This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.
Exactly. And there are some who'll use a vote against that one to try to make some point or other about an opponent in an election. And worse, others who'll believe it means something about the candidate.
(That's in reference to H. Res. 888 designating the first week in May as " 'American Religious History Week' for the appreciation of and education on America's history of religious faith.")
Now, I thought the Dems were supposed to work with Republicans?
When Republicans had the majority, they seemed to know how to get legislation through. Maybe the Dems are just "simpler" folk, bitter and clinging to religion and guns and not liking those who aren't like them. lol
I don't EVER want to hear you say Democrats are obstructionists again.
This bill, silly as it is, was blocked by obstructionists. Bush's threats of vetos of other legislation--with solid partisan bloc voting--is obstructionist.
If there's anything this story shows, it's that the Republicans would rather vote against lauding motherhood than allow the Democrats to pass legislation.
Now if a resolution this meaningless that makes no one unhappy and costs nothing will be blocked to prove a partisan point, imagine what Republicans will do to good legislation that Americans actually need...like assistance to avoid foreclosure, for instance.
No, when the democrats were the minority, they didn't feel it was right to play politics the way the republicans do. Also, they don't have the media on their side. If the democrats did what the republicans are doing, the media at all the major networks would be screaming and hollering because of the obstructionist democrats.
Exactly. And there are some who'll use a vote against that one to try to make some point or other about an opponent in an election. And worse, others who'll believe it means something about the candidate.
(That's in reference to H. Res. 888 designating the first week in May as " 'American Religious History Week' for the appreciation of and education on America's history of religious faith.")
Now, I thought the Dems were supposed to work with Republicans?
When Republicans had the majority, they seemed to know how to get legislation through. Maybe the Dems are just "simpler" folk, bitter and clinging to religion and guns and not liking those who aren't like them. lol
Wow. And you thought libs were funny.
I don't EVER want to hear you say Democrats are obstructionists again.
This bill, silly as it is, was blocked by obstructionists. Bush's threats of vetos of other legislation--with solid partisan bloc voting--is obstructionist.
If there's anything this story shows, it's that the Republicans would rather vote against lauding motherhood than allow the Democrats to pass legislation.
Now if a resolution this meaningless that makes no one unhappy and costs nothing will be blocked to prove a partisan point, imagine what Republicans will do to good legislation that Americans actually need...like assistance to avoid foreclosure, for instance.
Or health care.
Speaking of religion I read this article in today's L.A. Times. Please let me know what you think. I'd appreciate your opinion on the matter.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-beliefs...
I think that they are right.
No, when the democrats were the minority, they didn't feel it was right to play politics the way the republicans do. Also, they don't have the media on their side. If the democrats did what the republicans are doing, the media at all the major networks would be screaming and hollering because of the obstructionist democrats.