Dems Are Attempting To Eat Each Other.. [Archive] - The Orange Mane

Smiling Assassin27

02-04-2009, 08:21 AM

In credit to Obama, he wasn't OK with the amount of pork in the House stimulus bill, though he's managed to stay pretty quiet on the topic publicly. Pelosi's going down. She's losing the battle for hearts and minds in her own party and it's gonna cost her her head.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0209/Cooper_Obama_staff_encouraged_defiance_of_Pelosi.h tml

Cooper: Obama staff encouraged defiance of Pelosi

Rep. Jim Cooper (D-TN) -- one of the lead Blue Dogs -- made a startling admission to lefty Liberadio on Sunday, suggesting the White House quietly encouraged him to buck House leadership on the stimulus.

Cooper was one of 11 Dems to vote no -- joining every GOP House member.

"Well, I probably shouldn’t tell you this, but I actually got some quiet encouragement from the Obama folks for what I’m doing," said Cooper, one of about 55 House Democrats to sign a letter criticizing Speaker Nancy Pelosi for suspending normal debate and committee rules on the $819 billion package.

He went on -- and on:

"They know its a messy bill and they wanted a clean bill. Now, I got in terrible trouble with our leadership because they don’t care what’s in the bill, they just want it pass and they want it to be unanimous. They don’t mind the partisan fighting cause that’s what they are used to. In fact, they’re really good at it. And they’re a little bit worried about what a post-partisan future might look like. If members actually had to read the bills and figure out whether they are any good or not. We’re just told how to vote. We’re treated like mushrooms most of the time."

The White House press office and Pelosi's spokesman didn't immediately return requests for comment.

Cooper, an early supporter of Obama's, referred to the House leadership repeatedly as "old bulls" and the president as "Barack," said House leaders had "pinned" Obama down by jamming pork into the bill, and expressed hope the Senate would radically revise the package.

(h/t Nashville Post, which first reported Cooper's radio appearance this afternoon.)

Garcia Bronco

02-04-2009, 08:26 AM

This is what I've been saying on this board for years...it ain't the executive branch, its the legislative branch that's the problem with our economic situation. Congress spends the money in this country.

frerottenextelway

02-04-2009, 08:32 AM

I hope nobody actually believes Cooper.

Spider

02-04-2009, 08:34 AM

I hope nobody actually believes Cooper.

I do .......

frerottenextelway

02-04-2009, 08:43 AM

I do .......

The majority of Blue Dog Dems (conservative Dems) vote yes ... if the President urged them to vote no on a spending bill they would've all voted no.

The President likely said something like ''make the best bill and vote your conscious'', and Cooper did his typical run with it.

Spider

02-04-2009, 08:45 AM

Obama is a republicans worst nightmare , those who put country before party ( 85% of republicans ) will hate Obama for years to come ....... Obama will get us on the right track to fix everything Bush and his toadies ( aka Republicans in Congress) ****ed up .......

Spider

02-04-2009, 08:46 AM

The majority of Blue Dog Dems (conservative Dems) vote yes ... if the President urged them to vote no on a spending bill they would've all voted no. Depends

The President likely said something like ''make the best bill and vote your conscious'', and Cooper did his typical run with it.

wouldnt that be considered quite encouragement ........

frerottenextelway

02-04-2009, 08:51 AM

wouldnt that be considered quite encouragement ........

Well, it's nothing he wouldn't say publicly.

It is good though, to have a President that does believe in policy before politics behind close doors and not just infront of the camera.

Hotrod

02-04-2009, 08:53 AM

Obama is a republicans worst nightmare , those who put country before party ( 85% of republicans ) will hate Obama for years to come ....... Obama will get us on the right track to fix everything Bush and his toadies ( aka Republicans in Congress) ****ed up .......

Sadly you are probably right about the majority of republicans. Personally I hope the man has great sucess but am taking a wait and see approach.

Spider

02-04-2009, 08:55 AM

Well, it's nothing he wouldn't say publicly.

It is good though, to have a President that does believe in policy before politics behind close doors and not just infront of the camera.

