And Now for Something Completely Different

Congressional Democrats Have Failed America

Posted Friday, September 24, 2010, at 12:28 AM

I am not your typical Democrat. I do not toe the party line. I have voted for non-Democrats in the past, in fact this November I will vote against a Democrat again. I call Democrats out when I feel that my party is letting me or Americans down (despite what is preached at me on a routine basis).

They have decided to pass on the tax cut issue until after the election. This is the one key issue that had they extended tax cuts to 98% of Americans could have possibly kept them in power in Washington. They are afraid, however. What are they afraid of? They are afraid that if they extend tax cuts for most Americans (which a vast majority of Americans favor) and not for the richest 2% Americans that they may lose in their district. In the end, if the Democrats lose Congress this fall they have no one to blame but themselves.

They are cowards. They can point their fingers at Republicans as much as they want (and not Republicans are not blameless in this cowardly act which I will get to later) but in the end the only people they can rightly point their fingers at is themselves.

They should be out pointing out that despite the doom and gloomers prediction that by this time the country would be bankrupt the deficit has actually shrunk. Instead they are letting Republicans and the "lame stream media" push the false story that the deficit continues to grow.

The Congressional Democrats had a golden opportunity to put Congressional Republicans in a corner. Had they forced a vote on tax cuts for those making @250,000 and less, Republicans would have likely filibustered because the continuation of tax cuts would not have been offered to those making over $250,000. That would have sent a huge message to voters right before an election that Democrats were on their side while Republicans were on the side of the rich.

The Democrats however cowered under their own pressure on themselves. Sure, Republicans have bullied Democrats for two years. Yes, Republicans have cried that they couldn't get amendments into bills that were mostly filled with their amendments. True, Republicans filibustered bills and even voted against bills that were mostly over issues that they agreed with. Fact, the Republicans have sat on the sidelines for two years and have done absolutely nothing. Yet they are about to be credited for doing nothing by winning the Congress back. Unfortunately most of what they have "pledged" to do once they take over is return us to the disastrous policies that led us into the fix we are in.

Their supporters applaud this of course and turn a blind eye. Their pledge involves repealing the Health Care Reform and replacing it with ... exactly the same thing. True, the Republicans brought this "pledge" today be attempting to look like middle class Americans but looking like nothing more than stuffy white guys in fully buttoned shirts (can we please drop this facade ... yes both sides do this ... that trying to act poorer than you are by simply dressing differently fools no one?).

It is Democratically controlled Congress that has failed us as Americans. Yes it is almost a certainty that if Republicans do take back one or both houses, that things will only get worse as they try, for a third time, to prove that trickle down economics work. They had two years to get things done and got nearly nothing done. Yes, they passed a stimulus that helped stopped the recession and slowed the unemployment rate, but it was not enough. Yes, they passed a health care reform that will allow millions of Americans to finally get the needed insurance so that taxpayers will not have to foot the bill when they wait so long with a sickness that they have to go to the ER. It was not nearly enough, though.

Why? Because of cowardly Democrats, who instead of voting the way that their base favored and in many cases a majority of their constituents favored, voted the way that the insurance companies who were financing their re-election campaigns, or in some cases the highest bidder.

We need to vote out every single Congressperson, Republican and Democratic, and just start over with those that will actually represent us.

The system has failed, and my party, the Democratic Party, is the largest component of that failure.

It is time to hit the restart button.

Comments

View 30 comments

Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.

Once again Jon Stewart puts it better than any "real" news person can. Same crap, same people, same failed policies.

The Daily Show With Jon StewartMon - Thurs 11p / 10c

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Fri, Sep 24, 2010, at 7:47 AM
Okay so embedding the video failed miserably. Here's the link:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-september-23-2010/postcards-from-the-pledg...

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Fri, Sep 24, 2010, at 7:48 AM
Mike,

I'll agree that the Democrats have been cowardly but how do you blame this on Republicans? For most of two years Democrats were the first party in history, that I'm aware of anyway, who had SOOOO much power they could literally do anything they wanted. They couldn't be stopped except by stopping themselves, which is what they did.

You say they did nothing but then list several bills they passed. You and other Liberals don't seem to be willing to consider that maybe some of the things they did are what is making them less popular rather than the evil Republicans "lying" or "bullying".

-- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Fri, Sep 24, 2010, at 8:37 AM
@MH hopefully you caught this the other day..

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4346676/unedited-jon-stewart-interview

-- Posted by Damu on Fri, Sep 24, 2010, at 9:38 AM
That health care bill was awsome. My wifes Premiums on health care are going to go up next year because insurance comp are forced to cover parents kids all the way up to 26 years of age.

I thought the health care bill was suppose to keep premims down? Maybe not a direct tax on middle class but sure does feel like a tax.

-- Posted by right_all_the_time on Fri, Sep 24, 2010, at 10:45 AM
@right That is the normal amount they would increase. You won't see anything from the new health care bill till 2014.

-- Posted by Damu on Fri, Sep 24, 2010, at 11:46 AM
"For most of two years Democrats were the first party in history, that I'm aware of anyway, who had SOOOO much power they could literally do anything they wanted."

How do you figure they had SOOOO much power? They had a 60 vote majority for maybe 6 months but when the conservative wing of the party votes with the minority party that pretty much takes away from your theory of having SOOOO much power.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Fri, Sep 24, 2010, at 4:22 PM
Damu you are correct most of the health care does take affect in 2014 but not the portion where parents can add there children up to the age of 26.

See link.

http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/insurance/employers-reluctant-to-add-older-dep...

-- Posted by right_all_the_time on Fri, Sep 24, 2010, at 4:27 PM
"You and other Liberals don't seem to be willing to consider that maybe some of the things they did are what is making them less popular rather than the evil Republicans "lying" or "bullying"

Once again what are you talking about SW. It's what they didn't do that has driven their base to the point that they are considering staying home in November. Liberals wanted the public option, they didn't get it. Liberals wanted a comprehensive stimulus that would have helped everyone, they didn't get anything near that. Liberals wanted AT MOST an extension on the tax cuts for those making less than $250,000, they may get it but it will be after the election. Let's face it the base of the Republican Party is not going to cross the lines to vote for Democrats. Independents switch parties on a whim. The thing that can save the Democratic Party this election year is their base, and right now their base is extremely unhappy with the inaction of the Democratic Party. Independent voters rarely decide midterm elections, the bases do.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Fri, Sep 24, 2010, at 4:27 PM
Mike,

"but when the conservative wing of the party votes with the minority party"

Thank you for helping me prove my point. It is not the Republicans you should be mad at, you knew they would oppose Liberal agendas, if you want to be mad at someone blame Democrats. This doesn't take away from my theory at all, it proves it, you just apparently can't see that.

Six months is 180 days, just think of what they could have accomplished in that time if they could agree.

" Independents switch parties on a whim" Here is more Liberal elitism. Independents and others who don't agree with Liberals are too stupid to know what they think huh? This has always been a complaint I have with Liberals, they say they are open minded but they really only mean they are open if one happens to agree with them. I don't believe independents switch on a whim, I think they switch based on what they believe. Apparently I have more faith in humankind than you do.

I disagree with your contention on who will decide this election. I think there has been too much going on that in this election more independents will be active. Maybe Liberals should work to remove non-Liberal Democrats so next time they can do whatever they want.

To answer your question, however: I am trying to get across the idea that people think for themselves. I believe you disagree because I see you often saying how stupid or brainwashed (not in exact words) people who don't agree with you are.

-- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Fri, Sep 24, 2010, at 4:54 PM
Edmund,

Ha! that was funny, didn't you get banned?

-- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Fri, Sep 24, 2010, at 4:55 PM
@Right Fair enough, how does it compare with the increase from last year? Mine would have gone up either way by my estimations..

Everyone Else... Enjoy Mr. Chaplin.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcvjoWOwnn4

-- Posted by Damu on Fri, Sep 24, 2010, at 4:57 PM
SW, once again proving that you only pick and choose what you want to read so you can attack me. 3/4 of my blog was about my displeasure with the Democratic Party in Washington yet you only focus on the portions where I (rightfully I believe) go after Republicans for their grandstanding and obstructionism.

"I see you often saying how stupid or brainwashed (not in exact words) people who don't agree with you are."

As soon as you through in your correction of not in exact words you proved that you were making a totally made up stance that you have attached to me but which you cannot prove. Can you point to any post or any blog where I have ever even made a suggestion that those you don't agree with me are stupid or brainwashed? No, you can't, yet that doesn't stop you from making a totally baseless and character assassination statement that I had, just not in those exact words.

