The eventual effects of deregulation

[Bonestorm]

That is pure nonsense. Who sets up the leadership and majorities for each committee? Who decides what comes up for a vote and what doesn't?

You want to move the goal posts to mean 'we can do whatever we want and you can't stop us'. That is dictatorial... complete control. Even then, the Dems had that for a few months. Yet what did they accomplish when they had it?

Dictatorial. LOL.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Dictatorial. LOL.

Probably not the best choice of words given people's first thought is a dictatorship... but it is dictatorial in that a super majority can dictate exactly what will happen and opposition cannot stop them. Not a dictatorship given that there is a vocal opposition that is not suppressed... just that the opposition is powerless to stop the majority in that case (provided the majority sticks together)

 

[Bonestorm]

Probably not the best choice of words given people's first thought is a dictatorship... but it is dictatorial in that a super majority can dictate exactly what will happen and opposition cannot stop them. Not a dictatorship given that there is a vocal opposition that is not suppressed... just that the opposition is powerless to stop the majority in that case (provided the majority sticks together)

Respectfully, the Senate was designed to operate on a majority basis -- except in certain very specific circumstances. That's what the framers of the Constitution intended. It's not dictatorial.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Respectfully, the Senate was designed to operate on a majority basis -- except in certain very specific circumstances. That's what the framers of the Constitution intended. It's not dictatorial.

Thanks captain obvious... I know that. The point is, that with a super majority the party can dictate exactly what is going to happen and if the party members stick together, the opposition cannot stop them from whatever they choose to implement. That was my point.

So glad that you understand what the founders intended though. Please explain to the two lefties here arguing that control means a super majority.

 

[Bonestorm]

Thanks captain obvious... I know that. The point is, that with a super majority the party can dictate exactly what is going to happen and if the party members stick together, the opposition cannot stop them from whatever they choose to implement. That was my point.

So glad that you understand what the founders intended though. Please explain to the two lefties here arguing that control means a super majority.

Actually, the statement was made that the Democrats, through their control of Congress, should have funded OSHA as they deemed fit, implying that with "control" comes the ability to pass whatever the controlling party wants. But that's just not the way the world works.

I agree that the argument that the Democrats didnn't "control" Congress is wrong, but so is the argument that the Democrats controlled the purse strings.

So, yeah, piss up the rope.



Also, too, interesting that you think the Constitution is dictarotial. You should write a pamphlet.

 

[zappasguitar]

Which doesn't change the fact that control of Congress does NOT mean filibuster proof. You two are trying to change the definition to what you want it to be rather than what it actually is.

Well ya know what I find strange?

That I don't see you clarifying and correcting the disingenuous comments of others when they claim that Democrats had CONTROL OF CONGRESS for four years and couldn't get anything they wanted passed.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Actually, the statement was made that the Democrats, through their control of Congress, should have funded OSHA as they deemed fit, implying that with "control" comes the ability to pass whatever the controlling party wants. But that's just not the way the world works.

If they had a super majority, they could have easily funded OSHA if they deemed it necessary/ a priority. To pretend otherwise is to ignore reality.

I agree that the argument that the Democrats didnn't "control" Congress is wrong, but so is the argument that the Democrats controlled the purse strings.

Please explain how it is that you come to the conclusion they didn't control the purse strings.

Also, too, interesting that you think the Constitution is dictarotial. You should write a pamphlet.

Right after you get done with your book 'How to make a straw man'... for I said no such thing.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Well ya know what I find strange?

That I don't see you clarifying and correcting the disingenuous comments of others when they claim that Democrats had CONTROL OF CONGRESS for four years and couldn't get anything they wanted passed.

1) It is a FACT that they controlled Congress for four years.
2) It is a FACT that you are trying to change the definition of control to what you WANT it to mean rather than accepting what it actually means

 

[Bonestorm]

If they had a super majority, they could have easily funded OSHA if they deemed it necessary/ a priority. To pretend otherwise is to ignore reality.

Please explain how it is that you come to the conclusion they didn't control the purse strings.

Right after you get done with your book 'How to make a straw man'... for I said no such thing.

It's like arguing with my brother's kids or something. Jesus.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

It's like arguing with my brother's kids or something. Jesus.

So when someone asks you to explain what you mean, you resort to the above? Ironic.

 

[zappasguitar]

1) It is a FACT that they controlled Congress for four years.
2) It is a FACT that you are trying to change the definition of control to what you WANT it to mean rather than accepting what it actually means

Honest discussion from another board Rightie?

What was I thinking...

 

[Bonestorm]

So when someone asks you to explain what you mean, you resort to the above? Ironic.

Because it's a complete fucking mystery, after eleventy twelve posts about the supermajority requirements in the Senate, why I say that the Democracts do not controll the purse strings simply because they control the House and Senate.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Because it's a complete fucking mystery, after eleventy twelve posts about the supermajority requirements in the Senate, why I say that the Democracts do not controll the purse strings simply because they control the House and Senate.

This is why you need to learn to comprehend what others write. We were talking about the point in time specifically where they DID have the supermajority. That is the point where they could have done what they wanted if they stuck together.

 

[Steelplate]

This is why you need to learn to comprehend what others write. We were talking about the point in time specifically where they DID have the supermajority. That is the point where they could have done what they wanted if they stuck together.

Yes....it worked out to be three or four months.