Obama & Dems in 2005: 51 Vote ‘Nuclear Option’ Is ‘Arrogant’ Power Grab!

[andymays]

Biden: "I pray God when the Democrats take back control we don't make the kind of naked power grab you are doing."


http://www.breitbart.tv/obama-dems-in-2005-51-vote-nuclear-option-is-arrogant-power-grab-against-the-founders-intent/



Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

[boxcar]

Biden: "I pray God when the Democrats take back control we don't make the kind of naked power grab you are doing."


http://www.breitbart.tv/obama-dems-in-2005-51-vote-nuclear-option-is-arrogant-power-grab-against-the-founders-intent/



Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

What are you trying to say: The Dems are a bunch of lying hypocrites? Hmm...I gotta think about that. :rolleyes: Funny how they are now singing a very different tune, though, isn't it? What a difference 5 little years make.

Of course, now we can see the political fallout that would occur if the Dems go this "reconciliation" route (a/k/a "nuclear option"). The ramifications for this country would be HUGE, not to mention more than a few voters would be angered over the Dems' arrogance and power grab. Now we can understand why BO desperately wants a "bipartisan" bill in the senate. Heck...at this rate, he'd settle for one lone Republican. One Republican defector and the Dems would have the super majority they need. You can bet your bottom dollar there are several Repugs on BO's short list who are being considered for juicy bribes in a backroom deal. (And no, that deal wouldn't be publicized on C-Span.) A huge amount of OUR money is going to be on the table -- just to get one Republican.

Boxcar

[ArlJim78]

part of me would love to see them try the nuclear option, but i think they won't even get the votes for that. maybe they could clear the senate, but I don't think it will make it through the house.

in any case it's great how they allow Obama to continue on with the healthbill, even ramping up to ramming speed. Obama is the "nuclear option" for the democratic party because of his war on America. after one year the party is in tatters, congress at 10% appoval. simply wonderful.

the only thing that can save them now is if a group of Republicans get soft in the head, and that is certainly possible.

[Leonard]

part of me would love to see them try the nuclear option, but i think they won't even get the votes for that. maybe they could clear the senate, but I don't think it will make it through the house.

in any case it's great how they allow Obama to continue on with the healthbill, even ramping up to ramming speed. Obama is the "nuclear option" for the democratic party because of his war on America. after one year the party is in tatters, congress at 10% appoval. simply wonderful.

the only thing that can save them now is if a group of Republicans get soft in the head, and that is certainly possible.

I don't see how the nuclear option is even possible or why there is any talk about it. The House must still pass the Senate version if the Dems in the Senate want to nuke with only 51 votes... the House only passed its own version by 5 votes last time.

Since then, Wexler resigned, Murtha is on a slab, the lone Republican that voted for the House version, Cao, has seen the light and said "no way" this time, Stupak says "no way" this time... there are also a great many others that are now in campaign mode and want to keep their jobs come November... it's not happening. Voting for Healthcare right now is the kiss of death for many come November. They just don't have the votes in the House.

Then there is Mitch McConnell, believe it or not. He may not be much of a Senator or an inspiring leader for Republicans but he is a walking procedural encyclopedia. When the Democrats say the Republicans are being obstructionist they are talking about one man and one man only -- McConnell. The Republicans haven't had the votes to stop anything for the past year. Nothing. They can only obstruct through McConnell via procedure and he is very, very good at it. That is why the healtcare bill was supposed to be law by August. Then November. Then by Christmas. Then by the State of the Union. The longer the healthcare debate drags on the less likely it is to pass.

The new White House proposals and the silly bi-partisan meeting with Republicans are are a side show. It is not a bill and if the White House wants it as a bill it must begin the entire process from the very beginning -- being drafted, debated in committee, voted out of committee, debated on the floor, voted on re cloture, voted for passage in each house, reconciled in both houses, voted for final passage.

Is any congresscritter going to hang his ass in the breeze a month or two before re-election for Obama? I don't think so.

These ungodly healthcare reform bills are dead in my opinion.

[Tom]

Sec is gonna be pissed when he sees this. He is on a crusade against hypocrisy lately. This will fry his eggs but good! :eek:

[boxcar]

Sec is gonna be pissed when he sees this. He is on a crusade against hypocrisy lately. This will fry his eggs but good! :eek:

No, he won't. He'll just post more hypocrisies by the Right to be "fair and balanced" and then give us a great big :sleeping: :sleeping: ...or two.

