NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/29/AR2006112901317_pf.html

Government as usual. So much for the idea of "100 hours" of change.

It was a solemn pledge, repeated by Democratic leaders and candidates over and over: If elected to the majority in Congress, Democrats would implement all of the recommendations of the bipartisan commission that examined the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

But with control of Congress now secured, Democratic leaders have decided for now against implementing the one measure that would affect them most directly: a wholesale reorganization of Congress to improve oversight and funding of the nation's intelligence agencies. Instead, Democratic leaders may create a panel to look at the issue and produce recommendations, according to congressional aides and lawmakers.

Because plans for implementing the commission's recommendations are still fluid, Democratic officials would not speak for the record. But aides on the House and Senate appropriations, armed services and intelligence committees confirmed this week that a reorganization of Congress would not be part of the package of homeland-security changes up for passage in the "first 100 hours" of the Democratic Congress.

Let's make a list, shall we? We did it with the Republicans (probably since the Gingrich days...). Let's count how many promises they break in the first year.

And you thought Democrats were "different"!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/29/AR2006112901317_pf.html

Government as usual. So much for the idea of "100 hours" of change.



Let's make a list, shall we? We did it with the Republicans (probably since the Gingrich days...). Let's count how many promises they break in the first year.

And you thought Democrats were "different"!

Well the democrats spell their name differently.

All politicans, regardless of party are full of hot air.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/29/AR2006112901317_pf.html

Government as usual. So much for the idea of "100 hours" of change.



Let's make a list, shall we? We did it with the Republicans (probably since the Gingrich days...). Let's count how many promises they break in the first year.

And you thought Democrats were "different"!

I see, so after the "The Democrats didn't win, the Republicans lost the election" whine, we'll be treated to a round or two or three of "Well, where's your plan? Got a plan yet? See they don't have a plan!"

The new Congress isn't in session until January. Relax, enjoy the holidays, and chill, okay? There'll be plenty of time for this next year.

a wholesale reorganization of Congress to improve oversight and funding of the nation's intelligence agencies.You think the Democrats would be able to accomplish that in just 100 hours, along with everything else on their agenda? Please. :rolleyes:

And what sweeping, positive changes did the GOP enact in the, oh... 12 YEARS they controlled Congress?

I see, so after the "The Democrats didn't win, the Republicans lost the election" whine, we'll be treated to a round or two or three of "Well, where's your plan? Got a plan yet? See they don't have a plan!"

The new Congress isn't in session until January. Relax, enjoy the holidays, and chill, okay? There'll be plenty of time for this next year.

No, this is a different whine. More of a wheeze. You know, the "two-party system in the US sucks, and just gives us more of the same" wheeze.

You think the Democrats qould be able to accomplish that in just 100 hours, along with everything else on their agenda? Please. :rolleyes:

And what sweeping, positive changes did the GOP enact in the, oh... 12 YEARS they controlled Congress?

Hey, I didn't make the promise - they did.

No, this is a different whine. More of a wheeze. You know, the "two-party system in the US sucks, and just gives us more of the same" wheeze.

That one's even more boring. :p

That one's even more boring. :p

I'm really tired of the "Vote for our party because we promise to fix everything" platform - especially when we only have two parties, and they both suck mightily at trying to fulfill their promises.

It's obvious to me that there's no major philosophical difference between the two - just window dressing.

I'm really tired of the "Vote for our party because we promise to fix everything" platform - especially when we only have two parties, and they both suck mightily at trying to fulfill their promises.
Delaying a major bureaucratic reshuffle until a committee can investigate and give recommendations ≠ "suck mightily at fulfilling promises"

If the Democrats went ahead with this plan with little to no preparation, they'd just be accused for being careless and/or reckless with our national security apparatus.

Delaying a major bureaucratic reshuffle until a committee can investigate and give recommendations =/= "suck mightily at fulfilling promises"

If the Democrats went ahead with this plan with little to no preparation, they'd just be accused for being careless and/or reckless with our national security apparatus.

Keep spinning, and you too could get a high paying job with either party.

The american kleptocrat party has two wings: Democrat and Republican.

I'm surprised that anyone is surprised.

The american kleptocrat party has two wings: Democrat and Republican.

I'm surprised that anyone is surprised.

I'm surprised that so many people on this forum actually believe there's a significant difference.

It's like the yankees and the red sox. People can spend hours fighting over the relative merits and strengths of each, but at the end of the day they are still both baseball teams.