;D Sa is in for a long 4 years ........another year and we just might have ot take up a collection for him and his kind to go to therapy

Spider

02-04-2009, 08:56 AM

Sadly you are probably right about the majority of republicans. Personally I hope the man has great sucess but am taking a wait and see approach.

Thats where I am ...... so far I like what I see from him .......

frerottenextelway

02-04-2009, 08:56 AM

;D Sa is in for a long 4 years ........another year and we just might have ot take up a collection for him and his kind to go to therapy

Ship 'em all to Gitmo, there will be plenty of room there then. 8')

Hotrod

02-04-2009, 08:59 AM

Thats where I am ...... so far I like what I see from him .......

so far I cant complain with anything he has done but it is early. It is in my nature to be cautious about you leftys and your agenda :)

Oh wait I disagree on Gitmo but that is another bag of worms.

Spider

02-04-2009, 09:06 AM

so far I cant complain with anything he has done but it is early. It is in my nature to be cautious about you leftys and your agenda :)

Oh wait I disagree on Gitmo but that is another bag of worms.

;D i want gitmo detainees brought to America , tried , and executed as soon as possible......

Hotrod

02-04-2009, 09:08 AM

;D i want gitmo detainees brought to America , tried , and executed as soon as possible......

LOL

My only problem with Gitmo was the lack of action. Hell to be honest I dont have a big problem with water boarding but what I do have a problem with is the idea of just locking people up for an undetermined amount of time talk about Un American. Prove them guilty or let them go.

cutthemdown

02-04-2009, 09:16 AM

LOL

My only problem with Gitmo was the lack of action. Hell to be honest I dont have a big problem with water boarding but what I do have a problem with is the idea of just locking people up for an undetermined amount of time talk about Un American. Prove them guilty or let them go.

In a war you don't release people until war is over. Al Queda surrenders and gives us Bin Laden, promises to dismantle, then we let the combatants go.

These guys go right back to being terrorists when they are released.

Spider

02-04-2009, 09:16 AM

LOL

My only problem with Gitmo was the lack of action. Hell to be honest I dont have a big problem with water boarding but what I do have a problem with is the idea of just locking people up for an undetermined amount of time talk about Un American. Prove them guilty or let them go.

;D agreed ......but we can still execute the guilty right ?

Hotrod

02-04-2009, 09:22 AM

In a war you don't release people until war is over. Al Queda surrenders and gives us Bin Laden, promises to dismantle, then we let the combatants go.

These guys go right back to being terrorists when they are released.

I certainly see your point but this war has no real end. The radical muslims aint going anywhere.

Hotrod

02-04-2009, 09:24 AM

;D agreed ......but we can still execute the guilty right ?

absoulutly, heck I'd give up some saturdays to serve on the firing squad :)

frerottenextelway

02-04-2009, 09:24 AM

In a war you don't release people until war is over. Al Queda surrenders and gives us Bin Laden, promises to dismantle, then we let the combatants go.

These guys go right back to being terrorists when they are released.

If this is a ''War'', then they would be "Prisoners of War", right?

cutthemdown

02-04-2009, 09:26 AM

I certainly see your point but this war has no real end. The radical muslims aint going anywhere.

I guess then they need to think twice before getting captured. If we release them then all they will do is surrender, get released, go fight again.

That's the definition of indefinite detention. It's caused because the people we are fighting are still fighting. Until it's over they should be kept.

Hotrod

02-04-2009, 09:32 AM

I guess then they need to think twice before getting captured. If we release them then all they will do is surrender, get released, go fight again.

That's the definition of indefinite detention. It's caused because the people we are fighting are still fighting. Until it's over they should be kept.

Again I actually agree with one exception. There needs to be some form of over site. Prove to someone that they are who you say they are.

Personally I bet most if not all of them are terrorists and should be held forever but the world would look at Gitmo and us alot differnet if we were to prove their guilt.

Spider

02-04-2009, 09:34 AM

now see Iam for executing them as soon as possible ........ make room for more

SonOfLe-loLang

02-04-2009, 09:40 AM

Here's the problem with the democrats: They are ****ing pussies. They've always been pussies. For some reason, they have Stockholm Syndrome when it comes to the far right. Right now, the republicans are playing an OBVIOUS political game. It's nothing more, it's nothing less. They are making a stink with a stimulus bill they never have any intention on voting for (why would we want to continue the same retarded policy that got us in here in the first place).