Can you point to the exact words. SW?

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Fri, Sep 24, 2010, at 9:08 PM
" Independents switch parties on a whim" Here is more Liberal elitism. Independents and others who don't agree with Liberals are too stupid to know what they think huh? "

Once again assigning words to me that I did not utter? SW, can you make a statement without absolutely lying? You attack me on almost a daily basis for assigning words to posters that they haven't made yet you do it constantly?

Independents do switch parties on a whim. If you actually think about it and look at the presidential election, every president that has been elected has not been elected because of their base but because of which way the independents swing that election. The mid-terms, which I stated early and you conveniently glanced over, are decided by the bases. Independents largely stay at home.

"Here is more Liberal elitism." Fox News couldn't have said that better, if they hadn't already said it ad nauseum during the last election. But of course you don't watch Fox News so you just came up with that on your own. Never mind that most rich people vote Republicans, Liberals are the elitist. Why? Because we call it as we see it. You are uncomfortable with that so as always you label, label, label.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Fri, Sep 24, 2010, at 9:13 PM
I always enjoy Fox's correspondence dumbing themselves down so that they can fit in with non elitist Americans. Many of them are Ivy league educated, would be hard to think that watching there programs though.

-- Posted by Damu on Fri, Sep 24, 2010, at 9:29 PM
You guys watch more tv than I do so I can't comment on networks. What I do know a lot about is business and I have been telling you guys for over a year that the current government is making the economy worse not better. I have been called a lot of names for telling that fact. I think that that fact is now accepted as the truth. My hope is that it is not to late but I think it is.

Most business' have now cut back for "good". The recovery hasn't come and companies have downsized and have lowered growth forecasts for the next few years. That means hiring will only come when demand requires it. That means that unemployment will stay low for a long time. We have now made this a jobless recovery which means that a boom is in the future, only 2-3 years out if we look at history.

The cause for this delayed recovery? The government. Had the current administration made the economy the number 1 priority during the "great recession" we could have corrected this. Instead, the current administration focused on many other issues including a terrible "stimulus package".

We are now in a mess where "radical" Republicans will win and the Republicans in the House will fight about what to do next. The answer isn't to buy guns and gold coins and build a bunker but those guys will win some seats (Thanks Obama and Pelosi and Reid). So basically, as a country, we are in for more of the same. We need to get through this cycle so our Dads can basically reclaim Washington. The last 2 years and the next 2 years are going to show that fads are just fads and conservative principals always prevail. What I mean by conservative principals is that people work hard and pay for things and live within their means.

The fads being the Hope and Change and Yes We Can and Tea Party and Tea Party Express.

Wallis

-- Posted by wallismarsh on Sat, Sep 25, 2010, at 5:50 AM
wallis you can deny it all you want to but the stimulus worked. The only people who claim that it didn't are all on the right. The only faults that are given to the stimulus is that it didn't do enough.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Sat, Sep 25, 2010, at 9:26 AM
"I have been called a lot of names for telling that fact. I think that that fact is now accepted as the truth."

You must be living in an alternate reality wallis. You have never been called names for telling what you believe to be fact about the economy. You have been called out for not apologizing when you were clearly wrong. But let's forget that for a moment. It's interesting the the group that pinpoints the beginnings and ends to recessions just recently stated that the "Great Recession" (we sorely need new people to come up with names for things it's so bland now) ended in 2009 yet you are now suggesting that they are wrong. So actually that "fact" you believe to be accepted as truth is not.

Again I have to question what you have been paying attention to considering that the administration has never stopped their focus on the economy. They have worked on other things but they have continued trying to focus on the economy. Since you are into pointing fingers why don't you point them at Congress.

"We are now in a mess where "radical" Republicans will win and the Republicans in the House will fight about what to do next. The answer isn't to buy guns and gold coins and build a bunker but those guys will win some seats (Thanks Obama and Pelosi and Reid)."

Can you explain why you are blaming Obama, Pelosi and Reid with this comment? They seem to have no connection what-so-ever.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Sat, Sep 25, 2010, at 1:38 PM
"I think there has been too much going on that in this election more independents will be active."

