|
|
CRedskinsRule 07-07-2010, 04:24 PM Lieberman's history:
. In the 2000 United States presidential election, Lieberman was the Democratic nominee for Vice President, running with presidential nominee Al Gore,
He was an unsuccessful candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination in the 2004 presidential election.
Lieberman has been officially listed in Senate records for the 110th and 111th Congresses as an "Independent Democrat"[2]
Ultimately, the Senate Democratic Caucus voted to allow Lieberman to keep chairmanship of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Subsequently, Lieberman announced that he will continue to caucus with the Democrats.[4]
Lieberman remains a registered Democrat.[5]
{sidenote, He has also opposed filibustering Republican judicial appointments.}
the above was from his Wiki,
he also was a Democratic Senator since 1988 before he lost the Democratic primary and ran as an independent democrat.
so trying to say this guy isn't a Democrat demonstrates a lack of knowledge about his past.
JoeRedskin 07-07-2010, 05:13 PM :rofl::rofl::rofl:
The Democrats never have had a majority in the Senate! Sixty Seats is a majority in the Senate! 60! And thats just breaking even! The most they have had in this term is 58. You can look it up if you don't believe me. Your Republican pals filibuster everything that comes along. Every single bill!!! Thats why I said that we need to get some more Democrats in the Senate. So the Republican Filibuster can be broken. Then and only then things will start getting done. The American People will be happy to see things get done and their ratings will go up. On the other hand, If it stays the way it is now......................................with Republicans still holding power. Our country could very well stay in the freakin dirt!
Wow. The President is a Democrat, the Democrats hold a majority in the House, a majority in the Senate and yet the Republicans are "still holding power"!!! Amazing. Add that to your "Democrats never have had a majority in the Senate" and you are just the Fact Checking Man!!!
Tell the truth, you've learned your debate style from JTF.
saden1 07-07-2010, 08:10 PM With Joe Lieberman, Ben Nelson and Blanche Lincoln in the caucus Republicans aren't/weren't the problem...with Brown they have become part of the problem. It's OK though, two can play that game. I'm sure sometime down the road when Lord Obama has ruined America and the GOP gains control once again they'll be whining about how little control they have. Filibuster away....you get a filibuster, you get a filibuster, everybody gets a filibuster.
JoeRedskin 07-07-2010, 08:35 PM I think they should officially change the term "filibuster" to "clusterf***".
As with so many things, a useful and important procedural/legal tool that gets abused (by both sides of the aisle).
Miller101 07-11-2010, 05:40 PM Have you and jtf been on the NASA shuttle to Bizarro world together? There are countries that have a similar structure to what you're looking for....Venezuela, Cuba, China come to mind.
:blah:
You actually think that Republicans don't hold power? Are you freakin kidding me!?!?!??! I mean, why hasn't Wall Street Reform passed? Because Republicans have prevented it from doing so. THAT IS CALLED POWER!!!! And also called DUH!!! When you can hold up a bill that is supposed to help bring this country out of a Great Recession.....................its takes POWER to do so. DUH!!!! And Democrats don't have a super majority to break the filibuster! DUH!!!!
Its sixty votes to get bills passed in the Senate now. Once upon a time it was fifty with the Vice President breaking the tie. Now, its sixty. Republicans have filibustered every single thing, so it takes Sixty votes to break that and pass the bill. Dems just don't have the votes.
Wow. The President is a Democrat, the Democrats hold a majority in the House, a majority in the Senate and yet the Republicans are "still holding power"!!! Amazing. Add that to your "Democrats never have had a majority in the Senate" and you are just the Fact Checking Man!!!
Tell the truth, you've learned your debate style from JTF.
Once again, The Dems don't hold a majority in the Senate. With Senator Byrd's passing they hold fifty-six seats now. Fifty-six is NOT ENOUGH to get a bill passed anymore and therefore is NOT Majority. DUH!!! If it was enough then Wall Street Reform would have passed already! DUH!!!!
Sixty Seats is a majority. SIXTY!!! THE BIG '6' '0'!!! And a Super Majority is something like Sixty-Eight or Sixty Seven................heck, maybe even Sixty-Five. When was the last time the Democrats had that many? Not in my lifetime. And until they get that many. Nothing will get done that the Democrats want to get done. Including passing a bill that will help to, get this, ACTUALLY REGULATE WALL STREET. When you regulate Wall Street you might actually stop a Great Recession from happening before it even happens. Can you imagine that? Preventing something so serious from ever happening? I can't! Not when Republicans have enough power to stop the Democrats from doing anything and everything that the Dems need to do too bring this country out of the ditch that they put it in.
