[Genghis Khan]

The idea of a bipartisan council on deficit reduction was originally conceived by Senators Conrad and Gregg, none of which are liberals. It was warmly endorsed by notable republicans such as Hutchinson, Inhoffe and McCain. Senate minority leader, Mitch Mcconnell, was a big supporter as well.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter ... budget-co/

And then came Obama and actually pushed the senate to confirm it. And what happens? Republicans flip. 7 of them oppose the vote and it's defeated, because you need 60. No, republicans don't abuse the filibuster.

So... reducing the deficit is a good idea until... Obama agrees?

Here's a tip for republicans who do not wish to look like the party of "no" - Stop blocking your own fuckin' ideas!

[BurrsWogdon]

Didn't you just chastise Canuck27 for habitually posting garbage?

[Genghis Khan]

Didn't you just chastise Canuck27 for habitually posting garbage?

I did. Thank god I didn't repear that mistake, ha?

[redcarpet]

McCain? Ah yes, the man who wants to increase military spending. I wasn't aware he had the credibility of an anti- public spending politician in the US

[Todd D.]

Is it a flop? Yes. Is it stupid? Yes. I wholehartedly agree that it shows the "Obama said therefore it must be bad" wing of the Republican Party.

However.

The bill failed because there were 53 yays and 46 nays. There were 39 Republicans in the Senate at the time. So while it's true that if the 7 Republicans that withdrew their support had voted for the bill it would have passed, it's likewise true that if the 7 Democrats had voted with their party, it also would have passed.

I don't mind calling someone out on their hypocrisy, bu it seems a bit odd to single out the Republicans as the ones that abused the filibuster.

[Nets]

No, republicans don't abuse the filibuster.

I don't mind calling someone out on their hypocrisy, bu it seems a bit odd to single out the Republicans as the ones that abused the filibuster.

Let's not forget which party feverishly bitched a moaned a few years back to retain the filibuster when the other party said that is was obstructionist?
Clue: It wasn't the GOP.

I don't mean to single out the Dems, since this goes both ways depending on who is in power. It just seems particularly egregious for democrats to bitch about the filibuster when they were the ones who worked so hard to keep it.

[Little von]

The idea of a bipartisan council on deficit reduction was originally conceived by Senators Conrad and Gregg, none of which are liberals. It was warmly endorsed by notable republicans such as Hutchinson, Inhoffe and McCain. Senate minority leader, Mitch Mcconnell, was a big supporter as well.

And then came Obama and actually pushed the senate to confirm it. And what happens? Republicans flip.

Ah yes, the Republican strategy, it's a bit like cutting off one's nose to spite one's face... brilliant! -NOT-

[nic4747]

The Republicans better tread carefully here or they are going to lose their advantage in the upcoming elections, the American people have little patience for these political games.

To be fair, some Republicans are mad about this, to quote one of them (who is absolutely right)

I think that for the Republican Party, one of the important things — first of all, from a substantive view, we have to get on with this. I think that if the public perceives that the Republican Party is playing political games and putting covering people's hides and whose main goal in life is to see how many more Republicans we can get in the Senate and the House, and the public interest be damned because this is the theory that we're going to create an environment that's going to be better — I think it's going to backfire. I think the American people move to the independents. They're looking for forthrightness, they're looking for transparency here. They're looking for us to deal with problems, and they've made it pretty darn clear they want us to do it on a bipartisan basis.

[Andys]

The idea of a bipartisan council on deficit reduction was originally conceived by Senators Conrad and Gregg, none of which are liberals. It was warmly endorsed by notable republicans such as Hutchinson, Inhoffe and McCain. Senate minority leader, Mitch Mcconnell, was a big supporter as well.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter ... budget-co/

And then came Obama and actually pushed the senate to confirm it. And what happens? Republicans flip. 7 of them oppose the vote and it's defeated, because you need 60. No, republicans don't abuse the filibuster.

So... reducing the deficit is a good idea until... Obama agrees?

Here's a tip for republicans who do not wish to look like the party of "no" - Stop blocking your own fuckin' ideas!

Wonderful! lol

Good, the Republicans are finally supporting my views. Block that dipwad at every turn.

