This Story is Archived
Bush faces political nightmare if Democrats win »
Posted by: jeremytoday 1 year, 10 months agoIf Democrats win control of the U.S. Congress in the November 7 election, it would turn the Capitol upside down and create a political nightmare for the already embattled President George W. Bush.
Read Full Story at news.yahoo.com »
This Story is Archived and Commenting is Closed
Comments: 255
-
-
StefanZweig
Oct. 23, 2006, 11:08 a.m.Yes, indeed!
Vote Democratic, so that we can return America to America again.
We must have justice for George W. Bush in starting a REAL investigation of his incompetence and corruption and involvement with 9/11, prosecuting the case for his impeachment and turning him over to the Hague Court.
-
-
Virginia
Oct. 22, 2006, 1:59 p.m.These are the high hopes of the Democrates according to the article: "...they plan to push their own agenda, "A New Direction for America," which includes raising the federal minimum wage for the first time in a decade, ending some tax breaks to oil companies and making college more affordable by reducing federal student loan interest rates. Democrats also promise to implement recommendations from the 9/11 Commission to bolster security, ease the threat of global warming and, in response to influence-peddling scandals on Capitol Hill, clean up the way Congress does business."
Of course, the experts think there will be another stand off between the parties. However, if the Democrates have the control, they set the agenda. Also, they can slow down the president's activist agenda to rob us of our Constitutional rights and slow down the whole Bush plan on many more ways to spend our blood and treasure.
-
Virginia
Oct. 22, 2006, 2:05 p.m.Let's get out and vote for Democratic candidates so that our government can be held accountable. Time for a change in direction.
-
GuyFawkes
Oct. 22, 2006, 5:56 p.m.Lumpy (luvmyprez),
Thank you for the unbiased (lack of) evidence about why we shouldn't vote democrat. Who would have thought that a Republican would tell people not to vote democrat? Your ability to think on your own is simply amazing. Please keep on supplying the objecive cut and pastes that you find. They are very (not) informative.
-
IanFraigun
Oct. 23, 2006, 12:27 a.m.And you really expect unbiased comments from the 3rd in command republican in the house.
Those comments are pure political BS for no other purpose than to get those who cannot or will not think for themsevles to blindly follow their recommendations when voting.
Based on your reaction we can see how independent of a thinker you happen to be on this issue. You taxes will only go up if you are in the $200,000 per year plus group that will pay a pittence more when the current breaks expire in 4 years. Geeze saying sticking to the law as passed is considered damaging to the economy. If it is so why did the republicans pass tax breaks with those sunset provisions in the first place except to fool people that they were getting permanent reductions.
-
StefanZweig
Oct. 23, 2006, 11:13 a.m.-- so you're anti-gay, as well as supporting the CorporatePimp In Chief!
-
mcgrievysr
Oct. 23, 2006, 11:37 a.m.luvmypreznomatterwhat--
"GayFawkes?"---your bigotry is showing. Shame on you.
-
-
-
moxxxxxxxxxx
Oct. 22, 2006, 10:59 p.m.Roy Blunt's son, M. Blunt is the governor of Missouri, Limbaugh is from Missouri, Ashcroft is from Missouri.
M. Blunt is considered the worst Governor in history- his idea of compassionate conservatism amounts to taking from the poorest citizens in Missouri and giving take breaks and Federal funds to corporations. He will take credit for reducing the number of people on welfare, but the reduction only amounts to his changing the criteria for eligibility. Many of Missouri's poor , mainly women, children and the disabled, are now homeless without adequate healthcare.
Shelters, food pantrys and free clinics are at capacity. But Blunt is just following the Republican doctrine let the community care for the needy, not the government.
Any advise that comes from Repulicans from Missouri should be heeded with caution. NEPOTISM runs rampant!
-
Aotearoa
Oct. 23, 2006, 1:07 a.m.Luv,
""House Republican Whip Roy Blunt of Missouri said if Democrats won control, "taxes go up, the economy falters and we have a party in charge that doesn't understand what the war is all about."
Before dumbya took office the country was in fine shape, jobs and economy was good , budget surplus , people weren't spied on, Constitution wasn't trempled on, America was looked up to by the world and kidnapping, trafficing, detaining, torturing and prosecuting with out due process was unheard of...
...."and we have a party in charge that doesn't understand what the war is all about."
Your right about one thing ,dumbya and rummie don't know hoot about what war is all about. Where is Osama and who is going to stop the civil war your heroes started in Iraq??