You think the Democrats would be able to accomplish that in just 100 hours, along with everything else on their agenda? Please. :rolleyes:

And what sweeping, positive changes did the GOP enact in the, oh... 12 YEARS they controlled Congress?

Translation: Their promises were unrealistic to begin with so don't hold them accountable, and since we're prepared to argue the Republicans are no better, we should just be satisfied.

Translation: Their promises were unrealistic to begin with so don't hold them accountable, and since we're prepared to argue the Republicans are no better, we should just be satisfied.

You've got to admit, if the Democratic Congress holds even one oversight hearing, it'll be more than the Republican congress did over the last five years. I'm expecting far more than that.

All politicans, regardless of party are full of hot air.

Jimmy Carter wasn't...

The american kleptocrat party has two wings: Democrat and Republican.

I'm surprised that anyone is surprised.

I'm surprised that so many people on this forum actually believe there's a significant difference.

All politicans, regardless of party are full of hot air.

No, this is a different whine. More of a wheeze. You know, the "two-party system in the US sucks, and just gives us more of the same" wheeze.

I'm really tired of the "Vote for our party because we promise to fix everything" platform - especially when we only have two parties, and they both suck mightily at trying to fulfill their promises.

It's obvious to me that there's no major philosophical difference between the two - just window dressing.

Okay, well, if the US political system sucks so much, what're you going to do about it? You going to get involved, join one or the other party and try to make it something that doesn't suck?

Or would you like some cheese with that whine (sheesh, that's two days in a row I've used that one)?

Keep spinning, and you too could get a high paying job with either party.

note from the ministry of reality. The current congress is still a REpublican controlled congress. Woudl you rather wait until the Democrats actually take power before you say how much they suck at it? Or would you like to prejudge their response before they even take power? God damn you people with your crap. It's like saying, the 44tyh President of the United States sucks, he has done nothing positive. Oh wait, the 43rd is still in power. Jackass!:sniper:

[QUOTE=Eve Let's make a list, shall we? We did it with the Republicans (probably since the Gingrich days...). Let's count how many promises they break in the first year.

And you thought Democrats were "different"![/QUOTE]

Let's do it the easy way. Let's make a list of promises they keep. We can keep that list on a very small post it. If we do it the other way we will need a very large data base. :eek:

Okay, well, if the US political system sucks so much, what're you going to do about it? You going to get involved, join one or the other party and try to make it something that doesn't suck?

Or would you like some cheese with that whine (sheesh, that's two days in a row I've used that one)?

The parties suck, because the system is broken. Not the other way around. There simply is no point in getting involved with either nest of vipers. The best people can do is abstain until voter turn out becomes so miserably low they can no longer claim any form of mandate for governance. Then perhaps the system itself will be overhauled, instead of these nonsense garbage political parties.

Shit is all decided in the courts or behind closed doors these days anyway.

It's like the yankees and the red sox. People can spend hours fighting over the relative merits and strengths of each, but at the end of the day they are still both baseball teams.

No... one is a baseball team and the other is a evil corporation that eats kitties and wants to take over the world. Duh.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/29/AR2006112901317_pf.html

Government as usual. So much for the idea of "100 hours" of change.



Let's make a list, shall we? We did it with the Republicans (probably since the Gingrich days...). Let's count how many promises they break in the first year.

And you thought Democrats were "different"!

Picking between Democrats and Republicans is like picking between which bowl of shit you're going to have to eat from. At least the Democrat bowl has corn. :)

No... one is a baseball team and the other is a evil corporation that eats kitties and wants to take over the world. Duh.

Look, I'm no fan of the Yankees either, but they still play baseball on occasion.

Look, I'm no fan of the Yankees either, but they still play baseball on occasion.

Only as a way to hide their true purpose of eating kittens/taking of the world. :mad:

Anyway, I meant that one side of the debate seems to always demonizes the other in our two party system. The "We are normal, but THEY are crazy people haters" arguement.

The parties suck, because the system is broken. Not the other way around. There simply is no point in getting involved with either nest of vipers. The best people can do is abstain until voter turn out becomes so miserably low they can no longer claim any form of mandate for governance. Then perhaps the system itself will be overhauled, instead of these nonsense garbage political parties.

Shit is all decided in the courts or behind closed doors these days anyway.

As if the lack of a majority ever kept anyone from claiming a mandate.