[emoshunless]

Curious, is there a republican that actually takes issue with being called "the party of no"

[emoshunless]

Oh and why is descent call patriotic when a democrat does it and its call obstructionism when anyone else does it...?

[Genghis Khan]

Oh and why is descent call patriotic when a democrat does it and its call obstructionism when anyone else does it...?

Try to grasp the simple difference between saying no to something from the beginning and saying yes but changing your mind in the vote itself to make the prez look bad.

[Obamanation]

The Republicans better tread carefully here or they are going to lose their advantage in the upcoming elections, the American people have little patience for these political games.

The Republicans have no advantage in the upcoming elections. There is outrage at incumbents for not bringing the promised change around quickly enough, and right now the incumbents are mostly Democrats, but I suspect obstructionist republicans will be equally politically expendable. November is a LONG way off and the issues that will decide each of these races have yet to surface. Looking at the polling numbers now is like trying to pick the Superbowl teams at the beginning of the season. There is every bit as much chance that the Democrats will pick up senate seats this election cycle as it is they will loose them. Obama just needs to get health care across the finish line and the whole game will change.

[politburo player]

The Republicans have no advantage in the upcoming elections.

Many notable Democrats would disagree with you.

[emoshunless]

Try to grasp the simple difference between saying no to something from tself to make the prez look bad

Kinda rude...

But if that's how you like to conduct your discourse....

Maybe you can grasp the bigger picture and realize I wasn't just speaking in regards to the "artical" posted for one.

They are called obstructionist every time they vote against something...

In the "artical" opinion piece... I have no idea why he voted something he at frist supported did he say it was only to hurt the pres or is that your opinion... From what I've seen with all politicians dem and rep they sometimes vote against something that would make sense to support only because something was attached that they didn't want.... for example... I think it was Prez Obama (senator at the time)
Voted against more money to be spent on military equipment...
Now I could be like this poster and just assume he hates america and its military and/or
Just did it to undermind the former adminstration... but being able to grasp bigger pictures you find
The reason he voted against it was because he wanted the bill to contain a withdrawl date from iraq
And he voted against a no withdrawl date he wasn't voting against more equipment for our troops...

[Genghis Khan]

They are called obstructionist every time they vote against something...

You're ignoring what I said, probably because you don't have an answer for it. Saying no to something is different than saying yes and then changing the vote in the last second for political reasons.

Saying no to the stimulus but then attending and celebrating ceremonies for projects that the stimulus paid for is flat out obstructionism.

[emoshunless]

I'm sorry you must have missed where I said in short;
When a bill or act of congress is "goin down" It starts saying one thing and after everyone adds their little amendments and take others out, in the end it can turn out totally differnet from what you originally supported... so if you have proff that the guy in the example's only reason for not supporting the final bill or act I'll take a look and if its true in this case I'll agree with you...

But if your only stating the reason you think he didn't support the final bill
Then your right I don't have an answer to that because I don't pretend to know peoples true inner intentions.

[nic4747]

It's pretty clear the Republicans are just obstructing for political reasons. I agreed with their obstructionism on issues like healthcare and the stimulus bill, but on issues like paygo, the bipartisan commission, and smaller issues there really should be more bipartisanship. I don't have problems with using "no" votes as political tactics to increase negotiating power, etc, as long as both parties are sincerely interested in fixing the problem. Sadly I don't think that's the case here.

There's nothing wrong with saying no, sometimes you need to say no a lot, someone has to be the adult in the room. But automatically saying no to everything regardless of what it is is not a good thing.

The Republicans aren't going to win over the American people if they don't shift their strategy. As I said before, it was the correct move on the healthcare bill, but just because it was successful in that instance doesn't mean they should just do it for everything.

[Andys]

The Republicans aren't going to win over the American people if they don't shift their strategy. As I said before, it was the correct move on the healthcare bill, but just because it was successful in that instance doesn't mean they should just do it for everything.

I don't know.... The most encouraging news I've heard yet is liberals coming on here complaining about Republicans Obstructing. I haven't felt this good about the Republican party since 2005. So it seems to be working for me at least.

[KPres]

I haven't felt this good about the Republican party since 2005. So it seems to be working for me at least.

You're not the only one. I only like them when they're obstructing. They can wear that "accusation" with honor.