"Nicer?"

Translations: "Don't treat us like we treated you."

Knowing Reid, this was a smart move by the GOP.

Did these morons really think their "permanent Republican majority" and being a general asshole schtick was really going to last forever?

Goddamn, payback is a biatch.

ragekage: Did these morons really think their "permanent Republican majority" and being a general asshole schtick was really going to last forever?

Goddamn, payback is a biatch.

Two words:

Harry Reid.

The GOP will basically be a majority as long as that dude is in charge.

Ooooo, little foot stampy tantrum. Don't worry, Mitch, I'm sure the Democrats will treat you as well as YOU treated THEM when YOU had the majority!

DamnYankees:
Harry Reid.

The GOP will basically be a majority as long as that dude is in charge.

Since you appear to know more about this than I do and I trust your judgment, can you explain why.

I can see it going both ways. Why will Harry Reid end up screwing it up?

sloppy shoes: Since you appear to know more about this than I do and I trust your judgment, can you explain why.

I can see it going both ways. Why will Harry Reid end up screwing it up?

He's just a spineless guy who has no moral compunction and will cave to anything. I can't think of any argument for how he has been a good majority leader.

DamnYankees: sloppy shoes: Since you appear to know more about this than I do and I trust your judgment, can you explain why.

I can see it going both ways. Why will Harry Reid end up screwing it up?

He's just a spineless guy who has no moral compunction and will cave to anything. I can't think of any argument for how he has been a good majority leader.

Well OKAY then. Haha. Who would you suggest instead?

/nice insult, btw.

sloppy shoes: Well OKAY then. Haha. Who would you suggest instead?

/nice insult, btw.

IIRC, the battle a few years ago was between Dodd and Reid for Dem Leader. Dodd seems like he'd be good. I have to admit I'm not a Senate politicis wonk, so I'm sure there are other good answers.

sloppy shoes: Well OKAY then. Haha. Who would you suggest instead?

Me, I'd suggest Feingold.

Aw, it's really refreshing to see the Senate Republicans do what they do best- biatch and cry like teenage girls.

Keep up the good work, fellas.

What really sucks about this, is that - barring some odd results in Georgia and Wisconsin (?) - McConnell has a point. Democrats need to get between 1 and 4 Republicans on board with any legislation to ensure they have the numbers in the senate.

He knows the obstructionist Republicans still have the numbers to continue to do block legislation, as they have been doing for 2 years now.

And he knows Reid doesn't have the balls to stand up to them and make them actively filibuster, instead of just allowing them to passively refuse cloture.

So the Republicans get to make this another 'do nothing Congress', while everyone blames the Democrats.

Grrr. Makes me mad. The cocksuckers lost. They need to get over it, and let the winners do what they got elected to do.

And-1: What really sucks about this, is that - barring some odd results in Georgia and Wisconsin (?) - McConnell has a point. Democrats need to get between 1 and 4 Republicans on board with any legislation to ensure they have the numbers in the senate.

He knows the obstructionist Republicans still have the numbers to continue to do block legislation, as they have been doing for 2 years now.

And he knows Reid doesn't have the balls to stand up to them and make them actively filibuster, instead of just allowing them to passively refuse cloture.

So the Republicans get to make this another 'do nothing Congress', while everyone blames the Democrats.

Grrr. Makes me mad. The cocksuckers lost. They need to get over it, and let the winners do what they got elected to do.

Minnesota.

The whole "filibuster proof 60" is a bullshiat point to begin with.

There are "conservative Democrats" who will vote against the party on certain issues, and "liberal Republicans" who will take up the slack on many of those issues. There are always a few nay-sayers from each party (pro-life Dems and pro-choice Republicans, for example)

Sure, the Dems want as many as possible on board, but there is no "magic number" that will let them run the show without obstruction.

Ah yes, Minnesota. Home of Governor Body, I knew that. Thanks,

And what you say about majorities is true, particularly with legislation. Honestly, if you cannot get 3 or 4 moderates from the other side to cross the floor, maybe the legislation is no good anyway?

But I had a notion that the whip ensured that cloture votes come down more or less on party lines, so that is what the filibuster-proof majority is about. But I am not sure if that is true or not. Seems to vary, from what I can see with a short Google.

It also pisses me off that what tends to get opposition to cross the floor is adding pork to a bill, not making it better law. That is probably another thread, but for sure the Republicans will now demand, and get, plenty of our money for their pet projects and pals back home.

Lionel Mandrake:
Sure, the Dems want as many as possible on board, but there is no "magic number" that will let them run the show without obstruction.

You are just trying to avoid the reality that if Democrats get to 60 votes they will institute a gay monarchy that eliminates our structure of government.

