Left In Lowell

Member of the reality-based community of progressive (not anonymous) Massachusetts blogs

 
2013 Candidate Questionnaire Responses!
 

July 18, 2007

UpperDown Vote

by at 12:02 pm.

Susan H has some great videos of the Dems and their call to action to pressure the lackluster Republicans on the Iraq bill with a timetable for withdrawal, those who, as some put it, make speeches at home about changing the course and standing up to Bush, but go to Washington and filibuster such real change.

Does anyone else recall the shrill, nay, war-cry passion of the Republicans whenever there was a controversial vote up in the Senate under their majority, and the Dems made any noise at all about possibly thinking about filibustering? Ohhhh…that’s when they screamed about the morality of allowing an upperdown vote…terrible to be an obstructionist…it’s wrong not to vote…in fact, we’ll pull the nuclear option if you do, and kill the filibuster once and for all…

Does the cognitive dissonance on the floor of the Senate ever threaten to bring the building down around their ears? My. God.

12 Responses to “UpperDown Vote”

  1. Jacob Says:

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070718/us_nm/usa_politics_poll_dc_2

    [snip]
    An even bigger majority, 83 percent, say the Democratic-controlled Congress is doing only a fair or poor job — the worst mark for Congress in a Zogby poll.
    [/snip]

  2. Lynne Says:

    Wanna know why?

    Because they’re still letting the Republicans push them around, that’s why. When the American people want real opposition to Bush’s policies.

    If I were the Dems, I’d be forcing the Republicans to filibuster for a month on Iraq. That’s right, stall the damn Congress for a whole month to prove a point.

    The Republicans are headed towards losing their filibuster minority, if they keep this up. There’s an awful lot of them defending their seats in 2008 - more than the Dems had in 2006, and Dems kept their seats and won extra ones to gain the majority.

    I predict ‘08 is going to be a bloodbath for Republicans. They’re going to lose the White House, lose more seats in the House, and might even lose enough seats in the Senate to be below the threshold for filibuster.

  3. Mike Combs Says:

    I cringed when I read bloodbath.

    Bloodbath is where they’ve left our soldiers. In the line of fire, in harm’s way, trapped in a 2 or 3 different civil wars.

    When the Republicans lose in 2008, they’ll go to nice clean air conditioned offices, expensive lunches and fat salaried lobbying jobs. That’s no bloodbath.

    When our soldiers lose in Iraq, it’s a different cost altogether.

  4. Jacob Says:

    I don’t think that’s why. I think it has to do with their being equally incompetent fools who think a slight majority is a “mandate”.

    Who actually thinks a wealthy 60 year old from San Francisco with a ridiculous boob job speaks for them?

  5. Jacob Says:

    I see my post was censored.

  6. Bob F Says:

    So long as the Republicrats eat at the same big dollar party table and so long as the major media help to perpetuate the myth that the economy at home is really good and the stock market is the indicator of all that is good and holy and so long as we all continue to allow the White House’s occupants tell so many science fiction stories about everything they do, we will get the weird looking, mostly elderly white rich millionaries going through the motions as though they actually care! The recent intelligent report that stated so clearly that nothing done in Iraq has made sense passed out of the public arena in 24 hours while we obsessed over a football player involved in dog fighting. We right now our leaderless at the highest levels and essentially conscious and responsible medialess too. Even if the Dems win next year, does anyone seriously believe that the Democrats will in any way, shape or form no what to do to solve the war crisis abroad, come up with viable ways to approach the Middle East more generally, resolve the domestic health care, housing, education and healthcare crises?

  7. Lynne Says:

    Here’s censorship for you, Jacob: You’re an ass. You wanna know why your post went into moderation? Because of the words you used in your comment. I have a list of words that are commonly used in spam. It helps cull the spam before it ever gets on the blog. If you don’t like it, go make your own blog and let all the spammers post on it if you like.

    I also thought your comment, besides using words able to be caught by a spam filter, was incredibly rude, unproductive, and if you keep it up, I might just well delete your gibberish. This is my website, I host it, I decide on the standards, and I edit where I think necessary. I’ve been incredibly patient with very rude people, allowed far more in comments than many blogs do. I think I’ve been pretty fair with people who have attacked me personally, and attacked other people. I give fair warnings. But there’s a limit to what I will tolerate. You’re skating on the edge of that.