Boxcar

[ArlJim78]

heh
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_9Bx0L3n3uAo/S4WIzQ05lQI/AAAAAAAAG90/BbfrZOFV7ZY/s320/obamazero.jpg

[mostpost]

Reconciliation is not the nuclear option. Reconciliation is not an attempt to kill the filibuster. The nuclear option was an attempt to kill the filibuster.
Reconciliation: (From Wikipedia)
Reconciliation is a legislative process in the United States Senate intended to allow consideration of a contentious budget bill without the threat of filibuster. Introduced in 1974, reconciliation limits debate and amendment, and therefore favors the majority party. Reconciliation also exists in the United States House of Representatives, but because the House regularly passes rules that constrain debate and amendment, the process has had a less significant impact on that body.

A reconciliation instruction (Budget Reconciliation) is a provision in a budget resolution directing one or more committees to submit legislation changing existing law in order to bring spending, revenues, or the debt-limit into conformity with the budget resolution. The instructions specify the committees to which they apply, indicate the appropriate dollar changes to be achieved, and usually provide a deadline by which the legislation is to be reported or submitted.[1]
Nuclear option: (Also from wikipedia)
In U.S. politics, the nuclear option is an attempt by a majority of the United States Senate to end a filibuster by invoking a point of order to essentially declare the filibuster unconstitutional which can be decided by a simple majority, rather than seeking formal cloture with a supermajority of 60 senators. Although it is not provided for in the formal rules of the Senate, the procedure is the subject of a 1957 parliamentary opinion and has been used on several occasions since. The term was coined by Senator Trent Lott (Republican of Mississippi) in 2005;[1] prior to this it was known as the constitutional option.[2]
Reconciliation was established by the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. It is part of the law of the land. It provides that budget related items are not subject to filibuster. It does not ban the filibuster; it does not change the Senate rules.
The filibuster is not a law. The filibuster (and the method for ending a filibuster) is a rule of the Senate. The nuclear option was/is a parliamentary maneuver to end a filibuster with a majority vote rather than 60%. Effectively killing the filibuster as a parliamentary tool.
The nuclear option applies to ALL legislation before the Senate. Reconciliation applies only to items which are budget related.


Of course, now we can see the political fallout that would occur if the Dems go this "reconciliation" route (a/k/a "nuclear option").
Wrong again Boxtop. Reconciliation is not "aka nuclear option", as I just proved. They are two different things.
Reconcilliation has been used 22 times to pass budget related items. 16 of those times it was used by Republicans. Lest you think that Health Care would not qualify as a budget related item, Cobra and S-chip were both passed by reconciliation.
The 22 items passed by reconciliation are listed in the wikipedia article.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconciliation_(United_States_Congress)

[newtothegame]

Ummm mosty....You forgot to address the thread....Or is it that your even gonna stay away from the fact that Biden said some years ago (above) that quote and now it seems the dems may do or try just that very thing?

[bigmack]

Reconcilliation has been used 22 times to pass budget related items. 16 of those times it was used by Republicans. Lest you think that Health Care would not qualify as a budget related item, Cobra and S-chip were both passed by reconciliation.
http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/1-1.gif

Keep clickin', tomorrow might be a big day. Then again...

After all these months you're now doing reconciliation homework? :lol:

Your team is well poised to carry it out.

I say 'bring it on'. Then, the bloodbath.

[hcap]

Ummm mosty....You forgot to address the thread....Or is it that your even gonna stay away from the fact that Biden said some years ago (above) that quote and now it seems the dems may do or try just that very thing?He addressed it quite well.
Reconcilliation has been used 22 times to pass budget related items. 16 of those times it was used by Republicans. Lest you think that Health Care would not qualify as a budget related item, Cobra and S-chip were both passed by reconciliation.The repug hypocrisy is rampant-as usual and as the bleating and whining here.

Bush tax cuts were passed by the repugs using reconciliation.

[newtothegame]

He addressed it quite well.
The repug hypocrisy is rampant-as usual and as the bleating and whining here.

Bush tax cuts were passed by the repugs using reconciliation.

Hcap' I am seriously starting to worry about you. Bush must be in your dreams, your nightmares, your daily rituals...etc etc. Sooner or later, you progressive libs have to let it go. Its been OVER a year now since Bush was pres.
At some point (like it or not) Obummer will have to stand on his own two feet. Or, should his presidency be all about Bush?

[newtothegame]

He addressed it quite well.
The repug hypocrisy is rampant-as usual and as the bleating and whining here.