I'll assume you are including the people that make up the TEA Party as independents, though if you could (and thankfully for the most part you can't) if you looked at the voter registration of people in the TEA Party a vast majority will be listed as Republicans.

History shows, SW, that independents largely stay home during mid-terms. This election will largely be decided by who can get most of their base out. Republicans should, they typically do during mid-terms. Democrats had a chance to energize their voice by at least forcing a vote on the Bush tax cuts, but they cowered, as usual.

The House is still saying that they plan on voting on the tax cuts this coming week, but they will likely cave as well.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Sat, Sep 25, 2010, at 10:37 PM
Mike,

It's not just the people on the right who believe the stimulus didn't work. It's also the millions of people who lost their job since it was passed. The Democrats can try to make them believe things would have been worse without it but the truth is that they have seen things get worse since it was passed and telling them how successful insults their intelligence and just makes them even more upset. That is why Democrats will lose. They promised policies to improve our situation, they passed their policies and things actually got worse yet, they are told those policies were successful but they know better.

-- Posted by McCook1 on Sun, Sep 26, 2010, at 6:32 PM
Yes and yet Republicans going home to their districts continue to tout this stimulus that "didn't" work. The very stimulus that they voted against.

It's a wonderful world, where you can pronounce that something hasn't worked, despite all the contrary evidence. Not only that, but the people who actually push back and show that the stimulus did work (for what it was allowed to do) are somehow insulting peoples intelligence.

Things got worse, McCook? Do you have proof of this? Have things vastly improved? Of course not, but when you have a group of obstructionists (Republicans) and cowards (Democrats) you will only get a portion of what was actually promised.

By the way the recession is over.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Mon, Sep 27, 2010, at 12:44 AM
Well this certainly doesn't fit the narrative that we are constantly told that Americans don't want any kind of income parity, so of course it will either be ignored or completely "discredited". What's more surprising is that the levels are high across all levels.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/09/poll-wealth-distribution-similar-sweden/

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Mon, Sep 27, 2010, at 1:46 AM
Mike,

I think you need to take some time to think about why other people may disagree with you rather than blindly lashing out. You make an awful lot of comments based on your assumptions and we all know what you make yourself look like when you make too many ASSumptions.

"Liberals are the elitist. Why?"

The reason I beleive Liberals are elitist is because they seem to think they can think better than everyone else and that they know what people should want better that the person himself does. You and the other Liberals on this blog are good examples of this. You, like other Liberals, try to turn the charge of elitism into solely an economic one. I leave economics out entirely, I am referring to an intellectual elitism. I had hoped that by reading my post I tried to explain why I thought Liberals are elitists. But by all means, continue your tired narrative of the "evil, rich Republicans"

-- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Mon, Sep 27, 2010, at 11:52 AM
"The reason I beleive Liberals are elitist is because they seem to think they can think better than everyone else and that they know what people should want better that the person himself does."

I understand you believe this, I understood that the first time you posted it, but what I want to know is where is the proof of this?

You go with intellectual elitism that's fine. I also believe that Republicans are intellectual elitists as well. You are the perfect example. You treat me and GI and other liberals on this site like idiots because we don't cowtow to what you want us to believe.

It is funny though, that your first paragraph is designed to make me look stupid (intellectual elitism, anyone?) regarding assumptions, then your very first sentence of your last paragraph is nothing more than an assumption on your part. But because you see yourself as smarter than me, apparently you didn't think I would catch onto that.

Next time before judging me on what you believe to be my assumptions don't follow it up with an assumption of your own.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Mon, Sep 27, 2010, at 12:27 PM
Guillermo,

You misunderstand my point, whether willfully or not, I am unsure.

Do you not see the difference between being elite, as in the best in your field vs. being elitist, as in thinking you are better than others?

I'm not surprised you don't follow what I'm saying and jump to the wrong conclusion, since I believe you are elitist yourself.

Are you or Mike political leaders, who will lead us with your excellence or are you just people who think you are better than conservatives?

Lets take your analogy and turn it into the message I was sending: Woud you prefer to have a quarterback who thinks he knows everything so refuses to listen to his coaches regardless of his success or not than a quarterback who understands he is part of a team and listens to the advice of his teammates and coaches?

