consumetheconsumer commented on the blog post Not Just Cost Uniting Democrats on Ending Afghanistan War
If your “enemy’s” stated goal is to bankrupt you – not kill you or take your planes or building but bankrupt you so you can’t fly or sail to their areas and kill / change their people – it makes perfect sense to consider the cost of fighting the enemy that knows it’s just a matter of tome before the $$$ runs out. This isnt rocket science.
Beyond disappointment. Beyond caring.
Will never have to care when one or more Democratic Senators complain about how if only the rules were different more Democratic legislation would be passed. They could have been.
They chose not to make them different so things could get passed.
Decisions, like elections, have consequences. The consequence for me is to abandon them as they’ve abandoned US (time and time and time and time again).
consumetheconsumer commented on the blog post Senate Rules Changes Slipping Away, As Media Dissembles
seriously, if they won’t even change the rules to try and end constant obstruction why should anyone bother to support them? So that we can continue to hear about how awfully obstructionist the GO-P-TEA crowd is? We know that. The question is – what are Senate Democrats – who still have a majority – going to do about it.
If the answer is nothing, then I know they are not at all serious about doing anything for the next 2 years that benefits human people. Come next election cycle, I’ll return the favor. Enough is enough.
consumetheconsumer commented on the blog post Senate Rules Reform Will Be Tweaked, Some Democrats Nervous About Committing to Changes
If Senate Dems do not vote, en mass, to change the rules at the very first opportunity, in a manner that will significantly limit the ability of the GOP to thwart otherwise supported legislation, what more evidence will be needed to show that they’re just hiding behind the Party of No?
If we change the rules the rule will be used against us . . . what hogwash. What, then, is the reason for the past 4 years?
No filibuster reform, no support in 2012. there has got to be a line in the sand somewhere.
I agree it’s important. I think the tax cuts should expire. But the MSM is reporting anonymous sources who have their own axes to grind. Of course the Ds in the Senate are upset, they’re getting played – and it’s not the first time. And now they’re looking for someone, anyone, but themselves to blame. Which of the 4 votes do you think would actually have passed? The ones the Ds wanted? Doubt it.
I’m tired of listening to the MSM. I have my thoughts . . . we’ll see what actually happens. My thoughts are based on my view, from the MSM oddly enough, that Senate Democrats have shown us NOTHING. I expect the charade of we’d really like to help but our hands are tied to continue. I could be wrong. Hopefully so. I’m just also tired of everyone blaming Obama, rather than the Congress . . . he wasn’t my messiah, but he only gets to vote at the end.
I was commenting on the GOP, not the Democrats. The s GOP ran on we’re against back room deals like Obamacare and financial reform. Now they are making back room deals to get their 100% tax cut while the Democrats continue playing with themselves. Obama just wants unemployment benefits, New Start and few other things before the GOP rules the House and Senate (yeah, D’s will still hold the #s, but they’ve held the numbers for 2 years and what has it got us?)
The Democrats had 2 years to tackle a wide variety of issues. They squandered that time playing games. Obama may not be all everyone thought he would be (who is really), but most of the Democrats in Congress can go jump off a cliff. We gave them everything and they still got played.
yes, apparently the GOP hates back room dealing, at least when they don’t get 100% of what they want. 99% and they’re ok with it.
So while we’re all here busy blaming Obama, anyone know who was the lone Senate Republican who blocked the 4 votes? Me, I say a pox on the whole lot of them.