Listen, the Democrats had complete control of the American political process for 2-1/2 years. Total domination. You could have passed anything you wanted in terms of individual tax rates, corporate tax rates, tax breaks, spending, legislation, defense, wars. The fact of the matter is that the Dems didn't even bother with a BUDGET for two years. The Dems could have made the tax rates anything they wanted to - you didn't need one Republican vote. The Dems could have passed two budgets without one Republican vote. The fact of the matter is that if the Democrats had done their jobs last year they would already be working off of that budget. And Dems could have changed the tax rates last year, and Dems could have changed spending allocations last year. Dems did not need ONE REPUBLICAN VOTE. If you are truly honest with yourself, the only reason why you are so bitter right now is that your own political party really fucked up.
actually you are wrong. either on purpose of through ignorance. ever heard of a senate filibuster? http://newsjunkiepost.com/2010/03/02/republican-obstruction-at-work-record-number-of-filibusters/ When the Democrats regained tenuous control of the 110th Congress in 2007, filibusters by the new Republican minority skyrocketed. Following the landslide victory of Barack Obama and progressive Democrats in 2008, there was a clear mandate for change in reform in America, yet the 111th should set a new record for filibusters as part of a clear pattern of obstruction from those who do not want change or reform.
================== Excellant question Maverick ; I only wish his answer was half as good Actually ant-Christ can mean not just '' against Christ; but substitute or/instead of Christ'' I am not refering just to the Pope, but any man or women who promotes the idea of human infallibility is promoting in one sense a ''substitute Christ''/ant-Christ''. Only Jesus Christ LORD/Word is infallible. NO man is infallible; even skeptics rightly know that much.
From TPM, Dec. 2010: "Over the last two years, Dems broke more filibusters than any Senate in recorded history. In fact the only other Senate that comes close was the last Senate, right after the GOP lost its controlling majority on the Hill." And the Dems always had the "nuclear option". Fillibuster made it inconvenient, but in the end the Dems always had the numbers until the Nov. 2010 elections. You could have done anything you wanted. Did the filibuster stop you from passing a budget for a couple years ? Honestly, if Hillary Clinton had been your nominee the Republican Party would be looking at extinction. She would have been a much smarter and infinitely more capable leader than Obama in terms of controlling the legislative process and keeping the party aligned more with economic recovery and less on creating a new entitlement program. Bill ran circles around the Repubs in the 90's, and Hillary is smarter than Bill. Both are fiscal moderates and legislative disciplinarians who stay on point. Face it , Barry let the progressives sidetrack the Democratic Party and November 2010 was the price to be paid. The United States of America is a Center to Center-Right country. Whenever either political party deviates from that path, they pay for it during the election process. Maybe if you stopped reading the NYT and started reading the Arkansas Gazette it would clear your head.
well it would be reasonable to assume that if the number of filibusters doubles and a precentage of them are negotiated away that there would still be a record number that are not broken on important legislation. so the conclusion stands. your statement that the dems had total control of legislation is wrong.
they also had a the ability to bully people with the presidency. Just as the republicans screwed up when they had control so did the dems. Its because both parties are bought and paid for by campaign bribes. The true believers in either party are too easily compromised by the need to be re elected and the implicit and explicit threats of "leadership" when they get out of line. Its a disgusting process.
Please name one Dem Party legislative initiative that the Republicans successfully fillibustered since Obama took his term. Answer: NONE. Your next little petty arguement will be: 'well the Dems had to compromise and negotiate with the Repubs in order to withstand a possible fillibuster'. Guess what - this is a Republic. Every piece of legislation passed has to pass that muster. Quit being a whiny bitch about this.
this doesnt deserve a response. any thinking person knows the healthcare reform plan was destroyed because of republican obstructionism. republicans would filibuster and the dems would compromise. over and over they used this tactic to water down the legislation. in the end they all voted against it anyhow. i will give them their due. it was effective. they turned reform into a bonanza for insurance companies.
Free Thinker, please be advised that this is not the United States of San Francisco. This is not the United States of the Ninth Ward of Chicago. You can piss and moan all you want - this is a Center to Center-Right country. And there were no successful Republican fillibusters during Obama's term. Did not matter one scintilla in terms of the actual legislative process - Reid had the bullets every time up to Nov. '10. A fillibuster is an inconvenience but it was never a legitimate obstacle for the Dems in terms of passing legislation.