Bush tax cuts were passed by the repugs using reconciliation.

And...the thread was NOT about Bush...it was about Biden making comments to the affect that he hoped they would never strong arm power grab like using the above mentioned congressional ways. Now, it looks like that will be the Dems way of getting this through if they are to do it.
Now here's the question.....let me make it clear as I can.....Biden was against this tactic five years ago...but now he's for it?? Is that ok???
Course thats typical of this administration...say one thing...do another...

[hcap]

I am not giving a shit what Biden said or didn't say. Reconciliation is on the table, and it is about time.
The issue is not about Bidens' stance, it is about how to get important legislation done.

Dems should have done this from jump.

Bush? Who said Bush? I said RECONCILIATION under the heavily dominated repug Bush administration and as mostpost points out, the 16 instances of the bleating repugs using reconciliation when they had their druthers.

[hcap]

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/2/24/840251/-Majority-rule-is-the-nuclear-option

Majority rule is "the nuclear option"
by kos
Wed Feb 24, 2010 at 03:40:04 PM PST

Back when Republicans had the majority and Trent Lott ran the Senate, Republicans were more than happy to use the reconciliation process to pass their agenda. You see, they acted like a majority party with conviction for their ideology, and they used all tools at their disposal to make it happen.

And boy, did they ever, using reconciliation --

1-Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (first Bush tax cuts)

2-Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (second Bush tax cuts)

3-Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (Medicare, Medicaid, student loans, assistance for needy families)

4-Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005 (tax cuts)

5-College Cost Reduction and Access Act of 2007 (student aid, loan forgiveness)

In fact, it's kind of hard to find any health-related bit of legislation that didn't pass via reconciliation:

The use of expedited reconciliation process to push through more dramatic changes to a health care bill of such size, scope and magnitude is unprecedented," Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) wrote in a letter to President Obama on Monday, urging him to renounce the possibility of trying to pass a bill using the procedure.

But health care and reconciliation actually have a lengthy history. "In fact, the way in which virtually all of health reform, with very, very limited exceptions, has happened over the past 30 years has been the reconciliation process," says Sara Rosenbaum, who chairs the Department of Health Policy at George Washington University.

As Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid has noted:

"Since 1981, reconciliation has been used 21 times. The vast majority of those reconciliation efforts have been by Republicans," he said. "[T]hey should stop crying about reconciliation as if it's never been done before. It's done almost every Congress, and they're the ones that used it more than anyone else."

He added, "The Contract for America, most of the stuff in the Contract for America was done with reconciliation. Tax cuts, done with reconciliation. Medicare, done with reconciliation. So they better go back and look at history a little bit."

What's more, while the filibuster is just a Senate rule, reconciliation is ACTUAL LAW:

Yes, reconciliation is more than just a procedure hidden away in the Senate rules somewhere. It's a matter of law. Specifically, the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. § 641(e)(2)). Yes, that's right. As a matter of federal law, you can pass a reconciliation bill with just 51 votes. Because 2 U.S.C. § 641(e)(2) specifically limits -- by law -- debate in the Senate on reconciliation bills to 20 hours. Which means you can't filibuster it. Which means that it gets an up-or-down vote (remember those?), with no 60 vote threshold required. Plain old majority rules.

[ArlJim78]

Republicans never used reconciliation to pass something opposed by 70% of the country. That is the reason why Democrats won't use it to pass healthcare. There are enough of them who aren't avowed marxists to prevent them from even getting to a majority status.

[GaryG]

This is just empty talk.....all talky no ballsy I believe is how PA puts it. Enough of them will be on the street already come November without this. What a sorry bunch they are, running in circles and blaming each other....oh, and obie says he is not a socialist nor does he have a socialist agenda. Uh....sure obie, whatever you say bro.

[PaceAdvantage]

There's no saving this bunch now, I'm afraid (well, I'm not afraid...I'm quite pleased and surprised actually...never thought it would be over this quickly).

I actually started to buy into that "Republicans are dead and buried...Dem rule for 100+ years...." :lol:

[Secretariat]

Reconcilliation has been used 22 times to pass budget related items. 16 of those times it was used by Republicans.

Thanks for saving time mostpost. The Repugnicants on this site don't even realize they've used Recon 16 times to the Dem's 6.

The "hypocrisy" of their indignation and outrage is once again exposed.

Really informative and excellent post. Well done.

[ArlJim78]

Thanks for saving time mostpost. The Repugnicants on this site don't even realize they've used Recon 16 times to the Dem's 6.

