Comments | griffondj: Just the facts…..

griffondj

Just the facts…..

Jan 04, 2007 09:23

2006: The DNC stated they would be bi-partisan once the new congress was in session.

Today: The DNC is not allowing any Republican to amend ANY legislation in the first 100 hrs of the new congress.

I wish I could say I was surprised.

Comments 12

vigus January 4 2007, 17:37:22 UTC

The sad thing about it is that I don't think ANYONE was surprised. With the Republicrats, they are honest about not wanting to work with the Demapublicans. But, they were outright about it. The Demopublicans lied and said they were going to work with the Repuplicrats, but they wont.

Oh well.. it's a viscious cycle that probably won't ever be broken till the green party or independants win more, and even THEN, eventually, they will be assimilated into the one single party line bullshit we have now.

nezhka2846 January 4 2007, 19:20:23 UTC

Oh, BTW, you left your sparkly, silvery shirt at my place the other night. ;D

griffondj January 4 2007, 20:43:42 UTC

yeap, sure did, oh and i found a Prestige class for you. Give me a call tonight or come over if you want and I can show it to you or next time we meet.

nezhka2846 January 4 2007, 21:17:56 UTC

D was kind of thinking of gaming tonight, but I'm not sure how tired I'll be, and now we're *both* sick, so..... But I'll call you.

pugilistgirl January 4 2007, 21:56:29 UTC

I'd just like to comment that when the Republicans were in charge this was their STANDARD modus operendi.

Should the Democrats also do it? No.

But the Republicans, when confronted with this FACT and asked if their complaints were hypocritical, refused to answer directly and simply said the Democrats were wrong to do it without addressing their own complicity in said wrongness.

Bash the Democrats? Fine. But at least be fair about it ;).

just discussing, not attacking..... griffondj January 4 2007, 22:50:25 UTC

I gave a specific example, is there a specific example of Republicans not allowing ANY input from Demacrates on legislation or just your general feeling that they don't? And i do mean ANY input not just input that was out voted or didn't have enough support as they are refusing any.

Oh and I wouldn't look for balance in my bashing, I have a bias, admit to said bias, and flont said bias when I chose to speak on it. ;)

Re: just discussing, not attacking..... bastets_place January 4 2007, 23:13:03 UTC

Yes, it happened. Permit me to hunt down the specific legislation.

They were mentioning today on (NPR) the radio that there was a time when they held the vote open for three hours (rather than the usual 15 minutes) so that they (the republicans) could sway some of the opposing republicans (opposing the republican legislation, to be exact) so that a "no" vote became a "yea" vote overall. It was pretty grim. Let me look up the link. By tradition, they only hold the vote open for 15 minutes.

Oh- and the Democrats can SAY they won't allow any Republicans to have input, but the reality is a very different thing. The way it was phrased in the original speech was that they wouldn't allow the Republicans to tack on any additional legislation to those bills that the Democrats theoretically ran on. You know, like setting up to increase the minimum wage, but only if you give a tax break to "small business owners" like, say, Texaco or something. (That happens to be one that George Bush the current is pushing right now)

Re: just discussing, not attacking..... griffondj January 4 2007, 23:17:22 UTC

In your example of the vote being held open are you trying to tell me that holding open a vote longer and convincing people to be for something instead of against is a bad thing?

Thread 7

sirzodiacdj April 2 2007, 20:15:57 UTC

This is my MTG discussion/decklist/team discussion account if your interstest. ares and Co and I are starting to talk about things here.