So, if "shit is decided in the courts or behind closed doors these days anyway" there's no point? Did you vote in this years election? If you don't at least vote, you can't complain how the system and the parties suck, because you make no effort to chage things.

If you don't at least vote, you can't complain how the system and the parties suck, because you make no effort to chage things.

if you vote, then you legitimize a broken system. therefore if you vote, you can't complain because it's your damn fault we're in this mess.

if you vote, then you legitimize a broken system. therefore if you vote, you can't complain because it's your damn fault we're in this mess.

I sure can complain, and by my votes and contributions to the candidates I favor, I'm doing what I can to clean up the damn mess.

And if it's the system you want fixed, sitting on your duff waiting for the state to wither away is not going to accomplish anything. If you think we need a constitutional convention, we're not going to get one by wishing for it. You need to get people in office who will act. "If you vote, then you legitimize a broken system" is a cop out. If it's broken, I call on you, as a fellow citizen, to help fix it.

sitting on your duff waiting for the state to wither away is not going to accomplish anything.

true

You need to get people in office who will act.

false

I'm sorry, the Democrats haven't taken power yet. You'll have to retake Freshman Civics again, since you seemed to have missed that.

false

What then? How do you do it?

When are people going to realize its not about the party? Its about the people.

1. Although most of you believe democrats are "peaceful" and "fair," Christopher Rangel tries to bring back the draft.
2. Although a lot of you think only a republican would start a thing like the Iraq war, a democrat started/joined the Vietnam war, which is recognized as almost the same war

I could list a load more, I don't have the time and I don't feel the need. World leaders can suck no matter what party you're from.

All politicans, regardless of party are full of hot air.
Except when it's time for you to justify their evil wars. Then they're heroes.

What then? How do you do it?

the offices are part of the problem. to fix things you need to render them irrelevant. work outside the system. dual power, my man, dual power.

the offices are part of the problem. to fix things you need to render them irrelevant. work outside the system. dual power, my man, dual power.

I'm not anyone's "man" ... :p

Run a country as large as the US "outside the system"? How's that going to work? Please explain.

When are people going to realize its not about the party? Its about the people.

1. Although most of you believe democrats are "peaceful" and "fair," Christopher Rangel tries to bring back the draft.
2. Although a lot of you think only a republican would start a thing like the Iraq war, a democrat started/joined the Vietnam war, which is recognized as almost the same war

I could list a load more, I don't have the time and I don't feel the need. World leaders can suck no matter what party you're from.

For the sake of fairness and accuracy

1. His name is Charlie Rangel

2. The conflict in Vietnam started when Eisenhower sent "advisors (soldiers) to Vietnam in the 50's. It was an overreaction to the threat of commuunism.

For the sake of fairness and accuracy

1. His name is Charlie Rangel

2. The conflict in Vietnam started when Eisenhower sent "advisors (soldiers) to Vietnam in the 50's. It was an overreaction to the threat of commuunism.
And an attempt by the French to reassert control over their colonial holdings. The communist threat was not much more than a smoke screen in the early days of the conflict.

I'm not anyone's "man" ... :p

all people, places, and things are 'man'

Run a country as large as the US "outside the system"? How's that going to work? Please explain.

i'm not much concerned about running the whole thing anyways.

there is nothing inherent in this particular set of existing institutions that allows them, and only them, to run the place. and since those institutions are actually the problem, then the obvious solution is to come up with some new ones and put them into practice.

all people, places, and things are 'man'



i'm not much concerned about running the whole thing anyways.

there is nothing inherent in this particular set of existing institutions that allows them, and only them, to run the place. and since those institutions are actually the problem, then the obvious solution is to come up with some new ones and put them into practice.

Which is what I said earlier, a constitutional convention. It really is the only way to reorganize the US government. And to get a CC called, you need to elect people who agree with you, maybe at the state level first and progressing upwards. You can say "The current system is teh sucks" and stomp off in a huff, but you need to come back and work on the system after you feel better.

Which is what I said earlier, a constitutional convention. It really is the only way to reorganize the US government. And to get a CC called, you need to elect people who agree with you, maybe at the state level first and progressing upwards. You can say "The current system is teh sucks" and stomp off in a huff, but you need to come back and work on the system after you feel better.

nope. you tell the system to fuck off and you organize outside of it. we don't need to play by their fucked up and rigged rules at all.