Comments on: Shooting the lame duck

By: A_Nonny_Mouse

A_Nonny_Mouse — Fri, 03 Dec 2010 06:00:29 +0000

From where I sit, the actions of this Democrat Administration (including the outrageous behavior of the Democrat-controlled Senate and Democrat-controlled House of Representatives) during 2009 and 2010 years have tarnished the word “Democrat” beyond redemption.

I will *NEVER* support a Democrat again no matter how reasonable and worthy he/she may seem; and I will *NEVER* support any legislation proposed by them, either.

PS- additionally, I will *NEVER* *AGAIN* trust anything the MFMSM broadcasts or prints. (Call ’em “American Pravda” and be done with it.)

And no, that doesn’t mean I like the Republicans. I’d trust them about 5 minutes longer than the Democrats; & that’s all.

By: strcpy

strcpy — Thu, 02 Dec 2010 04:44:08 +0000

“As for Al Gore in 2000, you misjudge the disgust that so many american held toward Bill Clinton. ”

Sadly it took the last two years for much of the charm to wear off and people see what he was.

Even more sad is that it took the last two here to see that ole Bill wasn’t as bad as we thought either. I shudder to think if the dems run someone who makes us wistfully look back on the Obama years for a democratic president.

By: Nolanimrod

Nolanimrod — Thu, 02 Dec 2010 03:33:26 +0000

Democrats Maneuver for One Last Chance to Give America The Finger…

Isn’t everybody hip to the fact that this public servant thing is a lot of crap during a lame duck session?……

By: Nolanimrod

Nolanimrod — Thu, 02 Dec 2010 03:33:26 +0000

Democrats Maneuver for One Last Chance to Give America The Finger…

Isn’t everybody hip to the fact that this public servant thing is a lot of crap during a lame duck session?……

By: Nolanimrod

Nolanimrod — Thu, 02 Dec 2010 03:00:45 +0000

Cubz_Fan: they're talking about the Dream Act. What the hell are you talking about?

By: Steve

Steve — Thu, 02 Dec 2010 02:36:48 +0000

Lame ducks do not have to answer for their actions but they are only a fraction of the total. The rest have to worry about the next election. I do not see how Pelosi and Reid can hope to force them to cast votes that will almost certainly be used against them.

By: uncleFred

uncleFred — Thu, 02 Dec 2010 02:08:46 +0000

@gs
Losing seats is a far cry from being stripped of control by 50 seats (192-242 with one undecided) . You proclamation of displeasure hardly equals the repudiation suffered by the democrats a month ago. As for proceeding with the impeachment, however much it may have offended you, the voters left control of the house and Senate in republican hands. Impeachment requires a simple majority, conviction requires 2/3s. We can argue about whether impeachment would have succeeded in Jan 1999, but that is question that can not be answered.

As for Al Gore in 2000, you misjudge the disgust that so many american held toward Bill Clinton. I know many people who made a special effort to end Democrat control of the white house, specifically because of Clinton’s behavior and handling of his office.

By: gs

gs — Wed, 01 Dec 2010 23:25:27 +0000

I’m not so sure, however, that there’s ever been a case of the electorate roundly repudiating an entire party in control of Congress, and then that very same Congress attempting in its subsequent lame duck session to pass seminal legislation that it knows the voters don’t want (if any of you history buffs are aware of such cases, please offer examples in the comments section).

It’s not legislation, but iirc the 1998 lame duck Congress proceeded with impeachment even though the voters had made their displeasure clear at the polls.

Iirc the lame duck Congress proceeded even though the Republicans had lost seats in the election, an unusual midterm outcome for the party not holding the White House.

Only Al Gore’s gross incompetence prevented the Democrats from retaining the White House in 2000.

By: Jennifer

Jennifer — Wed, 01 Dec 2010 22:32:14 +0000

I, personally, have no objection to naturalization for those who serve in the US military. Being willing to defend and serve a country seems, at least to me, to be an acceptable roadmap to follow.

I have a *huge* objection to illegal immigrants who “graduate college” here being given citizenship. All they’ve show in a willingness to stay illegally in the country, take a college spot which might have gone to a legal citizen (or to a foreign national with a student visa) and then have the expectation that we’ll say, “Oh, that’s all right, you can stay here.”

No. If these students want to be legal, they need to return to their own countries, and either get a student visa to study in this country, or seek naturalization through the legal process.

By: Curtis

Curtis — Wed, 01 Dec 2010 22:07:01 +0000

Couple points:

“From the protection of different and unequal faculties of acquiring property, the possession of different degrees and kinds of property immediately results; and from the influence of these on the sentiments and views of the respective proprietors, ensues a division of the society into different interests and parties.”

Madison ranked the rights of ownership of property over “self-esteem.”

“The influence of factious leaders may kindle a flame within their particular States, but will be unable to spread a general conflagration through the other States.”

What we have here, is a failure to protect.

Our political system has lost its federalist element because the states have lost their power, and the judiciary, for the most part, does not defend state’s rights.

It is the states who must resist the overbearing Congress but they have abdicated that position.

Time for Texas tea!