Senate GOP to try to force health care repeal vote, via the amendment route

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2011 8:34 PM GMT
    I told you guys after the 2010 US election that Republicans would try to use the Congressional amendment procedure to force right-wing changes, that could include defeating the DADT repeal, among other extremist measures. Here's the latest example:

    http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/02/01/5968112-senate-gop-to-try-to-force-health-care-repeal-vote-

    As early as today, [Democratic Senate minority leader] McConnell will offer the repeal [to health care] as an amendment to an unrelated aviation bill that the Senate is slated to consider this afternoon.

    To a fucking aviation bill? And this is how Republicans want to end the health care bill? I promised you we'd see this, and right-wingers here called me a paranoid, and all kinds of personal slanders. Do I get my apology now?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2011 9:42 PM GMT
    Didn't they scream about DADT and the DREAM Act being attached to a Defense appropriations bill?

    The hypocrisy knows no bounds.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2011 11:08 PM GMT
    Why are they doing absolutely nothing about the deficit, creating jobs, or anything else that they actually had a mandate to do?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2011 11:16 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 saidDidn't they scream about DADT and the DREAM Act being attached to a Defense appropriations bill?

    The hypocrisy knows no bounds.


    Nope.

    As I recall, the gays were screaming that the Republicans "voted against DADT" when it was attached to a military spending bill and an amnesty bill.



    The bill itself was a military spending bill to which both DADT and DREAM were attached. And, you, yourself screeched about it, so stop being a douche. Remember, you're entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.
  • creature

    Posts: 5197

    Feb 01, 2011 11:18 PM GMT
    They are really giving Democrats the edge to secure a majority of seats for the next elections.

    Not a peep about job creation and fueling the economy. Just vindictive behavior. If the majority of Americans are really tired of these divisive, corrosive attitudes that currently-seated Republicans have, the moderate vote will go to Democrats.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2011 12:40 AM GMT
    TigerTim saidWhy are they doing absolutely nothing about the deficit, creating jobs, or anything else that they actually had a mandate to do?

    Why put your ass on the line when nothing they do right now is going to matter?
    They are waiting for the market to correct slowly in 2011-12, and then take all the credit in 2013-14:

    http://washingtonindependent.com/105175/cbo-economy-likely-to-stay-below-potential-for-yearsThe CBO expects that the unemployment rate will fall to 9.2 percent in the fourth quarter of 2011, 8.2 percent in the fourth quarter of 2012 and 7.4 percent at the end of 2013 — still high above the natural rate of unemployment of 5 percent.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2011 12:46 AM GMT
    q1w2e3 said
    TigerTim saidWhy are they doing absolutely nothing about the deficit, creating jobs, or anything else that they actually had a mandate to do?

    Why put your ass on the line when nothing they do right now is going to matter?
    They are waiting for the market to correct slowly in 2011-12, and then take all the credit in 2013-14:

    http://washingtonindependent.com/105175/cbo-economy-likely-to-stay-below-potential-for-yearsThe CBO expects that the unemployment rate will fall to 9.2 percent in the fourth quarter of 2011, 8.2 percent in the fourth quarter of 2012 and 7.4 percent at the end of 2013 — still high above the natural rate of unemployment of 5 percent.


    Yes, and then SouthBeach will decree that the House repealing HCR, though that's meaningless without the Senate doing so and the president signing on to it, caused the drop in unemployment.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2011 1:53 AM GMT
    Art_Deco said... As early as today, [Democratic Senate minority leader] McConnell will offer the repeal [to health care] as an amendment to an unrelated aviation bill that the Senate is slated to consider this afternoon.

    To a fucking aviation bill? And this is how Republicans want to end the health care bill? I promised you we'd see this, and right-wingers here called me a paranoid, and all kinds of personal slanders. Do I get my apology now?

    Oh the horror of it all! As if the Democrats never use any parliamentary tactics such as reconciliation, also known as the nuclear option. If Reid agreed to bring the bill to the floor it wouldn't have to be brought up this way. But he wanted to shield his fellow Dems from embarrassing votes that could hurt them in 2012. Too bad.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2011 2:10 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said
    The bill itself was a military spending bill to which both DADT and DREAM were attached. And, you, yourself screeched about it, so stop being a douche.