The "hypocrisy" of their indignation and outrage is once again exposed.

Really informative and excellent post. Well done.
for the one millionth time, yes we all realize it has been used FOR BUDGET RELATED BILLS. this is not a budget bill however.

and secondly, many of us would LOVE to see them go the reconciliation route on this. go ahead, make my day. are you feeling luck? like hcap said, they should man up, grow some balls and pass this thing already.

[bigmack]

Thanks for saving time mostpost. The Repugnicants on this site don't even realize they've used Recon 16 times to the Dem's 6.

The "hypocrisy" of their indignation and outrage is once again exposed.

Really informative and excellent post. Well done.
What in the world are you talking about? We're aware.

Indignation, outrage, hypocrisy? Just do it, man!

Like hcap said, have the balls & just do it.

Quit whining about Reps & shove this deal through. Let's go already.

Of course with any level of rational thought you know, & hcap knows & mosty knows that ain't gonna happen. But ya'll looked tough for about a 3-4 days, so you have that going for yourselves. :rolleyes:

[GaryG]

With all of the whining from the left you would never think that they were the party in power.....59% of the Senate. They are apparently most comfortable as victims. Fine with me, I'm most comfortable as Attila the Hun.

[newtothegame]

Yep, as I stated earlier.....
Please, all you libs, progressive Dems who want this bill...please...(wait) PLEASE call your reps and tell them not to worry about what the polls are saying. Not to worry about bipartisinship...hell for that matter, don't worry about future budgets and deficits...RAM IT THROUGH....
I have a hard time recalling any party who came to power with such authority...and is currently crashing and burning at record pace..!!!!

[mostpost]

Republicans never used reconciliation to pass something opposed by 70% of the country. That is the reason why Democrats won't use it to pass healthcare. There are enough of them who aren't avowed marxists to prevent them from even getting to a majority status.
Where do you get that 70% figure from? A survey of Republicans in Congress?
Much of the opposition to the Obama/Democrats proposals is based on the misleading information being promulgated by Republicans and their synchophants at Fox.
In August 2009 NBC News did a poll in which 36% of respondents favored the Obama health care plan, while 42% opposed it. NBC then gave a brief summary of what the plan contained. After receiving this information, support for the Obama plan rose 17% to 53%. Oppositon dropped 7 points to 35 %.
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/NEWS/NBC-WSJ_Poll.pdf

Another poll, by the Kaiser foundation, asked respondents whether the Obama plan contained certain items. It then asked if they would support a plan containing each of those items.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/01/health-care-polls-opinion-gap-or.html

Another reason for Obama's drop in popularity on the health care issue is that many of us feel he is being too accomadating to the Republicans, not because we oppose his policies.

[GaryG]

Much of the opposition to the Obama/Democrats proposals is based on the misleading information being promulgated by Republicans and their synchophants at Fox. I knew it.....Fox News was behind all of this. Otherwise he would be as popular as Reagan. C'mon Obie....go for reconciliation, make my day.

[ArlJim78]

Where do you get that 70% figure from? A survey of Republicans in Congress?
Much of the opposition to the Obama/Democrats proposals is based on the misleading information being promulgated by Republicans and their synchophants at Fox.
In August 2009 NBC News did a poll in which 36% of respondents favored the Obama health care plan, while 42% opposed it. NBC then gave a brief summary of what the plan contained. After receiving this information, support for the Obama plan rose 17% to 53%. Oppositon dropped 7 points to 35 %.
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/NEWS/NBC-WSJ_Poll.pdf

Another poll, by the Kaiser foundation, asked respondents whether the Obama plan contained certain items. It then asked if they would support a plan containing each of those items.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/01/health-care-polls-opinion-gap-or.html

Another reason for Obama's drop in popularity on the health care issue is that many of us feel he is being too accomadating to the Republicans, not because we oppose his policies.
I've seen many polls lately that show 60-70% don't want this all or nothing comprehensive bill, that it should be done in smaller increments or scrapped and started over. bottom line, his approach is not popular other than with people identified as the political class. of course it very popular with them because they are unaffected.

[mostpost]

for the one millionth time, yes we all realize it has been used FOR BUDGET RELATED BILLS. this is not a budget bill however.

and secondly, many of us would LOVE to see them go the reconciliation route on this. go ahead, make my day. are you feeling luck? like hcap said, they should man up, grow some balls and pass this thing already.
If it is not budget related, then why all the crying about how much it will cost? As Hcap and I pointed out, reconciliation IS AN ACTUAL LAW. I have not read the law, but I am confident that it spells out when it can be used.