Here, here is a little video that I found that explains almost all of the bills that have been held up by the Senate. Bills that have passed the house, but won't pass the Senate:
YouTube - Wall St Reform? Party of Nope thinks you're a Dope
GMScud 07-11-2010, 05:56 PM Deleted.
GMScud 07-11-2010, 06:12 PM :blah:
You actually think that Republicans don't hold power? Are you freakin kidding me!?!?!??! I mean, why hasn't Wall Street Reform passed? Because Republicans have prevented it from doing so. THAT IS CALLED POWER!!!! And also called DUH!!! When you can hold up a bill that is supposed to help bring this country out of a Great Recession.....................its takes POWER to do so. DUH!!!! And Democrats don't have a super majority to break the filibuster! DUH!!!!
Its sixty votes to get bills passed in the Senate now. Once upon a time it was fifty with the Vice President breaking the tie. Now, its sixty. Republicans have filibustered every single thing, so it takes Sixty votes to break that and pass the bill. Dems just don't have the votes.
Once again, The Dems don't hold a majority in the Senate. With Senator Byrd's passing they hold fifty-six seats now. Fifty-six is NOT ENOUGH to get a bill passed anymore and therefore is NOT Majority. DUH!!! If it was enough then Wall Street Reform would have passed already! DUH!!!!
Sixty Seats is a majority. SIXTY!!! THE BIG '6' '0'!!! And a Super Majority is something like Sixty-Eight or Sixty Seven................heck, maybe even Sixty-Five.
Miller, the Dems still have a majority. FYI, there are only 100 Senators- two per state. If the Democrats have 56, more than half, then how do they not have a majority? Do explain.
The Dems no longer have 60 senators, which is the filibuster-proof super majority. DUH!!!
You talk loud and say nothing.
Democrats struggle to hold critical 60-seat Senate majority - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/06/senate.power.balance/index.html)
Republican Scott Brown Defeats Democrat Martha Coakley in Massachusetts Senate Race - ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/republican-scott-brown-defeats-democrat-martha-coakley-massachusetts/story?id=9602776)
Democrats Lose More than Senate Seat in Mass: Massachusetts Elects Republican for Senate, Dems Lose Super Majority (http://us-elections.suite101.com/article.cfm/democrats_lose_more_than_senate_seat_in_mass)
SmootSmack 07-11-2010, 06:15 PM When I think of that "can you change" thread that CRed started I wonder about Miller101 and whether he could change. To me he seems to be the type of person who if he heard a Democrat say "the world is shaped like a triangle and the capital of Italy is Tehran" He'd be like "damn right it is!"
I'll post this link again even though he'll just gloss over it. Or maybe he's right,maybe the Dems never have had 60 seats in the Senate and this link is some article from The Onion.
Democrats struggle to hold critical 60-seat Senate majority - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/06/senate.power.balance/index.html)
Miller101 07-11-2010, 07:45 PM Miller, the Dems still have a majority. FYI, there are only 100 Senators- two per state. If the Democrats have 56, more than half, then how do they not have a majority? Do explain.
The Dems no longer have 60 senators, which is the filibuster-proof super majority. DUH!!!
You talk loud and say nothing.
Democrats struggle to hold critical 60-seat Senate majority - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/06/senate.power.balance/index.html)
Republican Scott Brown Defeats Democrat Martha Coakley in Massachusetts Senate Race - ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/republican-scott-brown-defeats-democrat-martha-coakley-massachusetts/story?id=9602776)
Democrats Lose More than Senate Seat in Mass: Massachusetts Elects Republican for Senate, Dems Lose Super Majority (http://us-elections.suite101.com/article.cfm/democrats_lose_more_than_senate_seat_in_mass)
It takes 60 to pass a bill from the Senate!!! DUH!!!!!!! The Dems don't have that DUH!!!!! They don't have a majority! DUH!!!!!
What more do I have to explain!?!?!?!?
JoeRedskin 07-11-2010, 08:17 PM It takes 60 to pass a bill from the Senate!!! DUH!!!!!!! The Dems don't have that DUH!!!!! They don't have a majority! DUH!!!!!
What more do I have to explain!?!?!?!?
You are just an idiot. DUH. Truly. DUH. Beyond comprehension. DUH. You can use whatever definition for "majority" you want, but it doesn't change the meaning. DUH.
Majority: greater number of people or things: most of the people or things in a large group ( takes a singular or plural verb ) "The majority of women now work."
define majority - Bing DICTIONARY (http://www.bing.com/Dictionary/search?q=define+majority&FORM=DTPDIA&qpvt=majority+definition)
|