Leve leva e malanga kae tau
-
ADAGUY
Oct. 23, 2006, 7:59 a.m.I live in Missouri, Roy Blunt was at one time the Gov., and I can tell you, he wants everyone to have equal rights, as long as he agrees with those rights. This guy is next to a Marxist when it comes to politics. Believe me, He's bad medicine.
ADAGUY
-
dr-don-from-denver
Oct. 23, 2006, 10:26 a.m.Humpmy--Do you mean stop giving the richest taxpayers huge sums of our tax money back, and start working toward living within our means with a budget surplus like we had under Clinton? That would be terrible!!
"a party in charge that doesn't understand what the war is all about" Oh my, like a different strategy to get our people the hell out? NO, NO, NO! Stay the course, right over the cliff, with the rest of the (34%)lemmings!!
-
WngC618
Oct. 23, 2006, 12:02 p.m.HA this good man says so( of course a blunt lie) and our good luv believes him!..
What a surprise ;)
-
ind06
Oct. 22, 2006, 5:58 p.m.Bush's tax strategies don't come up for review until 2010, so this congress, democrat or republican, will have little to say about taxes, certainly not "rolling back" any previous cuts/adjustments President Bush has made.
-
deathray
Oct. 22, 2006, 6:19 p.m.The economy may be slowing anyway.
I think it's going to be a difficult reality for the Administration...they may have to stop being the ideologues they have become.
That would just be a terrible thing.
-
-
deathray
Oct. 22, 2006, 7:42 p.m.luv - and yet your attributions are spurious...
show me the work of a serious economist, who is not a prtisan, and i'll show you a person who believes that the health of the econbomy is relatively fragile.
-
deathray
Oct. 22, 2006, 8:09 p.m.Oh and luv -
Senator Mike Crapo is an attorney, not an economist, and is an apologist in the Senate for the Republican Party, as he is the Majority Deputy Whip.
Yeaj, that's unbiased....
-
dr-don-from-denver
Oct. 23, 2006, 10:42 a.m.Wow! Does Rove call you directly with your lies? I'll say it's CRAPO!
The market is doing well, thanks to the extra disposable income (tax rebates) of the rich. The average American family is struggling to put food on the table and gas in the tank. This "great" economy is based on a huge amount of federal debt which will be passed along to our children and grandchildren, along with worsened golbal warming, polluted air and water, increased risk from terrorism, etc. Some legacy your lover is leaving!!
-
mcgrievysr
Oct. 23, 2006, 11:39 a.m.luvmyprez---don't try to discuss economics with deathray. You know better, and if you don't, then you're a fluff chick.
-
-
Harbeas
Oct. 22, 2006, 6:38 p.m.Does it really matter who is in office? They all have their own agenda and don't really care what we think.
-
jordan11
Oct. 23, 2006, 12:54 a.m.Does it really matter who is in office?>>>>
Conservatives have contolled the Senate for 12 years. What do you think?
-
dr-don-from-denver
Oct. 23, 2006, 10:51 a.m.Do you want the agenda to be killing 2800 of our service people and 620,000 civilians while polluting the earth to make Halliburton and other companies rich, cutting student aid, spending us into bankruptcy, stopping effective stem cell research to cure diseases, and the destruction of 217 years of Constitutional protections for all.
or
An agenda of working toward a better life for ALL Americans, the use of our fighting forces ONLY when our country or the peace of the world, corporate responsibility for their actions, fiscal responsibility, medical research to benefit our people, available education for all, and a return to the rule of law?
Sounds like a no brainer to me!
-
-
-
-
ind06
Oct. 22, 2006, 7:09 p.m.Hi greenmac! Check out How To Rule the World" and "Correlation Between Social Drinking" threads then
Vote ind06 in '08! O.r.!
For every American, free beer and easy wealth!
Hi peg!
Oh, I forgot, you're Canadian...
Vote ind06 in '08 for Canadian PM! O.r.!
Free Molsons and easy wealth!
-
Inquisitor
Oct. 22, 2006, 7:32 p.m.I would hope that a Democratic majority would repeal the Military Commissions Act of 2006. They would also need to force a judicial review of the legality and applicability of the over 850 Presidential Signing Statements issued by Bush. I would also hope that a Democratic majority could force the DoD and the Joint Chiefs to define an actual mission for Iraq, the progress toward which could then be measured. Finally, we need to improve our intelligence and cooperation with the worldwide community on identifying and destroying terrorist organizations no matter where they are located. This also would require a buildup of our quick-reaction and counter-insurgency forces.