    The only thing I pointed out was that it was NOT a vote on DADT.



    Christian73 saidRemember, you're entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.


    Yes, Lawrence O'Donnell. icon_rolleyes.gif


    Re: DADT. I remember far more gnashing of teeth than that from you and your brethren.

    Re: Opinions. That's not a Lawrence O'Donnell quote. It's Daniel Patrick Moynhan's which O'Donnell appropriated.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2011 2:15 AM GMT
    socalfitness said
    Art_Deco said... As early as today, [Democratic Senate minority leader] McConnell will offer the repeal [to health care] as an amendment to an unrelated aviation bill that the Senate is slated to consider this afternoon.

    To a fucking aviation bill? And this is how Republicans want to end the health care bill? I promised you we'd see this, and right-wingers here called me a paranoid, and all kinds of personal slanders. Do I get my apology now?

    Oh the horror of it all! As if the Democrats never use any parliamentary tactics such as reconciliation, also known as the nuclear option. If Reid agreed to bring the bill to the floor it wouldn't have to be brought up this way. But he wanted to shield his fellow Dems from embarrassing votes that could hurt them in 2012. Too bad.


    Reconciliation was never known as the nuclear option. It was the filibuster.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_option

    And reconciliation was used to pass one of your favorite things: The Bush tax cuts!

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2011 2:21 AM GMT
    socalfitness said
    Art_Deco said... As early as today, [Democratic Senate minority leader] McConnell will offer the repeal [to health care] as an amendment to an unrelated aviation bill that the Senate is slated to consider this afternoon.

    To a fucking aviation bill? And this is how Republicans want to end the health care bill? I promised you we'd see this, and right-wingers here called me a paranoid, and all kinds of personal slanders. Do I get my apology now?

    Oh the horror of it all! As if the Democrats never use any parliamentary tactics such as reconciliation, also known as the nuclear option. If Reid agreed to bring the bill to the floor it wouldn't have to be brought up this way. But he wanted to shield his fellow Dems from embarrassing votes that could hurt them in 2012. Too bad.

    You don't know your history, nor the US Congress. The so-called "nuclear option" first came to public prominence in 2005, when Senate Republican Majority Leader Bill Frist (TN) threatened to use it to eliminate Democratic Party filibusters against Republican bills.

    The Republican & Democratic "Gang of 14" united to oppose this move, to preserve the historic Senate filibuster. The reconciliation you mention has nothing to do with the so-called nuclear option that Frist proposed. You really do need to consult your US political science text books. It's most annoying to try to discuss these things with someone who is grossly ignorant of a given topic.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2011 2:42 AM GMT
    Christian73 said... Reconciliation was never known as the nuclear option. It was the filibuster.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_option

    And reconciliation was used to pass one of your favorite things: The Bush tax cuts!

    Technically, I would have to agree. They are related as this illustrates:
    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2010/03/the_democrats_nuclear_option_i.html
    ...If Democrats choose, as seems inevitable, to try to pass changes to the health-care plan under the rules of reconciliation, only a majority vote will be required. But that's not the nuclear option, despite some Republican rhetoric to that effect. Under reconciliation procedures, Republicans could not filibuster the measure. But they could offer amendments. Unlimited amendments. Senate Democrats already have the historical records handy: 58 votes on the Contract With America cuts in 1995, and 44 votes on the Bush tax cuts.

    Here is where the nuclear move comes in. If Republicans exercise their prerogative to propose amendments and show no signs of quitting, Democrats could use the nuclear option to make them stop....
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2011 2:46 AM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    socalfitness said
    Art_Deco said... As early as today, [Democratic Senate minority leader] McConnell will offer the repeal [to health care] as an amendment to an unrelated aviation bill that the Senate is slated to consider this afternoon.

    To a fucking aviation bill? And this is how Republicans want to end the health care bill? I promised you we'd see this, and right-wingers here called me a paranoid, and all kinds of personal slanders. Do I get my apology now?

    Oh the horror of it all! As if the Democrats never use any parliamentary tactics such as reconciliation, also known as the nuclear option. If Reid agreed to bring the bill to the floor it wouldn't have to be brought up this way. But he wanted to shield his fellow Dems from embarrassing votes that could hurt them in 2012. Too bad.

