H2O MAN
 
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2010 07:49 am


Rubio's Victory Speech Highlights American Exceptionalism & Opportunity For All
 
CoastalRat
 
  2  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2010 07:54 am
@H2O MAN,
Got to watch his speech last night and I was frankly impressed.
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  3  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2010 08:00 am
He is a good speaker. I am very interested to see what he is like in the Senate.

As I was watching the speech he reminded me of Jimmy Stewart. Did anyone else get this vibe?
CoastalRat
 
  2  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2010 08:03 am
@maxdancona,
That will be the test for all the newbies. While they may not be able to instantly do what they say they want to do, will they at least push and fight the established legislators toward some kind of fiscal responsibility.
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2010 08:11 am
Marco
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2010 08:11 am
@djjd62,
Rubio
CoastalRat
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2010 08:24 am
@djjd62,
You got it all wrong. You say "Marco" and someone else replies "Rubio." Unless you just like playing with yourself.

(No, not that way. Get your mind out of the gutter. Cool )
maxdancona
 
  2  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2010 08:38 am
@CoastalRat,
Quote:
While they may not be able to instantly do what they say they want to do, will they at least push and fight the established legislators toward some kind of fiscal responsibility.


I am kind of hoping that they will govern responsibly. I mean working together with other elected officials while putting the country first. The partisan "no compromise" rhetoric being thrown around is disheartening to me as an American.

I don't want our elected legislators, be they new or established, to fight each other. We pay them to get things done, not to have some sort of partisan wrestling match.




CoastalRat
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2010 09:02 am
@maxdancona,
I agree whole-heartedly max. Compromise is all about both sides giving a little in order to achieve the greater good. Nothing wrong with that at all. What happened yesterday is the direct result of Obama and the far left thinking that they, and only they, know what is best and ramming through legislation (and threatening to ram through additional legislation) whether the majority of americans like it or not. (This is my opinion. Others are free to have differing opinions as to why the wholesale rout.)

I'm not saying that the two sides need to compromise on every issue, as some core beliefs cannot be compromised away. But both sides need to look for common ground and meet there whenever possible.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2010 09:09 am
@CoastalRat,
CoastalRat wrote:

I agree whole-heartedly max. Compromise is all about both sides giving a little in order to achieve the greater good. Nothing wrong with that at all. What happened yesterday is the direct result of Obama and the far left thinking that they, and only they, know what is best and ramming through legislation (and threatening to ram through additional legislation) whether the majority of americans like it or not. (This is my opinion. Others are free to have differing opinions as to why the wholesale rout.)


I can't agree with the idea that the Dems were unwilling to Compromise on their major legislation, because it simply isn't true. They compromised significantly on the Stim bill, on Health Care Reform, and on Financial reform. The three major bills passed all included major concessions to the Republican party and their ideas of how things should be done.

I also don't know what 'ram through' legislation means. When you have the votes to pass something, and you pass it - without any legislative trickery, they didn't end up using Reconciliation for any of them - is that 'ramming through?'

Quote:
I'm not saying that the two sides need to compromise on every issue, as some core beliefs cannot be compromised away. But both sides need to look for common ground and meet there whenever possible.


It's entirely accurate to say that Obama and the Dems reached out significantly to Republicans over the last 18 months, and got almost nothing in return. Will the Republicans reach out? Can they, seeing as they explicitly promised not to do that?

Re: Rubio, he certain presents a good face, even if a lot of the time he doesn't make sense logically. He has a strong future in politics.

Cycloptichorn
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2010 09:10 am


Quote:
Obama:

We don't mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back.


I guess PrezBO needs to man-up and invite Republicans to join him up front.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2010 09:11 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:



I can't agree with the idea that the Dems were unwilling to Compromise
on their major legislation, because it simply isn't true.


BS!
0 Replies
 
CoastalRat
 
  2  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2010 09:28 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Bribing members and exempting states from certain items in legislation that other states must follow just to gain a senator's vote because a bill would not pass without it is not considered "ramming" something through?

I'm not saying that dems compromised on nothing at all. Sure, they threw out a few bones, but mostly only to satisfy their own moderate members. At least that is my perception and I believe the perception of many Americans. When congress passes legislation that a majority of the country opposed (health care reform) in the form it took (congress not even knowing what was in the bill, per their own statements? Come on Cy, who passes crap that way? Oh yeah, democrats.) then I call that "ramming" it through.