Soon we will all be forced into gay marriage with procreation done at "centers" with sex turned into a mainstream pleasure commodity bought and sold at the consumeristic displays of bondage and pink underwear.

It has been a long fall for the truly righteous and for that we will all be branded with the scarlet letter of the truly hedonistic: L. Yes, in our new reeducation camps the queers and the socialists will teach our children the virtues of helping your fellow man and the pleasures of anal sex. Yes, it is rape I speak of, rape of our moral agenda, rape of our women, and rape of our greed.

YES, my parishioners, NO longer will you be able to look at the black man, the gay man, the wo-man, or any man and hold your head up high in shame. NO longer will you be able to comment on the blight they bring to society. First we gave up our whips, then we gave up our thumb rulers, and soon we will be giving up our airport bathrooms. We have fallen my fellow Christians, we have fallen: it is a sad day in time when discrimination does not merely measure the value of your soul, but also your monetary worth and political prowess.

The Great Republican authority has fallen. They shall speak of us in better times, just as the Jews sit around the Menorah and reminisce of how they got to kill Jesus. AS with them, we must protect our own now. Perhaps it is time for an exodus. Alaska is pining for Independence. Let us flow there, where the oil is thick and the hunting plenty. Let us live there- where the beauty is natural, as is the corruption. It's done: Alaska shall be our home, my fellow conservatives. NAY! We shall call it...JESUSISRAEL

You know, as the days go by...the GOP begins to look like that little dweeb punk kid on the playground that, in the middle of a game of dodgeball, would nail you in the back of the head right at the end of the match.

Then, the next day, he comes up with this bright new idea that shots above the shoulders should be illegal.

bulldg4life: Then, the next day, he comes up with this bright new idea that shots above the shoulders should be illegal.

Then the day after, slams one into your face on the grounds that he only said the back of the head was illegal. Then says that from now on, let's make the whole head illegal.

McConnell is such a whiner.

I was going to write up a snarky response Harry Reid ought to send back, but then it occurred to me it would be far cooler if he used McConnell's letter to wipe his ass after a healthy shiat, then flushed it down, and posted a video of the whole event to YouTube. Reid would be the most awesome Senator ever then.

Lionel Mandrake: The whole "filibuster proof 60" is a bullshiat point to begin with.

There are "conservative Democrats" who will vote against the party on certain issues, and "liberal Republicans" who will take up the slack on many of those issues. There are always a few nay-sayers from each party (pro-life Dems and pro-choice Republicans, for example)

Sure, the Dems want as many as possible on board, but there is no "magic number" that will let them run the show without obstruction.

The conservative Democrats aren't going to vote for extremely left-leaning bills, but they are very unlikely to vote against ending debate on a bill. 60 Democratic seats really would kill a filibuster, and they'd have the votes to pass their agenda. 58 seats is enough to bring all but the most liberal legislation to a vote.

This is somewhat true. The Republicans still have the Loc Nar they can use as a bargaining chip...

Epsilon: I was going to write up a snarky response Harry Reid ought to send back, but then it occurred to me it would be far cooler if he used McConnell's letter to wipe his ass after a healthy shiat, then flushed it down, and posted a video of the whole event to YouTube. Reid would be the most awesome Senator ever then.

Yes, but then he would prove to the world with video evidence that he has a vagina, and no balls at all.

/penis.

We all need to be nice to Republicans. If we're not, we'll end up in some bizarro world, where terrorists actually get pursued and held accountable for murder!!!



Q: Why aren't gays allowed in the military?
A: They makes republicans look weak on defense

Reid was a scrawny boxer who fought his way out of the hard-scrabble arid nothingness of Tonopaugh, Nevada where his father was a pickaxe miner. McConnell's Kentucky crybaby coal miner forebearers couldn't eat Harry Reid's ass if they tried ... at least THEY had water.

/when McConnell's done trying to eat Reid's ass he can try to eat mine
//Give 'em Hell, Harry

Such giant balls on these guys. Do these guys remember the Republican freeze out of Democrats after the 2000 election? I do NOT want to see similar behavior from the Democrat majority, but the least the Republicans could do is be a little bit humble in their loss.

"Congratulations on your successful elections. We're willing to meet in the middle on some issues, because the majority of Americans have indicated they would like to see more compromise. But we represent our constituents and intend to see their voices are heard in this chamber." That gets the same message across without the dick waving contest.

The Republicans are much more effective at being the opposition party than Democrats.

That being said, I don't think they have enough firepower the next two years to do anything other than stamp their feet really loudly.

How short their memory is

I do seem to remember, though I can't find an article on it, Republican attempts to exclude ALL democrats from ALL senate committees.

And yet in another article today McConnell had nice-ish things to say about the Obama transition.