    You don't know your history, nor the US Congress. The so-called "nuclear option" first came to public prominence in 2005, when Senate Republican Majority Leader Bill Frist (TN) threatened to use it to eliminate Democratic Party filibusters against Republican bills.

    The Republican & Democratic "Gang of 14" united to oppose this move, to preserve the historic Senate filibuster. The reconciliation you mention has nothing to do with the so-called nuclear option that Frist proposed. You really do need to consult your US political science text books. It's most annoying to try to discuss these things with someone who is grossly ignorant of a given topic.

    OK, I was inaccurate as my response to Christian acknowledges. If that makes you more comfortable in your hysterical whining about the inclusion of health care repeal as an amendment to the FAA funding bill, so be it. But the fact remains that both sides engage in parliamentary tactics.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2011 2:59 AM GMT
    socalfitness saidOK, I was inaccurate as my response to Christian acknowledges. If that makes you more comfortable in your hysterical whining about the inclusion of health care repeal as an amendment to the FAA funding bill, so be it. But the fact remains that both sides engage in parliamentary tactics.

    "Hysterical whining" is of course a matter of perspective. Trying to kill the health care bill through an aviation bill amendment remains a bit under the belt, in my view. But evidently not in yours.

    The point I was actually trying to make is that these "parliamentary tactics" are exactly how I predicted Republicans, after their 2010 Congressional gains, would attempt to reverse the DADT repeal, reinforce DOMA, and pursue other anti-gay legislation.

    This move involves health care, not gay issues. But I stand by my predictions of what Republicans will do. (And we're seeing it already in Republican-dominated state legislatures) Are you willing to go on record here as saying Congressional Republicans won't insert anti-gay amendments in bills during this Congress?

    My contention was that Republicans will put anti-gay "landmines" in every bill they can, especially essential funding legislation. Do you want to take that bet? I'd like to see you on record here, as I'm putting myself, and my reputation, on the line. I've got the balls -- do you?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2011 3:05 AM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    socalfitness saidOK, I was inaccurate as my response to Christian acknowledges. If that makes you more comfortable in your hysterical whining about the inclusion of health care repeal as an amendment to the FAA funding bill, so be it. But the fact remains that both sides engage in parliamentary tactics.

    "Hysterical whining" is of course a matter of perspective. Trying to kill the health care bill through an aviation bill amendment remains a bit under the belt, in my view. But evidently not in yours.

    The point I was actually trying to make is that these "parliamentary tactics" are exactly how I predicted Republicans, after their 2010 Congressional gains, would attempt to reverse the DADT repeal, reinforce DOMA, and pursue other anti-gay legislation.

    This move involves health care, not gay issues. But I stand by my predictions of what Republicans will do. (And we're seeing it already in Republican-dominated state legislatures) Are you willing to go on record here as saying Congressional Republicans won't insert anti-gay amendments in bills during this Congress?

    My contention was that Republicans will put anti-gay "landmines" in every bill they can, especially essential funding legislation. Do you want to take that bet? I'd like to see you on record here, as I'm putting myself, and my reputation, on the line. I've got the balls -- do you?

    I can't predict what every Republican will or won't do. But I have heard there are plans to slide into the next funding measure a provision that will authorize funding for little green men in space capsules to take into custody all the inhabitants of Wilton Manors, FL and transport them to reorientation camps run by the Moral Majority.
    PS - Wasn't there the same gloom and doom prediction about military dragging their feet wrt DADT? They seem to be moving out smartly.
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    Feb 02, 2011 3:45 AM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    socalfitness saidOK, I was inaccurate as my response to Christian acknowledges. If that makes you more comfortable in your hysterical whining about the inclusion of health care repeal as an amendment to the FAA funding bill, so be it. But the fact remains that both sides engage in parliamentary tactics.

    "Hysterical whining" is of course a matter of perspective. Trying to kill the health care bill through an aviation bill amendment remains a bit under the belt, in my view. But evidently not in yours.

    The point I was actually trying to make is that these "parliamentary tactics" are exactly how I predicted Republicans, after their 2010 Congressional gains, would attempt to reverse the DADT repeal, reinforce DOMA, and pursue other anti-gay legislation.

