing that a particular bill was blocked b a particular party is a very easy thing to do in this day and age, yet you cannot present any evidence of it. Why is that?

 

[Damocles]

I think it hilarious that you accuse me of "protecting my own" when all you are doing is pushing the failure to regulate on the Democrats in the absence of any evidence that the Democrats blocked the regulations or that the Senate Republicans actually tried to get a bill passed.

Showing that a particular bill was blocked b a particular party is a very easy thing to do in this day and age, yet you cannot present any evidence of it. Why is that?

Rubbish, the "absence" is only in your mind. They brought it out of committee to have it die on the floor because they could not get the votes to support cloture. But hey, working on it, getting it out of committee on a party line vote... yeah, that's no evidence at all...

Hack.

 

[uscitizen]

the fannys were not the butt of this problem.

 

[Bonestorm]

Rubbish, the "absence" is only in your mind. They brought it out of committee to have it die on the floor because they could not get the votes to support cloture. But hey, working on it, getting it out of committee on a party line vote... yeah, that's no evidence at all...

Hack.

Saying something over and over and over again doesn't make it so. This is what it looks like when the majority party brings a vote to the floor but fails to pass a cloture motion:

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/L...ote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00227

All you have to do is show me the same thing for the regulatory bill. It's not all that difficult.

You read Hassett's piece and believe every word. He played you.

 

[Damocles]

Saying something over and over and over again doesn't make it so. This is what it looks like when the majority party brings a vote to the floor but fails to pass a cloture motion:

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/L...ote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00227

All you have to do is show me the same thing for the regulatory bill. It's not all that difficult.

You read Hassett's piece and believe every word. He played you.

One more time, repeating this is rubbish. How often do bills die without even a cloture vote because they know cloture is impossible?

This is something that people bring up on both sides. Instead of licking the tub ring and trying to say it tastes like peppermint you could just realize that some people in government saw it coming, tried to do something and got held up in the Senate where the big guns had been bought.

You know very well that once cloture vote is taken discussion can not be brought back up on a failed topic until the next session. Not taking the cloture vote shows that they were willing to keep trying, not that they didn't care. If they wanted to make some sort of political point they can pull the cloture vote at any time.

If you believe that Hassett's piece is the only piece of information we can go by you are hacktacularly wrong. We can use knowledge, civics classes, rules of order... We can use more than just partisan hack sites that try to dismiss any possible dirt on their own party...

Or we can sit around on a site where everybody knows about this stuff and pretend they don't, hack away and keep talking point pounding.

The Senate was bought and paid for. Anybody with a brain can follow the money.

 

[Bonestorm]

One more time, repeating this is rubbish. How often do bills die without even a cloture vote because they know cloture is impossible?

This is something that people bring up on both sides. Instead of licking the tub ring and trying to say it tastes like peppermint you could just realize that some people in government saw it coming, tried to do something and got held up in the Senate where the big guns had been bought.

Negative. Some people in the House tried to pass legislation and did so with majority Democrat support and well as majority Republican support.

As for the Senate, it looks like it was not a priority of either party. Most bills die without cloture votes. The important ones go down swinging. This wasn't an important one for the Senate leadership.

 

[Damocles]

Negative. Some people in the House tried to pass legislation and did so with majority Democrat support and well as majority Republican support.

As for the Senate, it looks like it was not a priority of either party. Most bills die without cloture votes. The important ones go down swinging. This wasn't an important one for the Senate leadership.

Read the whole post.

You do what you accuse me of and try to absolve people who do not deserve it.

 

[uscitizen]

Talk radio is destroying Damo's mind.

 

[Bonestorm]

One more time, repeating this is rubbish. How often do bills die without even a cloture vote because they know cloture is impossible?

This is something that people bring up on both sides. Instead of licking the tub ring and trying to say it tastes like peppermint you could just realize that some people in government saw it coming, tried to do something and got held up in the Senate where the big guns had been bought.

You know very well that once cloture vote is taken discussion can not be brought back up on a failed topic until the next session. Not taking the cloture vote shows that they were willing to keep trying, not that they didn't care. If they wanted to make some sort of political point they can pull the cloture vote at any time.

If you believe that Hassett's piece is the only piece of information we can go by you are hacktacularly wrong. We can use knowledge, civics classes, rules of order... We can use more than just partisan hack sites that try to dismiss any possible dirt on their own party...