"I think the new administration is off to a good start," the Kentucky senator said.

"They're saying, in my view, all the right things ... that they want to govern in the middle and tackle big things."

tdpatriots12: The Republicans are much more effective at being the opposition party than Democrats.

Yes, I think the Democrats make much better Democrats than the Republicans, too.

Maybe the republicans could stand on the steps of the Capitol Building to "reid" the letter to the gotcha-media.

/i keed

Larry Mahnken: Yes, I think the Democrats make much better Democrats than the Republicans, too.

...what does that mean?

DamnYankees: ragekage: Did these morons really think their "permanent Republican majority" and being a general asshole schtick was really going to last forever?

Goddamn, payback is a biatch.

Two words:

Harry Reid.

The GOP will basically be a majority as long as that dude is in charge.

I'm guessing alot of people proclaiming that it's "payback time" for how the Republicans treated the Democrats when they held the majority, are young and didn't pay attention to politics before '94.
You know, that long period of time where Democrats held the Majority in the House and the Senate and demonstrated all of those nifty little "tricks" the Democrats whined about? That's the one I'm talking about.

Now, I'm not saying the Republicans were right in doing what they did, in fact they were very wrong and were voted out of the Majority for it; in other words, they acted like Democrats and paid for it.

But, I'm not seeing the Democrats breaking the cycle anytime soon, instead I see a ton of faux outrage against Republicans from people who don't realize that the Democratic Party taught the Republicans how to play dirty.

/Let's end the cycle of Insanity, or we can just wait for the next Republican majority to try for it.
//Yes, there will be another Republican Majority.

SilentStrider: Me, I'd suggest Feingold.

Seconded. Wexler, or Waxman, but they are in the House.

CanisNoir:

B... B... But it's not wrong when MY team does it! Only when YOUR team does.

That being said, the only way I can think of to explain Reid (without resorting to speculation about the type and size of his genitalia) is that the Republicans have dirt on him. I mean, how the heck else do you explain his inability to stand up to so much as a gentle breeze?

erik-k: CanisNoir:

B... B... But it's not wrong when MY team does it! Only when YOUR team does.

That being said, the only way I can think of to explain Reid (without resorting to speculation about the type and size of his genitalia) is that the Republicans have dirt on him. I mean, how the heck else do you explain his inability to stand up to so much as a gentle breeze?

Ahh but I did say it was wrong when my team did it, I just reminded people that they learned it from the other team :)

Regarding Reid: This is just a hunch mind you, but I'm guessing it's because he's a power seeking p*ssy?

/just a random guess

Kent Conrad should have Harry Reid's job.

I've never heard of him.

Perfect fit.

CanisNoir:

Heh, misinterpertation... I'm a Dem so "my team" means us. :P

/detests the wingnuts and the moonbats

CanisNoir: I'm guessing alot of people proclaiming that it's "payback time" for how the Republicans treated the Democrats when they held the majority, are young and didn't pay attention to politics before '94.
You know, that long period of time where Democrats held the Majority in the House and the Senate and demonstrated all of those nifty little "tricks" the Democrats whined about? That's the one I'm talking about.

Now, I'm not saying the Republicans were right in doing what they did, in fact they were very wrong and were voted out of the Majority for it; in other words, they acted like Democrats and paid for it.

But, I'm not seeing the Democrats breaking the cycle anytime soon, instead I see a ton of faux outrage against Republicans from people who don't realize that the Democratic Party taught the Republicans how to play dirty.

/Let's end the cycle of Insanity, or we can just wait for the next Republican majority to try for it.
//Yes, there will be another Republican Majority.

You know, I don't think I can remember a time where the Democrats pulled any of the crap that the Republicans did in their last round of majority rule.

Can you link me to a single instance where the Democrats "locked out" the Republicans on a bill?

If I had to hazard a guess, you can't.

What you're doing here is repeating a right wing talking point that has no basis in reality - but I wouldn't mind being proved wrong.

Random Reality Check: Can you link me to a single instance where the Democrats "locked out" the Republicans on a bill?

To be fair, they did hold up several Judical nominations. That said, it was 4 or 5 out of 60, I believe. But it's what the righties will say.

saintstryfe: Random Reality Check: Can you link me to a single instance where the Democrats "locked out" the Republicans on a bill?

To be fair, they did hold up several Judical nominations. That said, it was 4 or 5 out of 60, I believe. But it's what the righties will say.

Preventing unacceptable candidates from getting nominated is something that our representatives (on both sides of the aisle) are supposed to do.

What I am talking about is the downright miserable tricks that the Republicans were pushing, like introducing bills and then demanding a vote without even allowing enough time for the bills to be read, among other such wonderful tactics.