    This move involves health care, not gay issues. But I stand by my predictions of what Republicans will do. (And we're seeing it already in Republican-dominated state legislatures) Are you willing to go on record here as saying Congressional Republicans won't insert anti-gay amendments in bills during this Congress?

    My contention was that Republicans will put anti-gay "landmines" in every bill they can, especially essential funding legislation. Do you want to take that bet? I'd like to see you on record here, as I'm putting myself, and my reputation, on the line. I've got the balls -- do you?



    Pelosi and Reid promised the most open congress in history.

    And Nearly every bill went through suspension and needed a rules change. Bypassing the normal committee process.

    Why should anyone go on record and have to state anything?

    Especially when the democrat party promissed alot in terms of gay rights and deliver meager results. DADT repeal happened after major arm-twisting, and pending court cases. Democrats allowed prop 8 to go through when they pulled support in a baseless fear that Obama would lose California in 2008.

    Make all your predictions you want.

    Using amendments into legislation when you are in the minority ( democrats) is all you can do, when you have no control of the Senate schedule.

    What was the democrats excuse when they do it when they are in the majority?

    You dont have a bet because its no big deal. (except in your own mind)

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2011 3:53 AM GMT
    musclmed saidWhat was the democrats excuse when they do it when they are in the majority?

    You dont have a bet because its no big deal. (except in your own mind)

    The Democrats never had a super-majority to overcome Senate Republican filibusters, except for a brief several month period in 2009, that was too short to accomplish what they wanted.

    And my bet wasn't with you, so do butt-out, OK? When I choose to address you I will. Until then, please don't stick your nose into something that doesn't involve you. Thanks.
  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    Feb 02, 2011 3:55 AM GMT
    Art_Deco saidI told you guys after the 2010 US election that Republicans would try to use the Congressional amendment procedure to force right-wing changes, that could include defeating the DADT repeal, among other extremist measures. Here's the latest example:

    http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/02/01/5968112-senate-gop-to-try-to-force-health-care-repeal-vote-

    As early as today, [Democratic Senate minority leader] McConnell will offer the repeal [to health care] as an amendment to an unrelated aviation bill that the Senate is slated to consider this afternoon.

    To a fucking aviation bill? And this is how Republicans want to end the health care bill? I promised you we'd see this, and right-wingers here called me a paranoid, and all kinds of personal slanders. Do I get my apology now?





    Q F T icon_exclaim.gificon_exclaim.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2011 4:05 AM GMT
    Christian73 saidDidn't they scream about DADT and the DREAM Act being attached to a Defense appropriations bill?

    The hypocrisy knows no bounds.




    These right wingers will do anything, ANYTHING to keep in good with the Tbaggers and their far right wing base.



    The hell of it is, these baggers and far right wingers are all the while cutting their noses off to spite their faces. They are so duped by False News, Limbaugh, Beck, Palin, Bachman, Ingraham, Maulkin, Brietbart and on and on that they have no idea what the truth is about the things they are fighting against. These ignorant people shame themselves and are too stupid to see it, too steeped in ignorance to take the time to be informed. How the world must laugh at Amerika !!!!!
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    Feb 02, 2011 4:05 AM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    musclmed saidWhat was the democrats excuse when they do it when they are in the majority?

    You dont have a bet because its no big deal. (except in your own mind)

    The Democrats never had a super-majority to overcome Senate Republican filibusters, except for a brief several month period in 2009, that was too short to accomplish what they wanted.

    And my bet wasn't with you, so do butt-out, OK? When I choose to address you I will. Until then, please don't stick your nose into something that doesn't involve you. Thanks.

    icon_lol.gif
    upset i blew up your whole whining rant?

    Well keep up with that personal conversation the fact that you complain about a minority leveraging a bill when a majority uses parliamentary tactics shows your absurd partisan stance.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2011 4:07 AM GMT
    socalfitness saidI can't predict what every Republican will or won't do. But I have heard there are plans to slide into the next funding measure a provision that will authorize funding for little green men in space capsules to take into custody all the inhabitants of Wilton Manors, FL and transport them to reorientation camps run by the Moral Majority.
    PS - Wasn't there the same gloom and doom prediction about military dragging their feet wrt DADT? They seem to be moving out smartly.