Or we can sit around on a site where everybody knows about this stuff and pretend they don't, hack away and keep talking point pounding.

The Senate was bought and paid for. Anybody with a brain can follow the money.

Nonsense. There are procedural mechanisms for a failed cloture vote to be brought back to the floor in the same session. Specifically, the majority leader simply votes against cloture and is free to bring it back up. Just like Frist did here:

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/L...ote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00364


You can pretend that this was the most important matter to the Republicans but they never bothered to take a vote on it. It's just not the case. The Republican leadership simply didn't care to press the issue. It was not important to them. You can blame the failure to the "bought and paid for" Democrats if you want, but that doesn't make it so.

 

[Damocles]

Nonsense. There are procedural mechanisms for a failed cloture vote to be brought back to the floor in the same session. Specifically, the majority leader simply votes against cloture and is free to bring it back up. Just like Frist did here:

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/L...ote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00364


You can pretend that this was the most important matter to the Republicans but they never bothered to take a vote on it. It's just not the case. The Republican leadership simply didn't care to press the issue. It was not important to them. You can blame the failure to the "bought and paid for" Democrats if you want, but that doesn't make it so.

And there is never any other reason? I blame it both on them and the Rs who didn't fight hard enough. I blame both, you attempt to absolve. It's inane to pretend that they never cared at all, unless you are silly enough to think they knew it would blow up now and needed some "cover".

The reality is, it was brought again and again and killed in the Senate by the people that would most likely have acted strongly for regulation otherwise. It is EXACTLY what Desh and her "easier to spot" remark were about, yet it was "impossible" to spot by partisan hacks. Exactly as I stated.

 

[Bonestorm]

And there is never any other reason? I blame it both on them and the Rs who didn't fight hard enough. I blame both, you attempt to absolve. It's inane to pretend that they never cared at all, unless you are silly enough to think they knew it would blow up now and needed some "cover".

The reality is, it was brought again and again and killed in the Senate by the people that would most likely have acted strongly for regulation otherwise. It is EXACTLY what Desh and her "easier to spot" remark were about, yet it was "impossible" to spot by partisan hacks. Exactly as I stated.

Funny I didn't see you blaming the R's here, the post the got this discussion going:

We all get to hear about how great they are and how the current debacle is the R's fault when the R's tried to shut down FM & FM several times thus attempting to stave off the issue before it got here, but were shut down by those Ds that FM & FM bought. "Easier to spot" doesn't translate to a nice serving of political Karma on their plate, especially when the Ds would have to point fingers at themselves.

But hey, if you want to blame the Republicans too I'm all for it. In fact, since they were the ones that controlled the Senate and what matters were made a priority and what matters were not made a priority shouldn't they shoulder the blame?

The fact of the matter is that the bill was never killed by anyone because the Republicans never even gave it a chance. They let it die.

 

[Damocles]

Funny I didn't see you blaming the R's here, the post the got this discussion going:



But hey, if you want to blame the Republicans too I'm all for it. In fact, since they were the ones that controlled the Senate and what matters were made a priority and what matters were not made a priority shouldn't they shoulder the blame?

The fact of the matter is that the bill was never killed by anyone because the Republicans never even gave it a chance. They let it die.

Again, this is inane. They let it die because cloture was impossible. It happens all the time. I wish they gave it more of a push, sure.

But the reality is it didn't get out of committee because nobody was working on it, and we can figure out by following the money what happened or we can just sit covering our ears with our eyes closed and pretend that we have some way to "absolve" those we want.

Your insistence that the paid off Ds were somehow benevolently perfect is what we are arguing here, that they are somehow absolved. Many of them voted against it in committee and there is record of that vote (party line style). It isn't that hard to follow the money and see how the vote was going, nor even to listen to the taped sessions where the Ds (Dodd) kept telling me how "Strong" FM & FM were, and how this was unnecessary regulation on "good companies".

 

[Bonestorm]

Again, this is inane. They let it die because cloture was impossible. It happens all the time. I wish they gave it more of a push, sure.

But the reality is it didn't get out of committee because nobody was working on it, and we can figure out by following the money what happened or we can just sit covering our ears with our eyes closed and pretend that we have some way to "absolve" those we want.

