It's all kabuki politics for the mid-terms innit? Reid gets to say "here, we tried to advance the cause but those bastard Repubs blocked the bill"I don't think the democrats actually want DADT to stand. In fact Joe Lieberman of all people has been advocating for it's repeal.
This? I barely got a whispered chirp of a cricket on NPR that this happened, and it was all about DADT, not those senators who didn't want to fund the military in a time of war.Yeah, it's amazing how republicans would flip out of democrats voted against war funding, but yet republicans do it all the time when riders get attached.
"Let me be clear, the 'don't ask, don't tell' law should be changed," Collins said in a prepared statement. But she criticized Reid's handling of the bill.See, she doesn't have a problem with gay soldiers serving, she's just upset that the republicans couldn't lard up the bill with a bunch of provisions that the democrats hated. It has nothing to do with hating gay people, rather, she sees this as an opportunity to fuck over the democrats and she's taking it.
"Now is not the time to play politics, and I again call on the majority leader to work with Republican leaders to negotiate an agreement so that the Senate can debate the defense bill this week," she said.
On May 23, 2005, Pryor was one of the 14 senators who forged a compromise on the Democrats' use of the judicial filibuster. This effectively ended any threat of a Democratic filibuster.So Pryor, a Democrat, thinks that Democrats shouldn't be able filibuster Republicans but will actively help the Republicans filibuster the Democrats? This just blows my mind.
Good to know that sticking it to the Democrats is so much more important than the issue of basic equality. That's an example of having your priorities straight!Pretty much. They really need to get rid of the filibuster.
Because kicking them out doesn't really do anything. See Joe Lieberman.There's no benefit if you're a democrat. Lisa Merkowski just lost her primary and she's already losing her committee seats because she's considering a write in campaign. Seriously! Joe Lieberman actually did run as an independent and he campaigned against Obama and he's still chairing his committees!
"'President Obama, the House and a majority of senators clearly support an end to 'don’t ask, don’t tell,' but that, of course, is insufficient in the upside-down world of today’s Senate, where 40 members can block anything.Senators Kirsten Gillibrand and Mark Udall have urged Obama to do the same.
The two parties clashed on the number of amendments that Republicans could offer. Republicans wanted to add dozens of amendments, an obvious delaying tactic, while Democrats tried to block all but their own amendments. In an earlier time, the two sides might have reached an agreement on a limited number of amendments, but not in this Senate, and certainly not right before this election, when everyone’s blood is up even more than usual.
If the military’s unjust policy is not repealed in the lame-duck session, there is another way out. The Obama administration can choose not to appeal Judge Phillips’s ruling that the policy is unconstitutional, and simply stop ejecting soldiers.
But that would simply enable lawmakers who want to shirk their responsibility. History will hold to account every member of Congress who refused to end this blatant injustice.'
We’re the people whose votes Obama was trying to secure on the campaign trail when he:There's also a screenshot of one of his old web pages stating “the choice of a public insurance option” was one of his “three bedrock requirements for real health care reform”.
– outlined his health care plan in a 2007 campaign speech, saying “Essentially . . we’re going to set up a public plan that all persons and all women can access if they don’t have health insurance. It will be a plan that will provide all essential services, including reproductive services.”
– promised in 2008 on his campaign’s website that “any American will have the opportunity to enroll in [a] new public plan.” [2008]
– signed on to the HCAN principles on October 6, 2008, which includes “a public insurance plan without a private insurer middleman that guarantees affordable coverage.”
– told the Washington Post that his health care plan “creates a new public health plan for those currently without coverage.”
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) cited the roughly 1,800 earmarks in the bill worth $4.2 billion in explaining his opposition, but most others were blunt in their rational for opposing the military legislation.posted by Rhaomi at 9:28 AM on September 22, 2010
"I don't want health care," Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) said Thursday evening.
. tab v2021
ideology | Freq. Percent Cum.
------------------+-----------------------------------
very liberal | 2,127 6.02 6.02
liberal | 5,684 16.10 22.12
moderate | 13,701 38.80 60.92
conservative | 9,351 26.48 87.40
very conservative | 3,326 9.42 96.82
not sure | 1,124 3.18 100.00
------------------+-----------------------------------
Total | 35,313 100.00
There are about 3 conservatives for every 2 liberals in the US.July 8, 2010: Federal Court Rules DOMA Sec. 3 Violates Equal Protection.Previous FPP: "The federal Defense of Marriage Act has been ruled unconstitutional by Judge Joseph Tauro of the District Court of Massachusetts."
"'Her discharge from the Air Force Reserves violated her substantive due process rights under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. She should be restored to her position as a Flight Nurse with the 446th AES as soon as is practicable,' wrote [Federal Judge Ronald Leighton of Tacoma, Washington]."*Wingnut talking point in 3-2-1: "Judge Leighton is an activist judge who should not legislate social issues from the bench!"
"Leighton was nominated by President George W. Bush on January 23, 2002 to a seat vacated by Robert Bryan. Leighton was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on November 14, 2002 on a majority voice vote and received commission on November 26, 2002."A previous ruling by the judge: Druggists may withhold "morning-after" pill. To prohibit them from doing so is an unconstitutional violation of the pharmacists' freedom of religion.
« Older Sometime its seems like you're living in a William... | When releasing the Mozilla sou... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
.
posted by jaduncan at 1:59 AM on September 22, 2010 [4 favorites]