Now Even Sitting Members Of Congress Are Saying "Enough!"

[Guest]

Did anyone happen to see Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) on MSNBC this morning? He was berating the political condition in the Congress, saying that virtually no legislation in either house of Congress can even get put up for a vote because either one party or the other doesn't want to lose the vote and provide campaign fodder that might cost them a seat in either the House or Senate in the upcoming 2012 elections. He asserted that Congress is totally frozen and devoid of any leadership from either political party.

Coburn used as an example a small amendment that he attempted to have attached to a bill in the Senate that would close all the schools being operated on military bases here in the U.S., reducing spending by about $1 million per year. We are spending $51,000 per student per year for the operation of schools on military bases. (That's more than the cost of attending Harvard, Yale or Stanford for a year.)

Coburn proposed closing the schools and providing $12,000 per student in funding to the local school districts where the bases are located, some of which were far more highly-rated schools than those on the bases. What was the vote on the amendment? Sorry, it was never brought up for a vote on the floor of the Senate, frozen "in committee".

I agree with Coburn's conclusion, amazing for a sitting U.S. Senator...."we have to get rid of all the people currently serving in the House and Senate. Our political process is totally dysfunctional and needs to be fixed by new people who might have the motivation and leadership abilities to fix what is so badly broken."

[Guest]

Did anyone happen to see Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) on MSNBC this morning? He was berating the political condition in the Congress, saying that virtually no legislation in either house of Congress can even get put up for a vote because either one party or the other doesn't want to lose the vote and provide campaign fodder that might cost them a seat in either the House or Senate in the upcoming 2012 elections. He asserted that Congress is totally frozen and devoid of any leadership from either political party.

Coburn used as an example a small amendment that he attempted to have attached to a bill in the Senate that would close all the schools being operated on military bases here in the U.S., reducing spending by about $1 million per year. We are spending $51,000 per student per year for the operation of schools on military bases. (That's more than the cost of attending Harvard, Yale or Stanford for a year.)

Coburn proposed closing the schools and providing $12,000 per student in funding to the local school districts where the bases are located, some of which were far more highly-rated schools than those on the bases. What was the vote on the amendment? Sorry, it was never brought up for a vote on the floor of the Senate, frozen "in committee".

I agree with Coburn's conclusion, amazing for a sitting U.S. Senator...."we have to get rid of all the people currently serving in the House and Senate. Our political process is totally dysfunctional and needs to be fixed by new people who might have the motivation and leadership abilities to fix what is so badly broken."

I saw it, agree with it and agree with you. Perhaps if we could lose the R and D after everyones name ON THE BALLOT.....and just have them vote what they think is best for the country instead of marching in line with the PARTY !!!

[Guest]

they had no problem moving along an apparently safe bill involving the slaughter of horses!!

btk

[Guest]

I saw it, agree with it and agree with you. Perhaps if we could lose the R and D after everyones name ON THE BALLOT.....and just have them vote what they think is best for the country instead of marching in line with the PARTY !!!

I agree. I'm sick and tired of R's and D's refusing to look at the person and voting blindfolded for party only.

[Guest]

Yes, the REPUBLICAN House veeeeery quietly lifted a 5-year old ban on funding horse meat inspections.

The Weeper of The House is quite a guy.

http://assets0.ordienetworks.com/images/user_photos/1170850/BoehnerJohnCrying_width_600x.jpeg?71d0ff77

[Guest]

A criminal will only quite doing what he is doing when, either he goes to jail or gets de-elected. I say we jail most of them and de-elect the rest and start over.

[Guest]

I didn't realize the house could do that on their own!!!!!

I wonder if they know that and can get more bills passed!!!!

And yes, I have a brand new bridge across the gulf to TX to sell!!!

btk

[Guest]

Of course, they cannot do it on their own.

On the other hand, it couldn't be done without their approval.

[Guest]

No incumbent should be allowed to campaign. Only the person running against them. They should be re-elected on their merits or not re-elected on their lack of merits. The incumbent has had a whole term in office to do his/her camaigning. Let their track record do their camaigning for them.

[Guest]

Sooooo folks...........after we throw the bums out.......I guess the liberals would prefer an all liberal Congress to speed along all those spending bills for the entitlement classes. The conservatives of course would want an overwhelming majority bound to cut spending and preserve tax cuts for the wealthy.

Hmmmm....there would seem to be a fundamental dichotomy not only in Congress but the voting public that would preclude a "throw them all out" movement.. Theoretically, elected officials have to appeal to their constituencies. Generally speaking of course, urban areas and unions will almost always tilt liberal because that's where their self interest lies. The red state majorities generally pick up a substantial part of the tab for all those entitlements and would likely tilt to the right of spending cuts and tax relief. Here we go again.......right back to deadlock, stalemate and self interest.:boxing2:

While "tossing them all out" sounds like a feel good anesthetic for the current problem, it really makes little practical sense.

I wonder how a unicameral government would work in the USA?:shrug:

[Guest]

Sooooo folks...........after we throw the bums out.......I guess the liberals would prefer an all liberal Congress to speed along all those spending bills for the entitlement classes. The conservatives of course would want an overwhelming majority bound to cut spending and preserve tax cuts for the wealthy.

Hmmmm....there would seem to be a fundamental dichotomy not only in Congress but the voting public that would preclude a "throw them all out" movement.. Theoretically, elected officials have to appeal to their constituencies. Generally speaking of course, urban areas and unions will almost always tilt liberal because that's where their self interest lies. The red state majorities generally pick up a substantial part of the tab for all those entitlements and would likely tilt to the right of spending cuts and tax relief. Here we go again.......right back to deadlock, stalemate and self interest.:boxing2:

While "tossing them all out" sounds like a feel good anesthetic for the current problem, it really makes little practical sense.

I wonder how a unicameral government would work in the USA?:shrug:


I've often said here that while I understand the "vote out all incumbents" mantra that I think it very naive and counterproductive. The key is to shore up the house you're building and replace the defective parts. You tear it down every time you don't like something and you're going to have rain pouring down on you head and you'll be sleeping on wet cold ground an awful lot of the time.

[Guest]

Cabo35~Intrigued by your eagle with the flag on his cheek, I clicked on it to get a closer view. Too bad that the icon on your posts doesn't do justice to the larger view...Tears are streaming down his cheek also. What an accurate depiction!:eclipsee_gold_cup:

[Guest]

Astute observation. It is a "Crying Eagle".