Active Users:372 Time:18/06/2025 04:09:50 AM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
So we've gone from "stop being secretive" to "no public meetings" eh? Joel Send a noteboard - 09/02/2010 11:59:50 AM
I did look at the Shelby thing. Not really that much different then when Reid did the same thing to Bush to get some appointments he wanted. I still it bad form but lets not blow things to far out of proportion. Reid kept the senate in session under Bush because he didn't want Bush to an end run on the senate and do recess appointments but he is all for Obama doing it. Lets not slip to far down the road to hypocrisy.

Pork is pork, whoever does it. If there's real need for an expenditure there's no reason it can't be in your state/district if you have people who can do the work; that's part of representing them. However, if it's just a contrivance for no other purpose than to give them work, that's no good. Even deficit spending to prime the pump during a recession should have a payoff, as when the WPA hired a bunch of people, but also brought electricity to parts of Appalachia and Texas that continue benefiting from it 60 years later. Dems DO abuse it more than Republicans, I believe, and it needs to stop.

That said, filibustering appointments to get pork is NOTHING like holding the Senate open to continue a filibuster against judicial activists. Though I'm not sure the latter was really necessary rather than grandstanding, because recess appointments are a self correcting problem:

"The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session." Art. II, Sec. 2

In practice this just means they get a confirmation vote when the Senate comes back, and if the Senate doesn't want them they'll be unappointed nearly as fast as they were appointed (which is exactly what happened with many Clinton judicial appointees when Bill Frist was aiding filibusters he called "unprecedented" when Dems tried them on Bush. )
Having a public meeting or trying to pick off one or two moderate republicans is not the same thing as being bipartisan and they have failed even there. If they stopped letting Pelosi set the agenda they might have little more luck drafting bills that can gain wide support instead of drafting narrow bills and simply demanding it.

Sounds like the Republicans want the Dems to go on the record without having to do so themselves. Of course, saying that the first step to a bipartisan deal is to dump what remains of the original healthcare bill doesn't sound to compromise oriented either. I happen to think it needs to be dumped, and that public discussion with both sides would increase the chances of good ideas like the Snowe amendment becoming reality, but there's such a thing as doing the right thing for the wrong reasons (and, once again, Republican Congressmen apparently don't want to publicly discuss the issue, they just want the Dems to do it and then snipe at them. )
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.

Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!

LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Reply to message
Why bipartisanship can't work: the expert view Roland00 - 01/02/2010 11:34:58 PM 866 Views
And a personal comment Roland00 - 01/02/2010 11:39:28 PM 601 Views
Re: And a personal comment everynametaken - 02/02/2010 01:16:53 AM 557 Views
Who's to say YOU really know what's happening in Washington, though? Aemon - 02/02/2010 01:41:20 AM 634 Views
*thumbs up* *NM* Ghavrel - 02/02/2010 01:50:45 AM 222 Views
Or should I say... ? *NM* Ghavrel - 02/02/2010 01:51:03 AM 246 Views
I Don't watch tv Roland00 - 02/02/2010 02:29:53 AM 594 Views
not to mention those who mistake knowledge for understanding random thoughts - 02/02/2010 10:41:14 PM 446 Views
Even so. Joel - 05/02/2010 05:45:54 AM 470 Views
Like the NYT? random thoughts - 05/02/2010 02:12:36 PM 505 Views
I don't believe the Times has ever conceded bias. Joel - 05/02/2010 06:03:02 PM 526 Views
and neither does Fox so I am not sure that matters random thoughts - 05/02/2010 06:40:15 PM 568 Views
Note that I didn't mention Fox (or anyone, for that matter. ) Joel - 05/02/2010 07:13:31 PM 501 Views
PBS is biased random thoughts - 05/02/2010 07:21:14 PM 472 Views
You're entitled to believe that. Joel - 05/02/2010 07:31:07 PM 601 Views
PBS has an obvious yet undeclared bias so does NPR random thoughts - 09/02/2010 04:47:53 AM 435 Views
Even were that true (which I dispute) my statement stands. Joel - 09/02/2010 09:50:36 AM 548 Views
so they wouldn't be biased becuas it could hurt them but you still argue republicans attack them random thoughts - 09/02/2010 02:19:53 PM 509 Views
Sometimes the truth hurts, though it doesn't hurt PBS. Joel - 10/02/2010 10:15:13 AM 595 Views
We have been for some time. Joel - 02/02/2010 03:31:10 AM 498 Views
I don't think that's the case Isaac - 03/02/2010 02:59:50 PM 478 Views
Universal healthcare was the primary plank in Clintons '92 platform. Joel - 04/02/2010 10:02:18 AM 463 Views
That does not mean his bare plurality was an endorsement of National Healthcare Isaac - 04/02/2010 02:09:32 PM 592 Views
I don't think he won by default, and that was his primary issue. Joel - 05/02/2010 08:09:50 AM 604 Views
Re: I don't think he won by default, and that was his primary issue. Isaac - 05/02/2010 03:52:23 PM 560 Views
[insert witty subject line here] Joel - 06/02/2010 02:15:21 AM 589 Views
Let me break this into multiple replies here Isaac - 06/02/2010 07:45:36 PM 569 Views
'K Joel - 08/02/2010 01:22:12 PM 554 Views
Probably time to go into 'summary mode' Isaac - 08/02/2010 07:34:55 PM 582 Views
Again, we're back to "how would you prefer to do it?" Joel - 09/02/2010 09:42:51 AM 607 Views
Any way that works, which currently probably is none Isaac - 09/02/2010 06:12:41 PM 546 Views
I think HDI is more accurate than nothing, though it certainly needs some fine tuning. Joel - 10/02/2010 11:03:08 AM 596 Views
Sorry for the delay... Isaac - 12/02/2010 11:40:21 PM 688 Views
NP, life happens. Joel - 15/02/2010 02:06:55 PM 682 Views
I'll play a bigger age card since it was my third election to vote in and he won because of Perot random thoughts - 05/02/2010 05:57:04 PM 485 Views
Let's put it another way: Why did Dems nominate him instead of, say, Gephardt? Joel - 06/02/2010 02:22:04 AM 554 Views
you don't get mandates from primaries random thoughts - 08/02/2010 02:12:29 PM 455 Views
No, but end of the day more people wanted healthcare than didn't. Joel - 08/02/2010 03:09:31 PM 466 Views
everyone want health care they just don't want congress runnig it random thoughts - 09/02/2010 04:56:44 AM 503 Views
Whom do you prefer? Joel - 09/02/2010 10:07:39 AM 525 Views
Sorry not a big fan of socialism I hear it big over in Europe though random thoughts - 09/02/2010 02:23:55 PM 427 Views
In other words you prefer the system we have; thanks for admitting it. Joel - 10/02/2010 10:05:38 AM 484 Views
I prefer Thomas Woods Jr's description of bipartisanship Cannoli - 02/02/2010 02:49:06 AM 488 Views
If only someone had stood up on 8 December, 1941 and said, "hey, you're not supposed to do stuff!" Joel - 02/02/2010 03:28:38 AM 636 Views
you're making a good job taking things out of context, Joel AgentOrange - 03/02/2010 12:47:57 PM 455 Views
Don't speak in absolutes and I won't read absolutes. Joel - 04/02/2010 10:08:43 AM 472 Views
Some qualifiers can be left unsaid for a clearer message. Or better delivery AgentOrange - 04/02/2010 10:26:56 AM 456 Views
Qualifiers are clarifying by nature. Joel - 04/02/2010 10:49:06 AM 589 Views
huh. That does make sense. I know malpractice is a big weight on the the system in the US. AgentOrange - 04/02/2010 11:58:37 AM 424 Views
Perhaps, but it's hardly the greatest weight, or even in the top three, IMHO. Joel - 05/02/2010 05:44:49 AM 575 Views
Pearl Harbor would never have happened to a classically liberal nation Cannoli - 05/02/2010 01:33:56 AM 479 Views
Maybe; Billy Mitchell might debate that were he alive. Joel - 05/02/2010 05:34:54 AM 591 Views
Wow - that was a dumb statement even for you! SilverWarder - 05/02/2010 04:22:59 PM 659 Views
I do generally agree, but I think the Washington Naval Conference is too often overlooked. Joel - 06/02/2010 02:33:51 AM 595 Views
Some information and a question JasonD - 02/03/2010 05:49:20 AM 996 Views
Politicians and pundits should stop calling things that happened in the last decade "unprecedented" Joel - 02/02/2010 03:23:27 AM 649 Views
Or the democratic party has shifted so far to to the left they can't even get all of the dems random thoughts - 02/02/2010 02:39:14 PM 458 Views
You didn't hear all the whining when Bush was in charge with a Republican Congress? Dannymac - 02/02/2010 08:50:05 PM 475 Views
I there was plenty of whining going on random thoughts - 02/02/2010 10:36:56 PM 400 Views
Is this you conceding that the GOP is being obstructionist? Joel - 08/02/2010 01:43:04 PM 433 Views
I agree they are obstructing the libs from doing whatever they want random thoughts - 08/02/2010 02:19:13 PM 360 Views
They've tried including Republicans in drafting bills. Joel - 08/02/2010 03:08:17 PM 518 Views
tyring to pcik off one republican is not including republicans random thoughts - 09/02/2010 05:03:44 AM 467 Views
So we've gone from "stop being secretive" to "no public meetings" eh? Joel - 09/02/2010 11:59:50 AM 475 Views
well it was your guy who was up in arms about private meetings random thoughts - 09/02/2010 02:29:34 PM 453 Views
Was it? I don't recall any Dem complaining about private meeting on healthcare. Joel - 10/02/2010 09:44:56 AM 607 Views
most liberals seem to foretting the "rhetoric" that Obama used to get elected random thoughts - 13/02/2010 06:54:34 AM 446 Views
Um... sorry, man.... Joel - 10/02/2010 11:06:22 AM 640 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes