The tag "party of no" another contrived talking point?
 

This article seems to present that it is:

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...-deroy-murdock

Before some attack either the news organization or the author, try to look at the content which is derived from the congressional record. Try!.

btk

This senate needs an overhaul. I cannot believe that Reid got re-elected. I have said this many times and I will say it again, we need to vote republican in 2012 to save this country.

There have been so many events and occurances that are beyond your belief.
Good news is that there will continue to be. :cus:

Harry Reid IS NOT in tune with Obama priorities
 

as evidenced in the following:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...priority-reid/

And Obama knows this....doesn't he? So why would he be out stumping telling the American people to get off their couches and out of their slippers and if they love him do him a favor and push for the jobs bill NOW? Why would he continue to promote that congress is the enemy not him when his own Senate leadership is completely ignoring Obama's pleas.

To me it highlights the disfunction/disconnect between Obama...what he says...what his party leaders say and do or don't do...and reality. It highlights that is is doing nothing more than speech making with no continuity....no plan and no communication.

If there is another reason why he is out beating the bushes for his project when his own team is the hold up...please somebody enlighten me.

The problem is not the Republicans blocking and saying no. It is Obama not leading. How much more confirmation of this fact can America stand?

btk

:agree:

More bullfeathers from The Party of the G'Nopers. Nice try, guys, but you know the G'Nopers are the ones holding up bills by not allowing any compromise.

Haven't you been paying attention to the machinations of one Harry Reid? Maybe you better.

Wow, funny whacky nicknames combined with the party line group thought. Been many bills coming out of the House to help the economy but the Senate will not even bring it up for a vote. Who do you think the real obstructionist are?

Give you a hint: his initials are Harry Reid.

You should pay attention a bit more.
 

PASS THIS JOBS BILL RIGHT NOW!!

http://johnpaulus.com/blog/2011/09/2...er-priorities/


That darn teleprompter keeps messing things up.

Liberal Democrats are extremely short on answers for any of these problems that they have exacerbated, and so the debate has passed them by. All they think they have left to combat their adversaries for political power is marginalization.

The strategy due to this lack of substantive discourse is to mock and destroy. So they invent these "cute" names meant to lampoon those they wish to deflate in an attempt to provoke derision.

You see this in the lamestream media constantly as we witness the seeming coordination of their "talking heads" on all the liberal networks using the same descriptive names, as if by magic, to put their ideological opponents in a box.

WOW...talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

I'm sorry if the truth hurts.

It is as tho they think that if they all say something often enough, it becomes reality!

BOTH Parties Have Been Obstructionist
 

The use of threatened filibusters, cloture votes and the like have become increasingly used in the last 10-15 years, as the Senate has become more polarized and as the party caucuses have become more demanding and threatening to their members. The record shows that BOTH parties have used these Senate rules to block proposed legislation from votes on the floor. Basically, the technique changes the Constitutional requirements of the Senate from "simple majority" to a super-majority of 60 members. The record shows that the Republicans have used cloture votes far more frequently than the Democrats, which probably resulted in them being called "the party of no". But make no mistake, BOTH parties use cloture votes to circumvent the Constitutional definition of how legislation gets passed in the Senate if it meets their political purposes.

There are lots of reasons for how partisanship has changed the way our government. The cloture vote, arguably non-Constitutional, may be the biggest reason for our political stalemate. Very simply, legislation can be passed by a simple majority in the House, but House-passed bills can be stopped from even getting a Senate vote by the threat of cloture.

Actually, the Senate rules are even worse than their internal rule requiring a 60-vote majority to prevent a filibuster. The Senate has another rule wherein any single Senator can prevent a bill from being presented on the floor of the Senate for a vote. Such blockage--a simple "hold" on the legislation--can be done by a single Senator and can be done indefinitely and anonymously. That rule is most often used to prevent a person appointed to a federal position from receiving Senate confirmation--over 80 people, mostly judges, who have been approved by the Senate judicial committee are being "held" from a confirmation vote on the Senate floor by one Senator or another for unexplained reasons. But the "hold' can be placed on any legislation, not just appointments.