For a good read on just how that worked, take a look at how much time our representatives were given to read the Patriot Act - a document that was magically put together in next to no time, introduced to Congress and rammed down the American people's throat.

The Patriot Act (pdf) is 342 pages and was passed by the House on October 25th, 2001 - 44 days from September 11th to passage. Now tell me that this bill hadn't been waiting on the shelf for an opportunity to get passed.

Michael Moore (for whatever you think of him) managed to get admissions out of a few of our legislators that they never read the bill.

How the hell are we supposed to be adequately represented if bills get rammed through Congress and passed without even being read?

This is not change I can believe in.

Random Reality Check: saintstryfe: Random Reality Check: Can you link me to a single instance where the Democrats "locked out" the Republicans on a bill?

To be fair, they did hold up several Judical nominations. That said, it was 4 or 5 out of 60, I believe. But it's what the righties will say.

Preventing unacceptable candidates from getting nominated is something that our representatives (on both sides of the aisle) are supposed to do.

What I am talking about is the downright miserable tricks that the Republicans were pushing, like introducing bills and then demanding a vote without even allowing enough time for the bills to be read, among other such wonderful tactics.

For a good read on just how that worked, take a look at how much time our representatives were given to read the Patriot Act - a document that was magically put together in next to no time, introduced to Congress and rammed down the American people's throat.

The Patriot Act (pdf) is 342 pages and was passed by the House on October 25th, 2001 - 44 days from September 11th to passage. Now tell me that this bill hadn't been waiting on the shelf for an opportunity to get passed.

Michael Moore (for whatever you think of him) managed to get admissions out of a few of our legislators that they never read the bill.

How the hell are we supposed to be adequately represented if bills get rammed through Congress and passed without even being read?

This is not change I can believe in.

Why do you finger Republicans as doing 'dirty tricks', both sides actively do them at the cost of lives. No? Body Armor. How freaking hard is it to say, "Our troops need body armor, let's give it to them. All in favor?"

But no, instead they filled the thing with items that THEY wanted, and when it was shot down or delayed because of THOSE items, it was automatically the other sides fault because they didn't want to give body armor to the troops.

Ridiculous.

DeathByGeekSquad:
Why do you finger Republicans as doing 'dirty tricks', both sides actively do them at the cost of lives.

Well, where to begin...

We are not talking about "dirty tricks" whatever that means to you, we are discussing how the Republicans manipulated the system, using the threat of removing the time-honored filibuster from the minority party's toolbox, (among other things) because the Republicans believed that they were going to be the majority party forever.

As to your cost of lives crap - give me a break.

Who sent us into a war that wasn't an imperative when our troops weren't appropriately equipped?

DeathByGeekSquad: No? Body Armor.

And why was it our troops had to be rushed into battle, again?
Go ahead, tell us all how the Democrats were the ones pushing the invasion of Iraq.

DeathByGeekSquad: How freaking hard is it to say, "Our troops need body armor, let's give it to them. All in favor?"

Take a civics lesson, will you?

We have a system that is suppose to run on compromise.
The Republicans introduce a bill that mandates what they want and when the Democrats ask for something they would like to see passed, the response is, "How can you be against our troops?" when the bill that allowed for budgeting body armor has all kinds of Republican pork built into it.

And then we have Donald Rumsfeld saying that "Our troops have everything they need" followed up by, "You go to war with the army you have, not the army you wish you had."

Keep blaming this on both parties, Karl Rove loves it when "useful idiots" repeat his talking points.

DeathByGeekSquad: But no, instead they filled the thing with items that THEY wanted, and when it was shot down or delayed because of THOSE items, it was automatically the other sides fault because they didn't want to give body armor to the troops.

That's not what happened - unless you believe what the nice voice inside your dashboard is telling you.

DeathByGeekSquad: Ridiculous.

Yes, it would be, if it were true.

What's really ridiculous is that you not only believed the lie, but repeated it.

Either get informed about what is happening or stick to technology - and DON'T VOTE until you actually understand what you're talking about.

mmkay?

tdpatriots12: Larry Mahnken: Yes, I think the Democrats make much better Democrats than the Republicans, too.

...what does that mean?

Larry Mahnken's like a bell, man, a bell that rings out the truth.

Turnabout's fair play

Renowned transvestite sexologist: How short their memory is

I do seem to remember, though I can't find an article on it, Republican attempts to exclude ALL democrats from ALL senate committees.

And still try to blame the Dems for Republican mistakes of the time.

I'd like to see Feingold,or Sheldon Whitehouse get the job of Sen leader.

Just steamroll them, Harry. Their opinions simply don't matter anymore.

Jacobin: Turnabout's fair play

And we know how Republicans love to turnabout