BTW, I AM a semitic, which would make it quite an act to become anti-semitic eh?

Apparently, or did you not write: “Two issues that will win the hearts & minds of the common folk right there& ”

The key metric for impeachment should be whether the President committed high crimes and misdemeanors. Let’s put Clinton down for misdemeanors and Bush down for the other thing …

zadura – actually, the republican “monolith” is a misnomer – see immigration policy (which I disagree with most GOPers on), etc. But, when it comes to expressing basic values and agreeing on over-arching principles, the GOP is typically pretty unified.

and don’t worry… Bush and Rove will make sure that Congress will stay in the GOP’s hands for 2006… and will abolish it shortly after they suspend the constitution and declar Bush emperor under emergency powers.

It’s all been predetermined, don’t you see? Just accept it.

Regards,
St Wendeler
Another Rovian Conspiracy

From what I can tell, the only thing that would pass a democrat-controlled congress would be articles of impeachment modeled after Moonbat-in-Chief Ramsey Clark. Well, that and tax increases. Two issues that will win the hearts & minds of the common folk right there… as long as your view of the common folk is inside-the-beltway guys like OW and the “netroots.”

Regards,
St Wendeler
Another Rovian Conspiracy

It’s nice having Pedro around, if only to remind us of what we’re up against. If racism and anti-semitism were still socially acceptable, he’d be a racist anti-semite. As it is, he just takes his anger towards a cowardly, traitorous minority conspiring to destroy America and Christianity, and calls them “liberals.” Then any kind of hateful, eliminationist, fascist conspiracy theory is suddenly just “political disagreement” and it’s just fine for him to literally hate his fellow Americans. Go see a counselor, Pedro.

Typical. The Republicans ignore any and all research that puts the bullshit to their rhetoric. It’s just more conevnient to “govern” by “the gut.” At the same time they employ cheap political stunts wasting everyone’s time with do nothing, gotcha legislation so idiots like pedro can say things like: “OOOH The Democrats want felons to be citizens.” Al the while ignoring the fact that felons and other people of “low moral character” are already disqualified from becoming citizens:

Good Moral Character

Generally, an applicant must show that he or she has been a person of good moral character for the statutory period (typically five years or three years if married to a U.S. citizen or one year for Armed Forces expedite) prior to filing for naturalization. The Service is not limited to the statutory period in determining whether an applicant has established good moral character. An applicant is permanently barred from naturalization if he or she has ever been convicted of murder. An applicant is also permanently barred from naturalization if he or she has been convicted of an aggravated felony as defined in section 101(a)(43) of the Act on or after November 29, 1990. A person also cannot be found to be a person of good moral character if during the last five years he or she:

*has committed and been convicted of one or more crimes involving moral turpitude

*has committed and been convicted of 2 or more offenses for which the total sentence imposed was 5 years or more

*has committed and been convicted of any controlled substance law, except for a single offense of simple possession of 30 grams or less of marijuana

*has been confined to a penal institution during the statutory period, as a result of a conviction, for an aggregate period of 180 days or more

*has committed and been convicted of two or more gambling offenses

*is or has earned his or her principle income from illegal gambling

*is or has been involved in prostitution or commercialized vice

*is or has been involved in smuggling illegal aliens into the United States

*is or has been a habitual drunkard

*is practicing or has practiced polygamy

*has willfully failed or refused to support dependents

*has given false testimony, under oath, in order to receive a benefit under the Immigration and Nationality Act.

An applicant must disclose all relevant facts to the Service, including his or her entire criminal history, regardless of whether the criminal history disqualifies the applicant under the enumerated provisions.”
http://www.us-immigration-attorney.com/citizenship.htm

Idiot.

ps And I’m having a wonderful Sunday with my friends and family thank you very much.

As usual, your opinions are ….worthless.

In short

It is ok by the democrats that felons become citizens

Rather than allowing more people access to healthcare, the democrats want to protect fringe “health care providers” by demanding that things like therapeutic massage and chiropractic be manditory coverage items in health insurance plans

Democrats throw another bone to their sith lord, the Trial Attorneys. cause we all know who REALLY wins in class action suits.

Finally you quote an absolutely asinine study that suggests that insurance companies raised rates because of bad investments? Without going into gory detail, please explain to me why only general surgeons, ob gyns and family practice doctors have to pay for the expense of the insurance companies bad investments? The answer? It was a stupid study that didn’t evaluate the entire picture, but only looked at the cost of the “pay out”.

In short, as I demonstrated, the democrats don’t care who it hurts, they cannot allow republicans to appear to be getting anything done.

Oh you’re fucking kidding me. First of all it was not a bill it was an amendment to the larger immigration bill. The amendment was proposed by Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and John Cornyn of Texas both whom OPPOSED the larger immigration bill to which the amendment would have been attached. So Republicans who ALREADY OPPOSED the immigration bill play games with a redundant amendment to shift the blame for the bill’s failure to the Dems. Sweet. That isn’t leading, pedro, it’s playing the most cynical kind of politics.

