Yep...entirely avoidable (assuming Republicans rolled over and gave Obama everything he wanted). lol
If what you say is true, there should be no problem getting DACA properly legislated.A significant majority of Republicans want DACA to remain in place, so ... yes it was entirely avoidable if Republican congressmen were capable of doing fuck all besides whining, obstructing and pandering to their base.
Sadly, this is the way many of the liberals roll here. But thankfully there are some who are capable of reasonable discussion.
Yep...entirely avoidable (assuming Republicans rolled over and gave Obama everything he wanted). lol
If what you say is true, there should be no problem getting DACA properly legislated.
If what you say is true, there should be no problem getting DACA properly legislated.
Even money at this point that they drastically fuck something up like not raising the debt ceiling.
And Reid blocked many significant bipartisan bills that had overwhelming Democrat support in the House. It's tiresome to see people who are so partisan that they can only see one side of the problem.LOL give me a fucking break. That bill was written by 4 Democrats and 4 Republicans and passed the Senate with a veto proof majority, including 14 Republicans. That's as bipartisan as anything gets these days for something substantive.
It is tiresome to see people who are so partisan that they think giving even an inch means 'rolling over and giving the other side everything they want'.
Reminds me of all the bipartisan legislation Reid refused to debate or bring to a vote. The door swings both ways my friend.
Of course.
Meanwhile, many of the other bills that pass the House in today’s environment are bills that are intended to make a statement, not a law.
Ornstein contrasted bills that are "designed to lay the predicate for action via compromise" or consensus, which are declining, and those "designed for show or as a political statement, where there is neither intention nor expectation that the other house will act on them."
Where substantive, contentious legislation is concerned, the odds of passage are poor. One example is the Senate-passed (and bipartisan) immigration bill, which remains stuck in the House. Another sign is the fact that the Senate has not yet passed any of the 12 annual appropriations bills -- even though the House has passed seven and the Senate Appropriations Committee has approved eight.
By contrast, the second category of "show" bills includes dozens of full or partial repeals of the Affordable Care Act passed by the Republican House.
And Reid blocked many significant bipartisan bills that had overwhelming Democrat support in the House. It's tiresome to see people who are so partisan that they can only see one side of the problem.
You don't really believe that do you? Remember when an overwhelming majority of voters, Republicans included, favored universal background checks for firearm purchases? How did that go?
Republican legislators are far more afraid of primary challenges from the rabid base than they are of what Republicans as a whole think.
Sandy Hook was a huge opportunity for Democrats to finally get some movement on gun control that was completely wasted. Reasonable BIPARTISAN legislation was proposed...but ignored. Essentially, Democrats got greedy and pushed way too far...and, in the end, they got nothing....they couldn't even get 15 of their own to vote for their bill! But I love the way you revise history though...screams volumes about your honesty and intellectual integrity.You don't really believe that do you? Remember when an overwhelming majority of voters, Republicans included, favored universal background checks for firearm purchases? How did that go?
Republican legislators are far more afraid of primary challenges from the rabid base than they are of what Republicans as a whole think.
All I ask is for you to take an honest look in the mirror.Lol, seamless pivot without admitting you were wrong. Nice. First attempt: "it would only be their fault if they rolled over and gave Obama whatever he wanted!". When you are informed that lots of Republicans voted for the bill it turns into "Buh buh but REID".
As for Reid's blocking of bills I literally linked a piece that discussed exactly that, which you clearly didn't read. Even though Harry Reid blocking a totally different bill has nothing to do with Republicans making their own bed when it comes to DACA, if you actually look at those bills they weren't even remotely close to something as large and important as immigration. They were mostly statement bills or 'feel good' bills.
Another tiresome thing is when partisans try to draw some sort of false equivalence in order to run cover for behavior they know is inexcusable. Just say it with us: "Republicans have no one to blame but themselves."
All I ask is for you to take an honest look in the mirror.
fskimospy diverts into gun control, you divert into judicial appointments, etc and then have the audacity to say the bolded? You're a fucking hypocrite if there ever was one.Feel the need to duh-vert?
That was a fantasy you had, right?
Repubs at the time introduced all sorts of bills that had no hope of passage to gum up the works or try to discredit Reid.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...nn-jenkins-blames-harry-reid-do-nothing-sena/
Meanwhile, Repubs have obstructed in other ways every chance they could get-
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/obamas-vanishing-administration-217344#ixzz40D4ZpPfA
The same is true for judicial appointments, Garland being the most egregious example.
Which has nothing to do with Trump's proposed fuckover of 800K young people the vast majority of us would rather keep than deport. It's all about pandering to fear & xenophobia in his base.
Have you ever said anything in this forum that suggested an IQ above a pet rock? I think not.I'd ask you to take your own advice, but we all know it's a waste to do so.
fskimospy diverts into gun control, you divert into judicial appointments, etc and then have the audacity to say the bolded? You're a fucking hypocrite if there ever was one.
Sandy Hook was a huge opportunity for Democrats to finally get some movement on gun control that was completely wasted. Reasonable BIPARTISAN legislation was proposed...but ignored. Essentially, Democrats got greedy and pushed way too far...and, in the end, they got nothing....they couldn't even get 15 of their own to vote for their bill! But I love the way you revise history though...screams volumes about your honesty and intellectual integrity.
Sandy Hook was a huge opportunity for Democrats to finally get some movement on gun control that was completely wasted. Reasonable BIPARTISAN legislation was proposed...but ignored. Essentially, Democrats got greedy and pushed way too far...and, in the end, they got nothing....they couldn't even get 15 of their own to vote for their bill! But I love the way you revise history though...screams volumes about your honesty and intellectual integrity.
Exactly what point did he refute...I must have missed it.Sure just ignore everything else he said refuting your point.
All I ask is for you to take an honest look in the mirror.
The Assault Weapons Ban of 2013 was introduced by Dianne Feinstein and 24 Democrat cosponsors...it was not bipartisan in any way, shape or form. Hell, even 15 Democrats in the Senate voted against it because it was such a horrible bill. F*ck the truth in that little bubble of yours...keep blaming Republicans for catastrophic Democratic legislative failures. Yeah, that's the ticket!Wow is that some revisionist history there.
The Assault Weapons Ban of 2013 was introduced by Dianne Feinstein and 24 Democrat cosponsors...it was not bipartisan in any way, shape or form. Hell, even 15 Democrats in the Senate voted against it because it was such a horrible bill. F*ck the truth in that little bubble of yours...keep blaming Republicans for catastrophic Democratic legislative failures. Yeah, that's the ticket!
I think Trump was the most unpopular candidate to win the US presidency. The GOP doing unpopular things does not cost them elections. One just won a house race after assaulting a reporter. We can argue about why that is, but I think it's hard to dispute at this point.
You're free to go be an abject shithead somewhere else.