Your insistence that the paid off Ds were somehow benevolently perfect is what we are arguing here, that they are somehow absolved. Many of them voted against it in committee and there is record of that vote (party line style). It isn't that hard to follow the money and see how the vote was going, nor even to listen to the taped sessions where the Ds (Dodd) kept telling me how "Strong" FM & FM were, and how this was unnecessary regulation on "good companies".

1) Cloture was not impossible. Saying something over and over again doesn't make it true. Look at the House, the bill passed with a majority of Democrats voting in favor of the bill.

2) The bill made it out of committee.

3) Even assuming that the Dodd and others were against it, that doesn't excuse the Republicans from failing to bring such an important and critical bill that could have staved of a global financial crisis from coming to the floor for a vote. Suddenly the Republicans are afraid to put the screws to Democrats even thought they have the one thing that could have prevented global financial armageddon?

Please.

Oh, and I never said that the D's were perfect. I'm just saying this wasn't only their fault.

 

[Damocles]

1) Cloture was not impossible. Saying something over and over again doesn't make it true. Look at the House, the bill passed with a majority of Democrats voting in favor of the bill.

2) The bill made it out of committee.

3) Even assuming that the Dodd and others were against it, that doesn't excuse the Republicans from failing to bring such an important and critical bill that could have staved of a global financial crisis from coming to the floor for a vote. Suddenly the Republicans are afraid to put the screws to Democrats even thought they have the one thing that could have prevented global financial armageddon?

Please.

Oh, and I never said that the D's were perfect. I'm just saying this wasn't only their fault.

1. You are not a whip and therefore are just guessing out your behind.

2. I know it made it out of committee, I said that it didn't get out of committee because nobody cared about it... it made it out of committee because Rs were trying to pass it. Pay attention.

3. You don't have to assume, you posted the results of the vote of the committee yourself on a different thread. I didn't even have to look for them.

Oh and...

Yes, you keep trying to wash their hands of this, that's what keeps this conversation going.

 

[Bonestorm]

1. You are not a whip and therefore are just guessing out your behind.

2. I know it made it out of committee, I said that it didn't get out of committee because nobody cared about it... it made it out of committee because Rs were trying to pass it. Pay attention.

3. You don't have to assume, you posted the results of the vote of the committee yourself on a different thread. I didn't even have to look for them.

Oh and...

Yes, you keep trying to wash their hands of this, that's what keeps this conversation going.

1) If you are really trying to pass a bill you put it up for a vote. It's fairly elementary. You don't need to be a whip to figure that out.

2) Fair enough. But getting bills out of committee doesn't make them law. If you really want to pass a bill you put it up for a vote on the floor. Again, it's fairly elementary.

3) I never posted the results of the committee vote. I've looked for them but cannot find them.

Finally, I have already said, repeatedly, that the Democrats are partly to blame. The issue that we seem to be having is that you want to insist that the Democrats are largely or totally to blame and that the Republicans were really really trying to get this bill passed.

The problem is that you have no evidence to support your claims. In fact, it appears that the Republicans, who controlled the Senate and what bills came to the floor, were perfectly happy doing nothing and sitting idly by.

 

[Damocles]

1) If you are really trying to pass a bill you put it up for a vote. It's fairly elementary. You don't need to be a whip to figure that out.

Complete and total rubbish. If you are trying to pass a controversial measure Whips are always necessary. Pelosi would never have proposed the bailout that failed if the Whips hadn't reported success beforehand. Again, I wish they had made a larger deal of it and recorded a vote, but it doesn't change the reality.

2) Fair enough. But getting bills out of committee doesn't make them law. If you really want to pass a bill you put it up for a vote on the floor. Again, it's fairly elementary.

One more time for the deliberately obtuse. If your Whips tell you that the measure is doomed to failure often the leaders decide to let it die on the floor. Again it happens fairly often, and only the hackmasters attempt to play that card on a politically savvy board.

3) I never posted the results of the committee vote. I've looked for them but cannot find them.

You gave me the page that linked to the committee, it had links to the votes of the committee.

Finally, I have already said, repeatedly, that the Democrats are partly to blame. The issue that we seem to be having is that you want to insist that the Democrats are largely or totally to blame and that the Republicans were really really trying to get this bill passed.