[ArlJim78]

If it is not budget related, then why all the crying about how much it will cost? As Hcap and I pointed out, reconciliation IS AN ACTUAL LAW. I have not read the law, but I am confident that it spells out when it can be used.
It wasn't created for this type of bill, that comes from the guy who created the concept.

Regardless, I don't care. It's a bad bill period, a disaster. However Dem's hold all the cards and call all the shots right now so they can do what they want. but they'll pay a hefty price if they ram it through.

[newtothegame]

If it is not budget related, then why all the crying about how much it will cost? As Hcap and I pointed out, reconciliation IS AN ACTUAL LAW. I have not read the law, but I am confident that it spells out when it can be used.

Ohh c'mon mosty.....
With your above attempt at justification, ANY bill could fall under "budget". After all, every bill has some underlying cost. Therefore they ALL must be budget related right???

Geeze.... :(

[bigmack]

If it is not budget related, then why all the crying about how much it will cost? As Hcap and I pointed out, reconciliation IS AN ACTUAL LAW. I have not read the law, but I am confident that it spells out when it can be used.
No need to sell it. Make it so. Call your congressman/woman. :jump:

[Tom]

Call them what? :rolleyes:


Hey Sec, mostie, when are YOUR guts gonna stop being hypocrits and ACT?
They do not need us - go ahead......JUST DO IT. Bring it on.

:lol::lol::lol:

[johnhannibalsmith]

I must admit, despite my disdain for these particular bills - I actually hope that they just shut up and pass a bad bill using reconciliation. Just do it. I don't really believe that most in the chamber really believe it is a particularly good bill, despite a reluctance to speak against it unless they are in the minority. I suspect most hope it dies and that they can blame it on Repug obstructionism. Stop pretending your hands are tied by others - Vote for it. Pass it. Support it. Live with it.

[Tom]

Hey Reid, Pelosi.......bwaaaaack, bwaaack, bwaaaack.

Chicken shots! :lol::lol::lol:

[hcap]

for the one millionth time, yes we all realize it has been used FOR BUDGET RELATED BILLS. this is not a budget bill however.

and secondly, many of us would LOVE to see them go the reconciliation route on this. go ahead, make my day. are you feeling luck? like hcap said, they should man up, grow some balls and pass this thing already.
Post # 15

"But health care and reconciliation actually have a lengthy history. "In fact, the way in which virtually all of health reform, with very, very limited exceptions, has happened over the past 30 years has been the reconciliation process," says Sara Rosenbaum, who chairs the Department of Health Policy at George Washington University".

[boxcar]

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/2/24/840251/-Majority-rule-is-the-nuclear-option

Majority rule is "the nuclear option"
by kos
Wed Feb 24, 2010 at 03:40:04 PM PST

Back when Republicans had the majority and Trent Lott ran the Senate, Republicans were more than happy to use the reconciliation process to pass their agenda. You see, they acted like a majority party with conviction for their ideology, and they used all tools at their disposal to make it happen.

And boy, did they ever, using reconciliation --

1-Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (first Bush tax cuts)

2-Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (second Bush tax cuts)

3-Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (Medicare, Medicaid, student loans, assistance for needy families)

4-Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005 (tax cuts)

5-College Cost Reduction and Access Act of 2007 (student aid, loan forgiveness)

In fact, it's kind of hard to find any health-related bit of legislation that didn't pass via reconciliation:

The use of expedited reconciliation process to push through more dramatic changes to a health care bill of such size, scope and magnitude is unprecedented," Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) wrote in a letter to President Obama on Monday, urging him to renounce the possibility of trying to pass a bill using the procedure.

But health care and reconciliation actually have a lengthy history. "In fact, the way in which virtually all of health reform, with very, very limited exceptions, has happened over the past 30 years has been the reconciliation process," says Sara Rosenbaum, who chairs the Department of Health Policy at George Washington University.

As Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid has noted:

"Since 1981, reconciliation has been used 21 times. The vast majority of those reconciliation efforts have been by Republicans," he said. "[T]hey should stop crying about reconciliation as if it's never been done before. It's done almost every Congress, and they're the ones that used it more than anyone else."

He added, "The Contract for America, most of the stuff in the Contract for America was done with reconciliation. Tax cuts, done with reconciliation. Medicare, done with reconciliation. So they better go back and look at history a little bit."