    Not to mention, you’re so wrong it’s ridiculous. The people (70%) want out of Iraq, they want universal health care (with 51% saying the government should do it as single payer) and generally, they believe we’re on the wrong track. You can whine all you like, but the Republicans lost the trust of the people a long time ago. Democrats if they know what’s good for them will not follow in the corrupt, compromised, corporate, selfish footsteps of their conservative colleagues.

    Mike Combs: point taken. :(

    Bob: I’m hoping that the movement to elect leaders via grassroots money and power will help put pressure on the current Dem leadership, which has definitely disappointed as yet. That’s why I endorse candidates like Jamie Eldridge - because I trust him to stand up to Dems as well as Republicans. That’s why I’m intrigued by Democratic MA Senate candidate Ed O’Reilly - who’ll be on my radio show today - because Kerry is so seriously compromised in his motivations. We need competitive primaries so we can truly debate what leadership really is, and if we all pay enough attention we can do something about the environment, the economy, etc before it all blows up in our faces.

    Of course, there’s a good chance we miss the mark, and it all still blows up in our faces. The next 30 years will be telling. It (the current course of the US) be corrected sooner or later. The later, however, the more pain and suffering it will cause.

  8. Jacob Says:

    So you have a spam filter that looks for sensible arguments. That is some filter. I guess most liberal bloggers will need that. As for me starting a blog, well, maybe when the trust fund kicks in and I don’t have to work anymore. Oh well, someone has to pay for your silly generation’s social security.

  9. Mr. Lynne Says:

    Jacob… do you go to the movies? Skip a couple a month and you can have a blog. You may even have time to write on it.

    As for spam filters, your post got caught in one. It happens. Get over it.

  10. Bob F Says:

    Wow - Jacob - so many tiny digs in so few words. Liberals and sensible arguments, trust funds and work, social security too. And, wise guy digs at women too. Well done! Right in keeping with the ways we’ve all degenerated as a country with civil discourse, right at the moment when we desperately need people to think, think, think and honestly reflect on the issues in front of the country and by extension the planet. I’m certain blogs will not get this done, so I do not expect great wisdom all the time from everyone. But they help raise issues. Nor do I expect we can get at the root causes of the health care crisis for example, or our failing schools on a blog. But, we do not have 30 more years to figure this stuff out because more and more young people are turning from politics, leaving the public debate to the extremely wealthy who care very little what happens to folks who live in Lowell. I teach at UML and know most of my students are thoroughly alientated form the political process. So, what do we do? No glibwise guy answers please.

  11. waittilnextyr Says:

    How often do we measure the strength of a political campaign by the amount of money that has been raised? Is this a conspiracy by the media, where a great portion of that money is eventually spent?

    The impasse at Congress with the war in Iraq creates further apathy with potential voters, who are increasingly convinced no one is able to solve our most pressing problems. I give credit to candidate Murphy for his “shared sacrifice” plan, a different approach to ending the misguided war. With that type of tax legislation in place, we would not only bring an end to the Iraq occupation, but also would be likely reverse the Bush policy of preemptive wars. And this comes from a candidate with no funds save his personal contribution.

  12. Lynne Says:

    waittil and Bob: good points, and also RE: Murphy in the race, I do think he adds a lot to the conversation. He is definitely a “just joe.”

    Jacob, I have a spam filter that looks for words like “viagra” and “boob.” Case in point I KNOW this comment that I’ve made, with these words in it, will get caught in the spam filter. Stop using stupid words like boob and maybe people will even listen to your argument once in a while.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

[powered by WordPress.]


If you are not on Twitter and want to follow our feed on Facebook, click "Like" for our FB page.
BadgermillCity logo

Pages:

Recent Posts

Search

Categories:

Archives:

July 2007
M T W T F S S
« Jun   Aug »
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031  

Other:

Email us!

(replace spaces, ['s, symbols)
Lynne | Mimi

Lowell Area Bloggers/Forums

Lowell Politics

Mass Bloggers

Politics Online

The Arts in Lowell

Trad Local Media

37 queries. 0.944 seconds