The perception may not match up with the reality, but oftentimes, perception wins the day.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2010 09:38 am
@CoastalRat,
CoastalRat wrote:

Bribing members and exempting states from certain items in legislation that other states must follow just to gain a senator's vote because a bill would not pass without it is not considered "ramming" something through?


I think you'd have a hard time finding ANY piece of legislation which was the slightest bit controversial, that didn't include such things. So, no, I don't consider that ramming things through. Ramming things through would be, say, like holding votes open for 4 hours so you can bribe your own members to switch their vote (which the Republicans regularly did when they held the house). Or by using procedural tricks like Reconciliation to avoid the filibuster (which Republicans did with both Bush tax cuts). The Dems actually marshaled the votes, and got a couple of Republicans to vote with them each time. Hardly 'ramming through.'

I would also point out that the State exemptions were stripped from final versions of the HCR bill that passed, because the public - both at large and in that state - disagreed with it.

Quote:
I'm not saying that dems compromised on nothing at all. Sure, they threw out a few bones, but mostly only to satisfy their own moderate members. At least that is my perception and I believe the perception of many Americans.


Well, that's not really accurate at all. The ARRA and HCR both included significant concessions to the Republicans, that the Republicans demanded. And Obama offered to compromise more on the HCR bill (by throwing in major Tort reform), but Republicans weren't even interested in discussing it.

Quote:
When congress passes legislation that a majority of the country opposed (health care reform) in the form it took (congress not even knowing what was in the bill, per their own statements? Come on Cy, who passes crap that way? Oh yeah, democrats.) then I call that "ramming" it through.


You don't think that part of the reason people were so against it, was a concerted push by the Republicans to lie and deceive the public about what was in it? Remember the 'death panel' bullshit? You pretend that this was all organic, when it was anything but. The Republican party, their rich donors and Fox News teamed up to throw up a massive cloud of fear and doubt about the bill, all based on stuff which wasn't in it. They took the latent anger over Obama's election and pivoted it to the local Democrats, who were someone that these people could stand there and actually yell at.

Quote:
The perception may not match up with the reality, but oftentimes, perception wins the day.


You're absolutely right about that. The Dems in both houses were pussies, afraid of standing up for what they had done. There was no unifying national message at all for the Dems, which really hurt in a tough-economy election like this. Like I posted in the other thread, people had the exact opposite idea of what has happened, then what has actually happened, re: the economy and taxes. You'll never win when the public is convinced you haven't done anything at all to solve problems, even when you have...

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2010 09:48 am


Congratulations Marco Rubio!
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2010 09:51 am
@CoastalRat,
Quote:
I'm not saying that the two sides need to compromise on every issue, as some core beliefs cannot be compromised away. But both sides need to look for common ground and meet there whenever possible.


I agree with you on this one thing. The rest of the stuff you said, particularly what is "far left", "ramming" or what the "majority of Americans like" is partisan spin. I will refrain from poking back at you.

Let me end with the good news. In two years we get to do the whole thing all over again.


CoastalRat
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2010 09:54 am
@maxdancona,
Quote:
I agree with you on this one thing. The rest of the stuff you said, particularly what is "far left", "ramming" or what the "majority of Americans like" is partisan spin.
I guess it is like two people who see a car accident from two different angles. What they see may be totally different, but they agree there was indeed a car accident.

Quote:
I will refrain from poking back at you.


Thank you for that.

Quote:
Let me end with the good news. In two years we get to do the whole thing all over again.


Yeah, you've got that right. Although I'm not sure if I would call that good news necessarily.
0 Replies
 
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2010 10:10 am
@CoastalRat,
i have no friends Crying or Very sad
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2010 10:44 am
@djjd62,
Rubio has many, many friends Very Happy
0 Replies
 
CoastalRat
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Nov, 2010 10:52 am
@djjd62,
That's because you are too partisan. You've got to compromise. Don't be like Obama, Pelosi and Reid in talking how since they won in 2008 that we've just got to deal with it. Just suck it in and compromise. Then maybe you'll have a few friends.

And I tell you what. I'll even invite you to dinner anytime you get to SC. Of course, the compromise is that you get to pay, but hey, that seems fair to me.

(The views posted here are not necessarily the views of the clown. He is just having a bit of clownish fun.)
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Marco Rubio
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 1.11 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 08:03:00