    Most amusing. Creating exaggerated false statements of what I wrote certainly proves your point. Can you never actually quote what RJ members really post here, without these imaginary accusations? I think you need to adjust your foil hat, so you can get better reception. icon_rolleyes.gif

    Regarding DADT, what I predicted was that Congressional Republicans would attempt to sabotage it. That issue is still up in the air. If Republicans do indeed try to stop the repeal of DADT in this new Congress, will you admit I was correct?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2011 4:13 AM GMT
    musclmed saidupset i blew up your whole whining rant?

    No, instead rather disappointed that someone on RJ, where most the of the members are remarkably erudite, informed, and reasonable, could express the anti-gay views that you do. Which might lead me to wonder what your agenda and purpose here is, but I'll leave that to others to surmise for themselves.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2011 4:23 AM GMT
    Art_Deco saidRegarding DADT, what I predicted was that Congressional Republicans would attempt to sabotage it. That issue is still up in the air. If Republicans do indeed try to stop the repeal of DADT in this new Congress, will you admit I was correct?

    I hope you are wrong, but if they do try this, I will certainly acknowledge your prediction was correct.
    On the other point: musclmed doesn't need defending from me, but your trying to equate his comments against the Democratic tactics with being anti-gay doesn't hold water.
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    Feb 02, 2011 4:34 AM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    musclmed saidupset i blew up your whole whining rant?

    No, instead rather disappointed that someone on RJ, where most the of the members are remarkably erudite, informed, and reasonable, could express the anti-gay views that you do. Which might lead me to wonder what your agenda and purpose here is, but I'll leave that to others to surmise for themselves.



    Listen sir. There is nothing anti-gay of anything I have said.

    I resent your accusation.

    Sorry I dont drink your kool-aid.

    You link gay rights with liberal democrat politics. Which to me is offensive on its face. Gay rights are rights independent of politics.
    But you just shoot off your big mouth on alot of topics.

    And when you are shown to be a big blohard you run hiding behind the "anti-gay" word.
    How easily you wield that sword of anti-gay.

    I would invite you to read the advocate and other gay periodicals that have criticized republican and DEMOCRAT politicians.

    But you conveniently skip over that.

    You speak on authority. But name one anti-gay thought or action I have said or done EVER on RJ. This thread was about a healthcare repeal amendment, but you devolve to some anti-gay accusation.


    I question your motives, as you are just a very poorly put together advertisement campaign for the Democratic party. I see right through it.

    Do you do that in real life? When you disagree with someone you scream they are a bigot? You devalue what it is to be discriminated by pulling that line at every turn.

    If you dont want anyone to comment and call out your facts. I suggest you make a blog and block comments.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2011 5:01 AM GMT
    socalfitness said
    Art_Deco saidRegarding DADT, what I predicted was that Congressional Republicans would attempt to sabotage it. That issue is still up in the air. If Republicans do indeed try to stop the repeal of DADT in this new Congress, will you admit I was correct?

    I hope you are wrong, but if they do try this, I will certainly acknowledge your prediction was correct.
    On the other point: musclmed doesn't need defending from me, but your trying to equate his comments against the Democratic tactics with being anti-gay doesn't hold water.

    Thanks, I truly appreciate your reply. And if I'm the one who's wrong about this, I hope you know I'll be quick to admit my own mistake.

    As for musclmed, I'll drop that for now. I think I see what he's up to, but I'll back off, and wait. I have infinite patience, with the belief that people online will always reveal their true selves in time. It's kind of a Dostoyevsky thing, they just can't help themselves.

    Not that I'm exempt from that myself, and you may judge me as you will. But OK, I'll consider what you say, and whether I've been guilty of misjudgment. I'm an absolute tiger about gay rights & interests, but if I've let that cloud my thinking I'm open to criticism.

    At the same time, I have little patience for the weak & undisciplined thinking that many young people in the US have today. My European friends are appalled by how stupid young Americans have become. Full of attitude, but no substance. Americans think they're smart, but no one else in the world would agree.

    So OK, I'll idle back on this. See where it goes. I can kinda predict, and I suspect I know the outcome.