Can we get someone other than a Wally Cox clone to be the face of the Republican push-back?

Orin: “You guys are gonna make me mad. Really mad. Any minute, I’m gonna show you just how mad I am. Any minute now . . .”

Come on, people! We need a pit bull, not a Cockapoo.

(To you young readers, Wally Cox was the mild mannered voice of UnderDog, a cartoon Super Hero.)

That the left is even thinking about it tells us a great deal about the “real” left and Obama’s empty words.

…… how about not WAITING again with a PASSIVE threat for WHEN they try it?

Obama has made it clear, both in SOTU and “the retreat” what his stand is regarding the GOP initiatives. His stand is …..I DONT CARE WHAT YOU SAY AND I DONT CARE IF YOU DONT LIKE IT AND I AM SHOVING SOICIALISM DOWN YOUR THROAT.

Once again, even though Obama and the Dem’s conduct and initiatives are a disgrace to humanity….THEY ARE TELLING YOU WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO DO….VERY SPECIFICALLY.

The WH/Dems have already SAID they are going to still TRY to ram it… NO MATTER WHAT…….even after multiple disasters the Dems have recently experienced.

So now is NOT the time to say, “I will wait until you work up another socialist directive and THEN we”ll show you”……NO. Until the Dems say they will start again and work bipartisan…..YOU SLAM THEM NOW…..until or unless they kill the bill and start again.!

that the “new plan” is to pass the “fix” first in the house before they pass the Senate bill, because they don’t trust the senate to follow through on any commitment they might make.

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dc/2010/01/the-latest-path-for-health-car.html

Actually, I think Dem on Dem trust is their biggest problem at this point. As they look at each other, they must be thinking to themselves: who’s “in” for the “Thelma and Louise’” ending and who’s “out” for the “Julius Caesar” ending? (Pelosi is Caesar and self-preservationist Dems are Brutus.)

I appreciate tenacity, but when reality is repeatedly ignored, it becomes downright masochistic. Pelosi’s latest rally cry, “we’ll poll vault or parachute in” makes her sound delusional. I strongly suspect she’s quickly loosing the trust of her house members and her ability to lead them.

…because the performance of the Senate GOP leadership has been tepid at best.

Even Churck Schumer’s numbers are way down as it is. Ditto for Bayh, Feingold and others. I doubt this will fly.

Just running on memory, too lazy to research the links, but didn’t we hear a lot of fighting words going in to the infamous Christmas Eve vote as well? As our Fearless Leader has proclaimed, “just words”.

Since we’ve been tagged as the party of No anyway, why don’t our leaders actually earn it with some deeds? I believe our response to their ‘more cowbell’ should be ‘everything including the kitchen sink’ (like Claymores).

Show some gumption and fight using every trick in the book; what are they going to do, call us names?

In a way, I hope the Dems use reconciliation to pass a health care bill.

The current 60 vote cloture rule allows the Republicans, when they are in the majority, to make all kinds of excuses as to why conservative legislation and conservative nominations can’t pass the Senate.

“Well, we wanted to confirm Miguel Estrata to the DC Circuit court of appeals. But we couldn’t get pass the Democrats’ judicial filibuster.”

“Well, we wanted to pass tort reform on medical malpractice lawsuits. But the Democrats are in the back pocket of the trial lawyers and we couldn’t get their support for 60 votes to end the filibuster.”

“Well, we wanted to pass drilling in the Artic National Wildlife Reserve. But the Democrats filibustered it. They are in the back pocket of the environmentalist extremists, you know.”

The 60 vote cloture requirement represents a subsitution of excuse making for governing.

People say, “But it’s an important check against abuse by the majority.”

If it’s so darned important, why did the framers of the US Constiution neglect to include a supermajority requirement for passage in the US Senate? After all, the framers of the US Constitution did include a 2/3rds requirement for ratifying treaties, convicting an impeached President, overriding a veto, amending the US Constitution. The framers also gave the Vice President the power to break a tie vote in the US Senate. Obviously, the intent was for a majority of the Senate to be able to conduct business (a majority constitutes a quorum, allowing the Senate to do business).

I want the GOP to filibuster bad legislation when they are in the minority. But I also want them to junk the filibuster when they are in the majority and quit making excuses.

After the totalitarian SOTU, why would we think Obama would care about increased rancor in the Senate? As long as he gets what he wants, nothing else matters. If Schumer/Bayh/Feingold/etc lose because they go with reconciliation, why would Obama care? He has made it clear he will do whatever it takes to get what he wants, everything else be damned.

aka, The Sour vs. The Rancid

Dan, I knew Harry “The Body” Reid was a former boxer. I had not idea Hatch was as well, until you mentioned it. Not that I don’t trust you, but I had found this. http://www.askyourlawmaker.org/node/220

Is it really appropriate for the minority to be able to block legislation? I don’t think it is.

Don’t get me wrong. If the rules give the GOP Senate minority the opportunity to block bad legislation (and the health care legislation definately qualifies), I want the Republicans in the Senate to do what ever they can to obstruct.

But if I were writing the Senate rule book and I did not know which party would be in the majority and which would be in the minority, I would change the current 60 vote cloture requirement to a 51 vote cloture requirement.

I guarantee you that when the GOP wins back the US Senate (not necessarily in 2010, but perhaps in 2012 or later), the GOP will make all kinds of promises to conservatives about all of the great things that they plan to do. But when the Democrat minority filibusters GOP legislation, the GOP will not use reconciliation to pass important, much needed, conservative legislation.

Instead, they will just say, “Gosh. Those Democrats are so obstructionist. Won’t you conservatives help us get reelected?”

The joke is on us conservatives for falling for these lines election after election.

One thing I think the GOP should look into once it regains Senate majority is changing the mechanism of the filibuster. As is, since it takes 60 votes to overcome a filibuster, all the burden is on the majority. IMHO it should be changed so that a 3/5ths vote of the senators present is enough to end a filibuster.

That way a determined minority could still stop a bill, but they’d have to keep 41 Senators around all the time in order to do so.

No more lazy filibustering.

I was watching Colbert the other night. His guest, Doris Kearns Goodwin (I know, I know…) said… if the GOP wants to filibuster, Senate Dems should make them actually do it. They [the GOP] will look like idiots.

Can anyone in the know on the Senate side comment on the likelihood of a filibuster’s success?