Reid - "The People Are Losing"

[red states rule]

Sen Harry 'the war is lost" Reid is on the ropes. After loss after loss to Pres Bush on war funding, spending bills, and sinking poll ratings. Sen Reid denies Dems are losing the political battles in DC

I wonder if Harry will wait up for Santa on Christmas Eve?


Reid rejects notion that GOP is winning Hill battles


If this is what winning looks like, then Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid wants no part of it.

Tired of Republican crowing about winning on Iraq funding, the budget battle and the energy bill, Reid (D-Nev.) shot back on Tuesday afternoon.

"We hear a lot of Republicans boasting ... because of their unprecedented obstruction," Reid said.

Indeed, Republicans have gotten their way in the battle over spending, have forced Democrats to jettison rollbacks of tax breaks for oil companies, and have beaten back attempts to pay for expanded children's health care programs with a tobacco tax increase. Even though they're in the minority, the GOP, backed by President Bush, has used the filibuster to block Democratic priorities over and over this fall.

"Who's winning?" Reid asked a group of reporters. "Big Oil, Big Tobacco. ... Al Qaeda has regrouped and is able to fight a civil war in Iraq. ... The American people are losing."

Reid left the microphones to head to a signing ceremony for legislation which increases gas mileage rules for the first time in 30 years — something Democrats will indeed tout as a "W" in their won-loss column.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/1207/Reid_rejects_notion_that_GOP_is_winning_Hill_battl es.html

[Kathianne]

I saw this earlier at my kitchen table:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-071218congress-story,1,2214832.story


In Congress, not just gridlock, but 'paralysis'

By Gabrielle Russon

Washington Bureau

3:02 AM CST, December 18, 2007


WASHINGTON—Democratic congressional leaders rolled into town last January promising "a new direction," confident their 2006 election victory would give them a strong hand to rewrite Republican policies on everything from energy to health to the Iraq war.

But Congress is stumbling toward year's end well short of its goals and mired in recriminations, its problems ranging from a fragile majority to a unified, combative Republican minority to a defiant President Bush newly eager to exercise his veto power.

The Democrats' frustration was captured Monday by their announcement that they were caving in to a Bush veto threat and bowing to his demands to keep federal spending essentially flat. This came days after Bush vetoed a children's health insurance bill—for a second time—and Republicans blocked a Democratic energy plan.

Democrats, accusing the Republicans of obstructionism, are urging voters to send more Democrats to Washington next year. "It is disingenuous for Republicans to complain about a lack of progress, and then make a concerted effort to block change," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told the Senate last week.

Republicans, in turn, ridicule the Democrats as inept. "As people are going to be analyzing this Congress, I think one of the questions that has to be asked is, `Why didn't anything happen?' " said Rep. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), the No. 2 House Republican. "How did the House vote over a thousand times and wind up with virtually no legislation on the president's desk?"

Either way, few disagree that Congress is struggling to an unusual degree.

"It's paralysis on a historic level, paralysis we haven't seen since the years before the Civil War," said David King, a professor at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government.

Shortly after taking power, Democrats were able to push through a handful of bills that raised the minimum wage, increased aid to students and veterans, and reformed ethics rules. Since then, it's been a hard slog.

The best example may be the fight over the budget. Bush has insisted on keeping the 2008 domestic budget to roughly $500 billion; Democrats want to add $27 billion. Democrats, recognizing they could not overcome Bush's threatened veto, capitulated Monday; the House approved a measure funding 14 Cabinet agencies on a 253-154 vote.
...

[red states rule]

I saw this earlier at my kitchen table:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-071218congress-story,1,2214832.story

Good find Kathianne. This would make how many "new directions" for the Dems since they took power 11 months ago?

[actsnoblemartin]

harry "im a loser" reid .

[avatar4321]

I have to completely disagree here. The People are winning. If the people supported what the Democrats were trying to do, it wouldnt matter how much the Republicans tried to block it, they would fold to the people when the people started complaining about it.