“Democrats block a cloture motion for the Association Health Plan Bill”

Hilarious. And why did the Dems oppose the bill? Because it “stripped away a state’s ability to determine which health-care screenings and treatments insurers must cover.” It was also opposed by state attorneys general and such radical organizations as the American Cancer Society:

Enzi’s plan was opposed by the American Cancer Society and the largest lobbying group for Americans 50 and older, AARP. They said it would end some consumers’ rights, such as state-required cancer screening and protection against age discrimination, because national standards would substitute for state laws.

http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/business/14558455.htm

So the Dems come out in favor of states rights and consumer protections and the Republicans are whining? You know, pedro, blocking bad legislation is what good leaders do.

“Democrats blocked the bill limited awards in class action suits”

First of all, Congress passed the Class Action Fairness Act in 2005 in a move to cut down on the number of class action suits that ever made it to trial. So the Dems decided that the Republicans had given enough to big business at the expense of average Americans? Again, blocking bad legislation is what good leaders do.

“Democrats blocked HR 5254, legislation meant to make it easier to build refineries for gasoline production”

Um, HR 5254 The Refinery Permit Process Schedule Act just passed the House. Try to keep up Pedro. http://www.energy.gov/news/3715.htm
Republicans, however, blocked a Dem alternative that would have allowed for an Oil Refinery Reserve: “The plan was to build government-run refineries that would be brought to full capacity during emergencies to stabilize commercial markets.”

“Democrats blocked a bill limiting malpractice awards”

Oh yes, the Dems blocked a bullshit bill that was pushed based on a bullshit argument:

Re-igniting the medical malpractice overhaul debate, a new study by Dartmouth College researchers suggests that huge jury awards and financial settlements for injured patients have not caused the explosive increase in doctors’ insurance premiums.

The researchers said a more likely explanation for the escalation is that malpractice insurance companies have raised doctors’ premiums to compensate for falling investment returns.

I could go on …

Democrats block bill to prevent felons from becoming citizens

Democrats block a cloture motion for the Association Health Plan Bill

Democrats blocked the bill limited awards in class action suits

Democrats blocked HR 5254, legislation meant to make it easier to build refineries for gasoline production

Democrats blocked a bill limiting malpractice awards

Here is the list of good bills that WERE passed in spite of attempts by democrats to block them:

H.R. 6, Energy Policy Act of 2005  July 28, 2005 (Passed House 275  156) 124 Democrats Voted No.
H.R. 4503, Energy Policy Act of 2004  June 15, 2004 (Passed House 244  178) 152 Democrats Voted No.
H.R. 6, Energy Conservation, Research, and Development Act of 2003 November 18, 2003(Passed House 246  180) 154 Democrats Voted No.
H.R. 6, Energy Conservation, Research, and Development Act of 2003 April 11, 2003 (Passed House 247  175) 157 Democrats Voted No.
H.R. 4, Securing America s Future Energy Act of 2001 August 2, 2001 (Passed House 240  189) 172 Democrats Voted No.

Democrats defeat the Online Freedom of Speech act.

I could go on…..

Um, what? I thought your point was that Dems were blocking VITAL Republican legislation. Vital legislation like renewing the Voting Rights Act. I bet the Republicans are still smarting from the Democratic stonewalling there. Geez, if only the Dems would get out of the way the American people would see that the Republican majority only wants to do what’s right for America. Yup.

Oh and pedro, where would we be if Kerry’s proposals passed? The fuck out of Iraq. That’s where.

The Senate Judiciary Committee voted 11-7 this month to send the constitutional amendment to the full Senate for consideration. Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., has said the measure will get a Senate vote this month. That vote is expected in the week before the Fourth of July.

I’m just certain that if the Republicans can get this VITAL piece of legislation passed it will be “good for america.” Damn those Dems for trying to block it:

Senate leaders in both parties said Sunday there is no need for a constitutional amendment to ban flag-burning, which the Senate plans to debate this week.

Protecting the First Amendment’s right to free speech takes precedent, agreed Sens. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and Dick Durbin, D-Ill., each their party’s second-ranking Senate leader. Both said they would oppose the flag-burning amendment.

“I think the First Amendment has served us well for over 200 years. I don’t think it needs to be altered,” McConnell said on ABC’s “This Week.”

Anything? I hear people love the new prescription drug plan. Or were you talking about the Shiavo Bill, a wonderful moment of bipartisanship that really moved this country forward. That one really made the Republicans look good.

Or were you talking about the failed Constitutional Amendment to ban gay marriage? There’s a piece of legislation that would have done “the right thing for America.” Yup, crucial bit of policy there. And how about that overhaul of the nation’s immigration laws? I hear every Republican was behind the President’s plan, if only if it weren’t for those traitorous Democrats.

Idiot.

The democrats refuse to act in a bipartisan way to come to agreements on legislation. The simple reason? Anything that gets through makes the republicans look good.

This is just another example of the democrats “America Last” policy. Any republican headway on any issue good for america, is bad for the democrats; ergo, the democrats will drag their feet on everything, even if it is the right thing to do.