What's more, while the filibuster is just a Senate rule, reconciliation is ACTUAL LAW:

Yes, reconciliation is more than just a procedure hidden away in the Senate rules somewhere. It's a matter of law. Specifically, the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. § 641(e)(2)). Yes, that's right. As a matter of federal law, you can pass a reconciliation bill with just 51 votes. Because 2 U.S.C. § 641(e)(2) specifically limits -- by law -- debate in the Senate on reconciliation bills to 20 hours. Which means you can't filibuster it. Which means that it gets an up-or-down vote (remember those?), with no 60 vote threshold required. Plain old majority rules.



Including all the hypocritical Dems, who in 2005, squealed like the stuck pigs are, when condemning this parliamentary strategy. I guess their memories were faulty at that time, but now in 2010 have total recall of the law?

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Where do you get that 70% figure from? A survey of Republicans in Congress?
Much of the opposition to the Obama/Democrats proposals is based on the misleading information being promulgated by Republicans and their synchophants at Fox.
In August 2009 NBC News did a poll in which 36% of respondents favored the Obama health care plan, while 42% opposed it. NBC then gave a brief summary of what the plan contained. After receiving this information, support for the Obama plan rose 17% to 53%. Oppositon dropped 7 points to 35 %.
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/NEWS/NBC-WSJ_Poll.pdf

Another poll, by the Kaiser foundation, asked respondents whether the Obama plan contained certain items. It then asked if they would support a plan containing each of those items.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/01/health-care-polls-opinion-gap-or.html

Another reason for Obama's drop in popularity on the health care issue is that many of us feel he is being too accomadating to the Republicans, not because we oppose his policies.

Here' Mosty, feast on your eyes on these various polls:

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/27/obamacare-now-20-points-down-in-cnn-poll/

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform

http://www.politico.com/livepulse/0210/Poll_ObamaCare_a_bad_idea.html

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Njc2MzI1MDk5ZDc5MmYwYjdmMjYxMjYwNWE2ZDAwNWM=

http://wwwwakeupamericans-spree.blogspot.com/2009/12/polls-show-americans-aghainst-obamacare.html

The fact of the matter is that about 70% of Americans want NO part of the Dems' bills. Period. End of story. If Obamacare has such strong support among the public, it would have been law by now. If Obamacare wasn't such an Obamination that is doomed to fail, BO wouldn't give two flips about getting Republican fingerprints on the bill.

Think about these things. I know thinking pains you but at some point, you have to try to break out of your shell to see the light of day.

Boxcar

[newtothegame]

Here' Mosty, feast on your eyes on these various polls:

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/27/obamacare-now-20-points-down-in-cnn-poll/

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform

http://www.politico.com/livepulse/0210/Poll_ObamaCare_a_bad_idea.html

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Njc2MzI1MDk5ZDc5MmYwYjdmMjYxMjYwNWE2ZDAwNWM=

http://wwwwakeupamericans-spree.blogspot.com/2009/12/polls-show-americans-aghainst-obamacare.html

The fact of the matter is that about 70% of Americans want NO part of the Dems' bills. Period. End of story. If Obamacare has such strong support among the public, it would have been law by now. If Obamacare wasn't such an Obamination that is doomed to fail, BO wouldn't give two flips about getting Republican fingerprints on the bill.

Think about these things. I know thinking pains you but at some point, you have to try to break out of your shell to see the light of day.

Boxcar

Here mosty, let me help ya out since we already know your party line response.....

"Umm box...see, your trying to distort the facts here... The truth is the American people want this (regardless of what they say). They are sick and need the healthcare plan passed IMMEDIATELY. Their sickness has caused them to be dillusional thereby not fully understanding the questions posed in those terrible FAUX polls you posted. Don't you understand that this misleading is nothing more then the same thing that tyrant baby murdering capitalistic oil baron BUSH tried to do when he was president...its ALL BUSH's fault"

:lol:

[hcap]

I am not giving a shit what Biden said or didn't say. Reconciliation is on the table, and it is about time.
The issue is not about Bidens' stance, it is about how to get important legislation done.

Dems should have done this from jump.

Bush? Who said Bush? I said RECONCILIATION under the heavily dominated repug Bush administration and as mostpost points out, the 16 instances of the bleating repugs using reconciliation when they had their druthers.


http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_1xQeOPE9ePU/S5Ey5VhmV5I/AAAAAAAAErU/67eu3pCZHZw/s1600/4407203486_9cd4a3a587.jpg