NJSecularist
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 05:42 PM
Original message |
Kerry, Kennedy, Obama , Biden, Dodd - YEA; Hillary: not voting |
fenriswolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 05:52 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Feinstien let a real progressive into your seat you POS |
Renew Deal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. The House can save us on this right? |
|
Don't they have to approve as well? I hope our 231 does the right thing.
|
EmperorHasNoClothes
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 06:01 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
6. Apparently the house is more hostile to the immunity portion of the bill |
|
So hopefully it will get dropped from the bill after all.
|
Renew Deal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 06:04 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
9. I hope they do their job, |
|
I have to bug my critter.
|
corkhead
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 05:54 PM
Response to Original message |
2. She's still thinking that her votes could come back to bite her in the general |
gateley
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 05:57 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
5. Oh - I'm afraid you may be right. But wouldn't it be smarter, at this point, |
|
to worry about not alienating potential voters while she's still not been named the nom?
Politics. Thank god WE'RE all sane and not involved in this racket! :crazy:
|
hisownpetard
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 06:25 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
14. Bite her in the general? You mean, bite her in the ass! |
gateley
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 05:56 PM
Response to Original message |
4. Was this today's vote? I haven't gotten caught up yet. |
|
If so, I' surprised Hillary didn't participate - it's the right thing to do, for us and politically.
What say you, Clinton supporters? Thus far usually they ALL show for a vote, or they all don't,
|
Bread and Circus
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 06:01 PM
Response to Original message |
7. Endorse that, John Edwards. |
RUMMYisFROSTED
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 06:03 PM
Response to Original message |
8. Remind me. We have a majority, right? |
aquarius dawning
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 06:11 PM
Response to Original message |
10. This is a representative Democracy. Senators exercise the will of their constituency...period. |
|
That's how we roll in America. So you can't really blame the Senator for his or her vote because it isn't him or her voting, it's the people that voted him or her into the office you need to blame for not being progressive enough.
|
Jack Bone
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 06:19 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
11. from my understanding..The US House of Rep's was meant to reflect.. |
|
the will of the people. In contrast, The US Senate was meant to be a more deliberative body. Weighing both the will of the people and the good of the nation.
but then again, what the hell do I know?? :shrug:
|
aquarius dawning
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
12. No, the Senate was meant to get small states to sign onto this idea called the United States. |
|
A truly representative congress would be unicameral and would be completely proportional and it would represent people, not states.
|
Jack Bone
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
15. yes, I agree w/ you on the small states...partly |
|
But to further prove my original point, please look to the term limits. House is 2 years, Senate 6 years. That was instituted to make the Senate a deliberative body, free from the control of emotional issues that tend to occur within truly Representative body.
|
aquarius dawning
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
16. That's true. I would still be happier with a unicameral congress representing people, not states. |
|
Any named party that could assemble at least, oh say, 100,000 supporters nationwide would be seated in the unicameral house with voting power proportionally equal to the number of members nationwide. If there were 20 partys in the house each with exactly 1,000,000 members, each party would wield exactly 5% of the overall power. If a simple majority were needed to pass legislation, at least 11 partys would have to agree to vote together. If there were 20 partys and they each had 1,000,000 membersexcept one had 2,000,000 (call it the gay party if you will), that party's vote would be equal to about two of the votes cast by one of the other partys. In this way, everyone in America receives representation, nobody gets left out in the cold, two party democratic dictatorship is avoided, and lobbyist types have little chance of influencing legislation. It is a more perfect union. It's pretty much my favorite made up form of government.
|
Auntie Bush
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 06:24 PM
Response to Original message |
13. Is Hillary copying Obama by not voting? |
|
Has she learned if you don't vote or vote present or hit the wrong button... That no one can accuse you of voting for or voting against a controversial issue. Good move Hillary...I always knew you were intelligent and a fast learner. Go Hillary Go
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 18th 2024, 11:32 AM
Response to Original message |