I think you are on to the fundamental difference, in my opinion, between myself and Liberals, I think people should think for themselves, Liberals think themselves should think for people. (I know its improper grammar, I just liked the symmetry)

-- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Mon, Sep 27, 2010, at 4:05 PM
"I think you are on to the fundamental difference, in my opinion, between myself and Liberals, I think people should think for themselves, Liberals think themselves should think for people. (I know its improper grammar, I just liked the symmetry)"

So in other words you are saying that you are better than Liberals because of the way you think.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Mon, Sep 27, 2010, at 10:11 PM
Guillermo:

"how ever you choose to characterize the ways in which you misrepresent yourself)."

I like to misrepresent my self as the greatest marble player who ever lived.

"First, to run for elected office implies elitism"

I think I see some of the problem, I was speaking of people with a Liberal mindset, not politicians. I take for granted that politicians shouldn't really be listened to.

Mike:

"So in other words you are saying that you are better than Liberals because of the way you think"

You're the one who said I'm better than Liberals, thanks! But seriously, I said that was a difference between them and me. As I've said many times here, I think I'm better than everyone, but that is my opinion, it may not represent reality. Remember our discussion of opinion vs. truth vs. fact? I just don't think that people should have to agree with me.

-- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Mon, Oct 4, 2010, at 2:05 PM
"I just don't think that people should have to agree with me."

Well you are in luck because not many do. I know that was supposed to be meant as a snarky derivative comment in my direction but it just fell flat.

Naturally, as always you missed the point. The point being you keep going on rants about how you believe that Liberals think they are smarter than everyone then in almost the same breath you make a point at how you believe you are smarter than all liberals and then continue that train of thought with the great line, "As I've said many times here, I think I'm better than everyone".

I know this is lost on you because it always has been, but once again you are deriding those who think differently than you because of a perceived issue that YOU have and then you exhibit that very same issue that you just railed against.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Mon, Oct 4, 2010, at 2:43 PM
Mike,

You just don't get me, I understand that, I accept that. At least I admit I have faults and can be wrong, I admit I am hypocritical, I'm here for laughs. These facts aren't "lost" on me, they describe me.

For the record and seriously now, I don't have any problem with anyone being smarter than anyone else, it's the way the world works. The problem I have is when people try to tell people how to think or that they are stupid for thinking something different. If, for example, I am smarter than you it is still not appropriate for me to try to tell you how to think. I can disagree with you and put up opposing positions but if you choose to disagree with me I am fine with that. It doesn't bother me if people don't agree with me as you seem to imply it should with your "snarky derivative comment", although what it derives from I don't know.

I really only have two issues that matter to me here both of which are unpopular and earn me criticism.

-- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Tue, Oct 5, 2010, at 1:35 PM
You do realize everything you just said in your last post completely contradicts everything you have ever said on this blog since you joined. You say you don't care if someone is smarter than you yet you spent an entire post earlier talking about how much smarter you were than everyone. You say that you admit that you have faults and can be wrong yet this is the first time you have ever admitted either, though you aren't really admitted them just saying that you do admit to it.

You have never, until this post, admitted that you were hypocritical. In fact, in the past you have argued extremely hard against the fact that you can be hypocritical.

You say it doesn't bother you that people don't agree with you yet your posts in the past have shown quite the opposite so much to the extent that you question posters intelligences if they do disagree with you.

No, SW, I fully get you. I have always understood you. You make an argument, when a poster successfully shows that the argument doesn't work you change your argument ever so slightly so that you can claim that your new argument was your original argument. When another posters is successful again in breaking down your argument you will repeat the cycle. When that all breaks down you will insult and question the intelligence of the poster. You will also erroneously credit posters with comments they have not made so that you can then tear down the false argument. Point in case:

I said deride not derive.

One final note:

"If, for example, I am smarter than you it is still not appropriate for me to try to tell you how to think."

Then why do you constantly attempt to tell people what to think and deride them and question their intelligence if they don't change to your way of thinking? Have you already forgotten the many posts where you called me Mr Pot? It didn't hurt my feelings (which is the theme you are running on now) I just saw clearly that you were not going to show any poster that disagreed with you any type of respect so I chose to call you out on it.

I understand you perfectly SW.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Tue, Oct 5, 2010, at 3:02 PM

Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration:

If you already have an account, follow this link to login
Otherwise, follow this link to register