« Back to story "Republicans Vote Against Moms; No Word Yet on Puppies, Kittens"

Story Comments

Posted by: Beau7890 1 year, 6 months ago

This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.

All Comments Share Story Report

Neutral
Beau78901 year, 6 months ago

This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

Congress absolutely has better things to do. And this kind of thing goes on all the time. (Though less time would have been wasted if Rep. Tiahrt had just let it go.)
But many votes are for show. When examining a candidate's record, check the roll call in the final vote--the one that's either a bill's last gasp on the floor after amendments have been added, or the one that passes it through to the president. Much carping about candidates' records has to do with votes like this that are essentially meaningless.
Gotta admit the headline's a keeper though, don't you Stephen? ;-)

(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 3) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
Reply
8 Replies

loading ...
- Neutral
  bruhaha1 year, 6 months ago
  
  This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
  
  It's a waste of time for this, but not for bills such as H.Res. 888 or others like it?
  
  (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 4) (recursion depth : 2) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
  Reply
  7 Replies
  
  loading ...
  - Neutral
    bruhaha1 year, 6 months ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    BTW, yes it is a waste of time and pointless, but at least the tactics that the republicans have used to make it look like the democrats in congress are doing nothing are being mentioned.
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    0 Replies
    
    loading ...
  - Neutral
    Beau78901 year, 6 months ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    Exactly. And there are some who'll use a vote against that one to try to make some point or other about an opponent in an election. And worse, others who'll believe it means something about the candidate.
    (That's in reference to H. Res. 888 designating the first week in May as " 'American Religious History Week' for the appreciation of and education on America's history of religious faith.")
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    5 Replies
    
    loading ...
    - libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned4 Replies
      - Neutral
        Beau78901 year, 6 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Wow. And you thought libs were funny.
        I don't EVER want to hear you say Democrats are obstructionists again.
        This bill, silly as it is, was blocked by obstructionists. Bush's threats of vetos of other legislation--with solid partisan bloc voting--is obstructionist.
        If there's anything this story shows, it's that the Republicans would rather vote against lauding motherhood than allow the Democrats to pass legislation.
        Now if a resolution this meaningless that makes no one unhappy and costs nothing will be blocked to prove a partisan point, imagine what Republicans will do to good legislation that Americans actually need...like assistance to avoid foreclosure, for instance.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 7) (recursion depth : 5) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        1 Reply
        
        loading ...
        
        Neutral
        Goppy1 year, 6 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Or health care.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 8) (recursion depth : 6) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
      - Neutral
        splitrch1 year, 6 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Speaking of religion I read this article in today's L.A. Times. Please let me know what you think. I'd appreciate your opinion on the matter.
        http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-beliefs...
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 7) (recursion depth : 5) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
      - Neutral
        bruhaha1 year, 6 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        I think that they are right.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 8) (recursion depth : 5) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
      - Neutral
        bruhaha1 year, 6 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        No, when the democrats were the minority, they didn't feel it was right to play politics the way the republicans do. Also, they don't have the media on their side. If the democrats did what the republicans are doing, the media at all the major networks would be screaming and hollering because of the obstructionist democrats.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 8) (recursion depth : 5) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...