There are only three reasons the people's will could be defeated in the Senate:

1)The people aren't really for it.
2)The Majority leader in the Senate is completely incompetent and can't even get measures supported by the people passed.
3)Both.

If Harry Reid's claim that the people are losing, we must conclude that the reason they are losing is because the Senate Leadership is incompetent. He can't even attack Republicans without undermining himself.

[red states rule]

I have to completely disagree here. The People are winning. If the people supported what the Democrats were trying to do, it wouldnt matter how much the Republicans tried to block it, they would fold to the people when the people started complaining about it.

There are only three reasons the people's will could be defeated in the Senate:

1)The people aren't really for it.
2)The Majority leader in the Senate is completely incompetent and can't even get measures supported by the people passed.
3)Both.

If Harry Reid's claim that the people are losing, we must conclude that the reason they are losing is because the Senate Leadership is incompetent. He can't even attack Republicans without undermining himself.

It is very simple - Dems are overplaying their hand and misread the election results

A majority of voters do NOT support surrende rin Iraq, endless stupid investagations, higher taxes, bigger government, constant political attacks, and increased pork and waste of our tax dollars

and Dems have to wonder why their approval numbers are tanking

[PostmodernProphet]

It is disingenuous for Republicans to complain about a lack of progress, and then make a concerted effort to block change

typical liberal error.....equating "change" with "progress".......decay is change too......

[red states rule]

typical liberal error.....equating "change" with "progress".......decay is change too......

when Dems did it they said it was all about protecting the rights of the minority party

[Psychoblues]

And they were correct in that context.



when Dems did it they said it was all about protecting the rights of the minority party

What have you in this context?

[red states rule]

And they were correct in that context.




What have you in this context?

When Dems are in the minority, Republicans have to roll over and let Dems have their way

When Republicans are in the minority they need to roll over and let Dems have their way

To Dems that is bipartisanship

[Hagbard Celine]

I have to completely disagree here. The People are winning. If the people supported what the Democrats were trying to do, it wouldnt matter how much the Republicans tried to block it, they would fold to the people when the people started complaining about it.

There are only three reasons the people's will could be defeated in the Senate:

1)The people aren't really for it.
2)The Majority leader in the Senate is completely incompetent and can't even get measures supported by the people passed.
3)Both.

If Harry Reid's claim that the people are losing, we must conclude that the reason they are losing is because the Senate Leadership is incompetent. He can't even attack Republicans without undermining himself.

The people DO support what the Dems ran on. The reason Dem numbers are consistently low is because they haven't done ENOUGH to end the war in Iraq. 65 percent of Americans completely disagree with the war and want out. That's why the executive branch has even lower numbers than Congress does.

[Hagbard Celine]

When Dems are in the minority, Republicans have to roll over and let Dems have their way

When Republicans are in the minority they need to roll over and let Dems have their way

To Dems that is bipartisanship

That's pure BS. The reason the country is in the crapper is because for eight years Dems have bent over backwards to appease Republicans. The dems are so cowardly and weak that they are still doing the same thing even with a majority in Congress. So the warped, Neo-pub' agenda is still running with free-reign.
I think it's hilarious that you're so outraged at the "libs." Because if they actually did have a backbone and did stand up to the Republicans, they'd be squashing the agenda YOU support in the first place. You're like the archetypical snake eating its own tail :laugh:

[red states rule]

That's pure BS. The reason the country is in the crapper is because for eight years Dems have bent over backwards to appease Republicans. The dems are so cowardly and weak that they are still doing the same thing even with a majority in Congress. So the warped, Neo-pub' agenda is still running with free-reign.
I think it's hilarious that you're so outraged at the "libs." Because if they actually did have a backbone and did stand up to the Republicans, they'd be squashing the agenda YOU support in the first place. You're like the archetypical snake eating its own tail :laugh:

I know over at CNN, they think Dems are not being liberal enough. The truth is, their approval numbers are tanking because they are being to liberal

Voters do not want higher taxes, surrender in Iraq, or govenermemnt run health care

CNN tries to downplay or even ignore good news that goes against how they want to report the news in favior of Dems