The problem is that you have no evidence to support your claims. In fact, it appears that the Republicans, who controlled the Senate and what bills came to the floor, were perfectly happy doing nothing and sitting idly by.

Again, for the people with Deliberate Political Reading Comprehension Syndrome*. I wish they had pushed it to a vote because it would have served well at this time in the campaign. You keep attempting to discount the fact that they worked and got it out of committee and into the Whips hands to begin with, you pretend that means that they didn't really mean it.

It's just dance moves, an attempt to absolve those you want to absolve. Another point of obvious pretense is the constant implication that this is the only time that it was attempted. It becomes particularly amazing to find that it was attempted several times, even with direct warnings that there was a problem building. I wish they were more assertive definitely. I find it decidedly inconvenient that though they tried several times they were never particularly adamant about it. I chalk that up to their wish to constantly tell people how many more of <insert group here> now own homes than ever before... and the hope that they could push the problem off to a future Congress and use the "more homes" to get more votes.

-------------------------------------------------------
*(DPRCS is a real phenomena, it is particularly prevalent in an election year but it isn't that difficult to find in any political environment where more than one party is present and can, with very little work, be found even when only one party is present. If you know somebody who is effected by DPRCS contribute to the Damocles' fund to relieve DPRCS so that we may find a cure).

 

[uscitizen]

Whip it , Whip it good!

 

[Bonestorm]

Complete and total rubbish. If you are trying to pass a controversial measure Whips are always necessary. Pelosi would never have proposed the bailout that failed if the Whips hadn't reported success beforehand. Again, I wish they had made a larger deal of it and recorded a vote, but it doesn't change the reality.



One more time for the deliberately obtuse. If your Whips tell you that the measure is doomed to failure often the leaders decide to let it die on the floor. Again it happens fairly often, and only the hackmasters attempt to play that card on a politically savvy board.



You gave me the page that linked to the committee, it had links to the votes of the committee.




Again, for the people with Deliberate Political Reading Comprehension Syndrome*. I wish they had pushed it to a vote because it would have served well at this time in the campaign. You keep attempting to discount the fact that they worked and got it out of committee and into the Whips hands to begin with, you pretend that means that they didn't really mean it.

It's just dance moves, an attempt to absolve those you want to absolve. Another point of obvious pretense is the constant implication that this is the only time that it was attempted. It becomes particularly amazing to find that it was attempted several times, even with direct warnings that there was a problem building. I wish they were more assertive definitely. I find it decidedly inconvenient that though they tried several times they were never particularly adamant about it. I chalk that up to their wish to constantly tell people how many more of <insert group here> now own homes than ever before... and the hope that they could push the problem off to a future Congress and use the "more homes" to get more votes.

-------------------------------------------------------
*(DPRCS is a real phenomena, it is particularly prevalent in an election year but it isn't that difficult to find in any political environment where more than one party is present and can, with very little work, be found even when only one party is present. If you know somebody who is effected by DPRCS contribute to the Damocles' fund to relieve DPRCS so that we may find a cure).

Hilarious.

So in Damocles world when a party really wants to pass a bill what they do is just sit around and hope that they somehow get the votes to pass it as opposed to actively working to get the bill passed. You don't schedule a vote and force the issue. You don't require an actual filibuster. Hell, you don't even bother with a cloture vote. You just sit back and throw up you hands and watch the global financial armageddon that you just knew was coming.

Right . . .

Just like they did for these bills?

http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/cloture_motions/109.htm#result_key


You keep saying that regulation of Fannie and Freddie was attempted many times by the Republicans yet you have no evidence that it was attempted even once in the Senate.

 

[Damocles]

Hilarious.

So in Damocles world when a party really wants to pass a bill what they do is just sit around and hope that they somehow get the votes to pass it as opposed to actively working to get the bill passed. You don't schedule a vote and force the issue. You don't require an actual filibuster. Hell, you don't even bother with a cloture vote. You just sit back and throw up you hands and watch the global financial armageddon that you just knew was coming.

Right . . .

Just like they did for these bills?

http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/cloture_motions/109.htm#result_key


You keep saying that regulation of Fannie and Freddie was attempted many times by the Republicans yet you have no evidence that it was attempted even once in the Senate.

And, as I stated to start this whole boring repeat session off.

It is not "more obvious" because the hacks will refuse to see it and excuse it at every opportunity.