When a MAJORITY of Democrats vote sensibly on an issue...

[Silent3]

...but Bush still gets what he wants because so many Republicans vote in unison as party lapdogs, and all it takes is a few Democratic defections for Bush to get his way...

Can we STOP SAYING that "The Democrats caved!", "The Democrats rolled over and gave Bush want he wanted!", "They're all the same!", etc., etc.???

As if it's not bad enough this is the way things come across in the MSM, do we have to help them out by spreading and reinforcing the same inaccurate and damaging rhetoric ourselves?

Yes, I'm disgusted the there were enough Democratic defections for Bush to get his way with warrantless wiretapping, and that even with strong Democratic opposition to this next $50 billion down the toilet for the war in Iraq, Bush will all too likely still get what he wants... BUT THAT IS STILL MAINLY THE FAULT OF REPUBLICANS!

Do the people decrying the whole Democratic Party when things don't go our way in Congress even understand how voting in Congress works? Are they more angry at Democrats for not voting in complete lock step like an army of clones than they are at the Republicans for their crass and/or stupid support for Bush?

Why are we tearing down our own people, who represent the best hope for making things better, when our anger should be directed at the majority of Republicans and a MINORITY of Democrats? We're a long, long way from the day that a majority of Democrats voted for the IWR, yet I hardly see any appreciation for the positive direction things are going.

It's frustrating not to have strong enough a majority to get the right things done, and not anywhere close enough to enough strength to override a veto, but damn it, we shouldn't be eating our own in a badly misplaced expression of anger.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'd like to see a Democrat in the White House in 2008, and strong Democratic gains in Congress too. It's not going to help that cause if the misplaced anger here only adds to the popular cynical resignation that "it doesn't matter" which party you vote for.

[redqueen]

1. bush's fisa bill didn't need to go to the floor

those that aren't buying the BS won't, no matter how many people line up to say up is down


it does matter what party you vote for... but it also matters what the candidate stands for... having a "D" by their name is CLEARLY not enough

[cali]

2. Yep, nothing like calling people with a different pov

apologists. Such a charming habit.

[redqueen]

3. fixed

thanks

tried to edit out the ugliness... there was more before

i spent the morning reading a DK thread, filled with lots of derisive comments & laughter at him and his supporters

sorry for allowing that frustration to spill over here

peace

[cali]

4. Thank you!

And if you've been reading a DK thread with all its attendant nastiness, I get it. I just read one myself and I couldn't believe how unpleasant people were about Dennis. He's not my choice, but I have a ton of admiration for him. (I don't have a choice yet)

[rucky]

6. No legislation is better than bad legislation.

on edit: NOT to be read in the same tone of "there's no business like show business"

[LittleClarkie]

5. I know sometimes I wonder if electing all those blue dogs

was more harmful than helpful. False hope that they can't fulfill.

[tritsofme]

7. Your whole argument is flawed, Pelosi and Hoyer have near dictorial powers

in the House.

If they know the votes aren't there for any particular piece of legislation, then they are under no obligation to bring the bill to the floor for a vote.

There is a reason that the minimum wage never increased in 12 years of GOP rule in the House, its not because there wasn't majority support for the measure, its because the GOP leadership never brought it to the floor.

There is no reason to bring a bill that is repugnant to a vast majority to the House floor whatsoever, and the blame lies entirely on the shoulders of the Democratic Leadership for its passage.