-
-
LuvMerlyn4Ever
Oct. 22, 2006, 8:07 p.m.According to Bush logic if we state our mission that would give the enemy a clue. Whats wrong with you? It must be kept a strict secret. Don't you know anything LOL.
-
-
-
ind06
Oct. 23, 2006, 1:08 a.m.Okay, Moosehead?
Hey free beer is free beer!
Geez, politics is harder than I thought!
-
-
Tango57
Oct. 22, 2006, 8:09 p.m.Ah,,,more scare tactics!! It's the only format the Republicans can grasp...shame on them! Thank-God the rest of us know the difference.
-
Tcaros
Oct. 22, 2006, 8:15 p.m.I hope the Democrats prevail in the upcoming elections. If they do we will once again have "debate in public" square. We will have accountability for violations of the rule of law and the Constitution. We will no longer be scared into sacrificing our rights, ideas, and free speech for this administration endless war. And yes, the terrorist will still be scared of us because we will have the moral high ground as well.
-
Amok77
Oct. 22, 2006, 8:33 p.m.No matter who's in power, its nice to clean house now and then. They get pretty corrupt if you leave them in very long.
Time for a change, I don't think the demos can screw it up any worse than the repubs have...too bad we don't have a really good 3rd party.
-
eddie107
Oct. 22, 2006, 8:33 p.m.I would be amazed if the democrats dont sweep, but that is life. Bush had beter get his ducks in a row, because the democrats are most ceratinly coming. If there is any way he can find to pullout without loosing thousands of lives, he need to start implimenting it now. When the democrats come in, the troops will be coming out, and the real massacre will begin. A dollar says that there will be no cameras over there then. I feel very sorry for the American lives that have had to be lost at the hands of barbarians. But it is those barbarians that we gave the power to with our lust for massive trucks and suvs.
It is the little girl who had hope for the future that I will really feel sorry for, because without us, she will be sold as a slave, or forced to be married, same thing, at the tender age of 13 to some old cleric who will beat her if she doesnt do what he wants. It is the clerics that dont want us there, because it screws up thier heaven right here on earth.
-
eddie107
Oct. 22, 2006, 8:35 p.m.We do, but everyone has been brainwashed into believing that if you dont vote for one of the two sides, you are messing up thier election, and will be very mad at you.
-
blinkers
Oct. 22, 2006, 9:24 p.m.Whatever the outcome of these upcoming elections, President George W. Bush faces a treacherously difficult final two years to his disastrous presidency.
His ace buddy across the Atlantic, Tony Blair will be gone inside twelve months, and his successor PM is unlikely to keep British forces (America's only real allies) in the deteriorating situation in Iraq.
Meanwhile, I note that former Secretary or State James A. Baker III has declared that he will not make public the recommendations of his Iraq Study Group until after the mid-term election. I wonder why?
With the Democrats in control of either the House or the Senate, come November 8th, a sober and thoughtful debate could at least begin, not just on an Iraqi solution, but on a comprehensive process of national healing. Is this too much to hope for?
A vote for the Democrats would be a vote for such a hope, would it not?
-
Inquisitor
Oct. 23, 2006, 12:51 a.m."come November 8th, a sober and thoughtful debate could at least begin" . . . Even though the election is Nov 7, the new congress is not sworn in until the following January. How much damage can Bush and his Republican controlled lame-duck Congress do in those 2 months before the "sober and thoughtful debate" can begin?
-
-
Eagle_Eye
Oct. 22, 2006, 9:38 p.m."turn the Capitol upside down .... embattled President George W. Bush."
ROFLMAO, I would certainly hope so!! They can then get serious about taking care of America!! Also would put us ahead 2 years of the 10 years we have left to make a difference regarding Global Warming.
Robert Kennedy Jr has said that the Bush Administration is silently putting into place environmental rules and changes for his corporate buddies. I believe this to be true since this administration is so silent regarding environmental matters.
-
dr-don-from-denver
Oct. 23, 2006, 10:54 a.m.Actually, destructive would be more appropriate than "silent".
-
-
marufio
Oct. 22, 2006, 10:46 p.m.Looks like the Dems will take control of the House and Sentate which means Pres Bush will not have his way with everything including Iraq where he wants to stay the course. The Dems are going to throw his course off course.
The first 55 comments are shown. Show all 255 comments »
