Comments on: Zombies No More?

By: fd10801

fd10801 — Thu, 18 Jan 2007 05:34:29 +0000

Yes, Wilbur, I am well aware that the dividers are now in the majority of the House and the Senate.
Unity of purpose as opposed to unity of country is their mantra.

By: CDWard

CDWard — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 20:09:23 +0000

It’s hilarious seeing the Republicans whining about being treated the same way they treated the Democrats.

By: Wilbur

Wilbur — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 18:23:26 +0000

The Dems made a promise of bipartisanship. It’s their obligation to deliver.

So long as the repubs understand that “bipartisanship” doesn’t mean “you do what we want”. Over the last decade or so I’ve seen no sign that they understand that.

And, by the way, will you finally agree that W never delivered on his “uniter not divider” rhetoric?

By: fd10801

fd10801 — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 04:18:02 +0000

The Dems made a promise of bipartisanship. It’s their obligation to deliver.

By: Wilbur

Wilbur — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 01:10:08 +0000

Bush never had a chance to veto a spending bill that hadn’t already been passed by his Republican congress.

We’ll see how long that record lasts.

This is your best example of Bush’s bipartisanship?

“Uniter not divider” my ass.

By: fd10801

fd10801 — Tue, 16 Jan 2007 19:15:10 +0000

President Bush never vetoed a spending bill, no matter who sponsored it…

By: Wilbur

Wilbur — Tue, 16 Jan 2007 17:31:49 +0000

You getting where I’m going with this?

Yeah, I get it. You have no serious argument to make so you take refuge in a childish reductio ad absurdum

Case closed.

By: fd10801

fd10801 — Tue, 16 Jan 2007 07:38:27 +0000

Wilbur, you shouldn’t ask a question when you know the answer: The answer is “No!” The Republicans are bad politicians; the Democrats are good politicians.
Republicans are evil, Democrats are angelic.
Democrats are incapable of corruption or partisanship.
You getting where I’m going with this?
/sarcasm

p.s. President Bush never vetoed a spending bill, no matter who sponsored it…

By: Wilbur

Wilbur — Tue, 16 Jan 2007 06:47:12 +0000

I’ll be looking for that much vaunted “recognition of minority rights” we heard so much about since 1994.

See, that’s the difference between Democrats and Republicans, Frank. A big part of me says “yeah, we should play fair now that we’re in charge,” even though the last 12 years have shown that to be the last thing that would ever cross the mind of a Republican.

Once again, Frank gives an excellent illustration of the Republican golden rule: Do unto others, then squeal like a pig when they do unto you.

Meanwhile, my question stands: “For George Bush, “bipartisanship” means “you do things the way I want.” Can you provide _any_ counter-examples, Frank?”

By: merlallen

merlallen — Tue, 16 Jan 2007 05:51:43 +0000

fd10801. you lost. get over it, stop whining, it makes you look like a little kid who can’t get his way. In other words, a typical WATB Republican’t. The Democratic Party owes you and the Republican’t Party absolutely nothing.

By: fd10801

fd10801 — Tue, 16 Jan 2007 01:18:46 +0000

OK, Quaker, now we’re arguing “chicken and egg.”

We’ll just have to see what bipartisan means, now that the Dems are in control. I’ll be looking for that much vaunted “recognition of minority rights” we heard so much about since 1994.

By: Quaker in a Basement

Quaker in a Basement — Mon, 15 Jan 2007 23:16:32 +0000

the Democrats were notorious for voting in lockstep, when the Republicans were in the majority.

I repeat: the legislation had nothing to do with it?

The GOP majority was similarly notorious for larding legislation with clauses that were entirely unacceptable to Democrats, and doing so intentionally for the purpose of dividing the vote along party lines.

By: Wilbur

Wilbur — Mon, 15 Jan 2007 23:07:07 +0000

Um, how about Bush’s tax cuts? There’s three. How about funding authorizations for the Iraq war? there’s four. How about voting for Bush’s supreme court nominees? There’s five, there’s six. How about Bush’s No Child Left Behind crap? There’s seven.

In all these cases, many Democrats crossed the aisle and voted with Republicans. Many more examples and you might have to take off your shoes, Frank.

Meanwhile, I’ve got a proposition for you: For George Bush, “bipartisanship” means “you do things the way I want.” Can you provide _any_ counter-examples, Frank?

By: Internet's Frank

Internet's Frank — Mon, 15 Jan 2007 20:24:02 +0000

Nuts to your lousy evidence. Your evidence has COOTIES.

By: fd10801

fd10801 — Mon, 15 Jan 2007 20:17:02 +0000

No, Quaker, the Democrats were notorious for voting in lockstep, when the Republicans were in the majority. This, at the same time that northeastern Republican liberals crossed the aisle many a time.

I was referring to the FACT that for Democrats, “bipartisanship” = you vote like us, we never vote like you.

The commenters here brought up two examples. So?

By: Quaker in a Basement

Quaker in a Basement — Mon, 15 Jan 2007 19:21:20 +0000

Exactly. As opposed to the Democrats’ voting with the Republicans, which might be found under “fantasy,” or idioms like “When pigs fly,” or “When hell freezes over.”

What? The legislation at hand has nothing to do with it? It’s only the voting that matters?

By: S

Mon, 15 Jan 2007 14:50:15 +0000

Fwank’s a cwever boy, isn’t he!!!

By: fd10801

fd10801 — Mon, 15 Jan 2007 00:17:55 +0000

All I can say is: That’s two!

By: fd10801

fd10801 — Mon, 15 Jan 2007 00:16:57 +0000

All I can say is: That’s two!

By: Wilbur

Wilbur — Sun, 14 Jan 2007 23:05:25 +0000

sorry, last word of paragraph 1 should read “democrats”