Senate GOP letter calls for blocking most bills

Schadenfreude

patriot and widower
the party of no strikes again - so much for 'bi-partisan' cooperation

Associated Press/AP Online
content_divider_short.jpg


By DAVID ESPO WASHINGTON - Senate Republicans intend to block action on virtually all Democratic-backed legislation unrelated to tax cuts and government spending in the current postelection session of Congress, officials said Tuesday, adding that the leadership has quietly collected signatures on a letter pledging to carry out the strategy.
If carried out, it would doom Democratic-backed attempts to end the Pentagon's practice of discharging openly gay members of the military service and give legal status to young illegal immigrants who join the military or attend college.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has made both measures a priority as Democrats attempt to enact legislation long sought by groups that supported them in the recent midterm elections.
A nuclear arms treaty with Russia that President Barack Obama wants ratified would not be affected, since any debate would take place under different rules than those that apply to legislation. Even so, its passage is not assured as Republicans are seeking concessions from the White House.
Officials who disclosed the new Republican maneuver did so on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to discuss it.
It was not known how many of the Senate's 42 Republicans had signed the draft letter, which the leadership intends to make public quickly.
Senate Democrats need 60 votes to overcome any delaying tactics, meaning they could be thwarted if 41 Republicans join in the commitment.
Democrats' chances of passing politically charged legislation will dim when the new Congress convenes in January, since Republicans will take control of the House and gain more Senate seats.
The letter comes after comments by Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell and others in his party that the voters made it clear in the elections they want lawmakers to focus on economic issues.
"Despite what some Democrats in Congress have suggested, voters did not signal they wanted more cooperation on the Democrats' big-government policies that most Americans oppose," McConnell and incoming House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, wrote in an op-ed article published in the Washington Post.
A service of YellowBrix, Inc. .


img:hover { text-decoration: none; } html .fb_share_link { padding: 2px 0pt 0pt 20px; height: 16px; background: url("http://static.ak.facebook.com/images/share/facebook_share_icon.gif?12:26981") no-repeat scroll left top transparent; }
 
pssssssssssst...you "missed" this

Pelosi's new mission: Block Obama deals with GOP

WASHINGTON — Hers was the face on the grainy negative TV ads that helped defeat scores of Democrats. His agenda, re-election chances and legacy are on the line.

Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California, chosen after a messy family feud among Democrats to remain as their leader in the new Congress, and President Barack Obama share a keen interest in repairing their injured party after this month's staggering losses.

But Pelosi's mandate is diverging from the president's at a critical time, with potentially damaging consequences for Obama's ability to cut deals with Republicans in the new Congress.

Top politics news Pelosi's new mission: Block Obama deals with GOP
Hers was the face on the grainy negative TV ads that helped defeat scores of Democrats. His agenda, re-election chances and legacy are on the line.

..Their partnership is strained after an election in which Pelosi and many Democrats feel the White House failed them. They believe Obama and his team muddled the party's message and didn't act soon enough to provide cover for incumbents who cast tough votes for his marquee initiatives.

Pelosi will lead Democrats "in pulling on the president's shirttails to make sure that he doesn't move from center-right to far-right," said Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Calif., a co-chair of the liberal Progressive Caucus in the House. "We think if he'd done less compromising in the last two years, there's a good chance we'd have had a jobs bill that would have created real jobs, and then we wouldn't even be worrying about having lost elections."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40357872...-capitol_hill/

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?t=29377

and of course you missed the dems blocking the earmark bill....

:)
 
How the fuck would that be awesome! No to corporate welfare would be fine with me!

Russ Feingold, you will be missed!

If a party said we have to live within our means and can't spend what we don't have that wouldn't be awesome?
 
Yeah, let me know when that happens, probably after I am dead!

Hence my comment it would be awesome if we had one. The Democrats don't like what the Republicans want to spend money on so they try and call them the party of no. Well that's not right because the Republicans spend just as much as the Democrats do.

In my mind the closest we have to a party of no is the Libertarians. Now getting them elected is a different story.
 
Hence my comment it would be awesome if we had one. The Democrats don't like what the Republicans want to spend money on so they try and call them the party of no. Well that's not right because the Republicans spend just as much as the Democrats do.

In my mind the closest we have to a party of no is the Libertarians. Now getting them elected is a different story.
I truly don't see the Libertarians acting any differently than the other two parties once they hit the system! Just my guess, they voted out Feingold!
 
I truly don't see the Libertarians acting any differently than the other two parties once they hit the system! Just my guess, they voted out Feingold!

I really doubt it was the Libertarians who voted out Finegold. If they had that much power in Wisconsin they would have voted in one of their own.
 
I really doubt it was the Libertarians who voted out Finegold. If they had that much power in Wisconsin they would have voted in one of their own.
Why doesn't the Tea Time movement support the libertarian candidates? This is what perplexes me. They are about smaller government, right? and Capitalism and America and apple pie? They like war, too, huh? and what about Jesus?
 
Why doesn't the Tea Time movement support the libertarian candidates? This is what perplexes me. They are about smaller government, right? and Capitalism and America and apple pie? They like war, too, huh? and what about Jesus?

I don't really know the tea party people's stance is on war but it's not what the libertarian party is about. Same with God.

Unfortunately we only have two parties that get elected. So the tea party chose to try and change the Republican Party.

Who or what do you believe caused Feingold to lose?
 
I don't really know the tea party people's stance is on war but it's not what the libertarian party is about. Same with God.

Unfortunately we only have two parties that get elected. So the tea party chose to try and change the Republican Party.

Who or what do you believe caused Feingold to lose?
The misinformed voters. The Tea Party spent five times the money Feingold spent.
 
The misinformed voters. The Tea Party spent five times the money Feingold spent.

Now where did you get that information from?

Here's one of those fact check articles on Feingold. Check it out for yourself. It also shows that through August 2010 Johnson outspent Feingold $4.55 million to $4.28 million. For your five times statement to be true that means Johnson would had to have spent $20 million in the last two months and Feingold none. I don't quite think it worked out that way.


http://politifact.com/wisconsin/sta...eingold-says-hes-been-outspent-opponents-eve/
 
Now where did you get that information from?

Here's one of those fact check articles on Feingold. Check it out for yourself. It also shows that through August 2010 Johnson outspent Feingold $4.55 million to $4.28 million. For your five times statement to be true that means Johnson would had to have spent $20 million in the last two months and Feingold none. I don't quite think it worked out that way.


http://politifact.com/wisconsin/sta...eingold-says-hes-been-outspent-opponents-eve/

Soft money.
 
I don't really know the tea party people's stance is on war but it's not what the libertarian party is about. Same with God.

Unfortunately we only have two parties that get elected. So the tea party chose to try and change the Republican Party.

Who or what do you believe caused Feingold to lose?

You mean The Republican Party base tried to change The Republican Party? How surprising.
 
Back
Top