But they will bitch and complain and, because the Democrats are spineless, they will cave to their demands and pass a watered down stimulus that won't work (even though repubs still won't vote for it). Then the economy will further spin out of control, and come 2010, the republicans will run against it. And then completely **** up everything more with their bull**** conservative policy.

The democrats should tell them to go to hell and pass the stimulus bill they feel is necessary. If it doesnt work, at least they went down sticking to what they believed in and what basic economics suggested would work. If they cave to these retarded republican demands, it DEFINITELY wont work and the dems wont even be able to point fingers towards the right because the repubs will remind them "we didnt vote for it." It's so ****ing obvious and infuriating.

The american people spoke in the last election. Supporting for the left is at an all time high. No one wants the same policy that got us here....SO STOP LETTING THE MINORITY CONTROL THE CONVERSATION

Garcia Bronco

02-04-2009, 09:41 AM

(why would we want to continue the same retarded policy that got us in here in the first place).

What policies would those be?

frerottenextelway

02-04-2009, 09:46 AM

What policies would those be?

The ones that caused a $10 trillion deficit, a single year trillion deficit, lost jobs, grew the income gap a couple times over, and deregulated the banking institutions causing a near collapse of the country while execs had record breaking salaries and bonuses. ... and invaded Iraq for God knows what f'n reason and with no exit plan.

Those ones.

SonOfLe-loLang

02-04-2009, 10:17 AM

What policies would those be?

you know, that tax cuts are the magical cure all?

Garcia Bronco

02-04-2009, 10:35 AM

The ones that caused a $10 trillion deficit, a single year trillion deficit, lost jobs, grew the income gap a couple times over, and deregulated the banking institutions causing a near collapse of the country while execs had record breaking salaries and bonuses. ... and invaded Iraq for God knows what f'n reason and with no exit plan.

Those ones.

Liberals passed, voted, and wrote those policies as well. And some of those have nothing to do with government.

frerottenextelway

02-04-2009, 10:41 AM

Liberals passed, voted, and wrote those policies as well. And some of those have nothing to do with government.

Sans a couple exceptions, not really. It's pretty much the liberal platform to regulate and for progressive taxes. Oh, and to not invade random countries.

SonOfLe-loLang

02-04-2009, 10:45 AM

Liberals passed, voted, and wrote those policies as well. And some of those have nothing to do with government.

Yeah, this is BS. Liberal/progressive policy was widely ignored or not discussed. Democrats simply fell in line (like they so often did on much policy because they are pussies).

Hotrod

02-04-2009, 10:49 AM

Sans a couple exceptions, not really. It's pretty much the liberal platform to regulate and for progressive taxes. Oh, and to not invade random countries.

Then next time I suggest they dont vote in favor of such action.

frerottenextelway

02-04-2009, 10:56 AM

Then next time I suggest they dont vote in favor of such action.

Fact: More Democrats voted against it than for it, much less liberals who overwhelmingly opposed it.

bronco militia

02-04-2009, 12:22 PM

bronco militia

02-04-2009, 12:25 PM

DomCasual

02-04-2009, 12:42 PM

DomCasual

02-04-2009, 12:51 PM

bronco militia

02-04-2009, 01:20 PM

say whatever you think they want to hear

Garcia Bronco

02-04-2009, 02:42 PM

you know, that tax cuts are the magical cure all?

tax cuts mean nothing if the Government increasing spending.

SonOfLe-loLang

02-04-2009, 03:23 PM

tax cuts mean nothing if the Government increasing spending.

Whats your point? The republicans, in lieu of spending, just want to fill the stimulus with tax cuts as they still think this type of policy creates jobs. The last 8 years is evidence to the contrary.

ak1971

02-04-2009, 03:53 PM

ohh..I thought this was going to be some nasty Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, Barney Frank threesome thing.

Spider

02-04-2009, 04:11 PM

ohh..I thought this was going to be some nasty Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, Barney Frank threesome thing.
oh great .now i got wood