English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

10 answers

Do you know how hard it is to pass good reforms when you control all 3 branches of government? I mean, gosh, no one cuts the republicans any slack. Even though they run every inch of the federal government and have sent our nation spiraling into chaos by pushing through bills that few GOP members have the courage to vote against, it's obviously the democrats fault. I mean, if the liberals hadn't voted against allowing torture of prisoners, we could have lost every ally and all the dignity we had,but no, because they care about "human rights" the US has to obey the law just like everone else! ;-)

2006-09-23 03:04:02 · answer #1 · answered by John S 3 · 1 1

There's no single answer to that.

Part of the reason is the simple tendency in humans to blame someone else for everything. We're no different, except that we don't generally do it on camera.

Part of the reason is because it's at least partly true. The Democrats have blocked a lot of what the Republicans are trying to get done, and there's a significant difference between "control" and "having a majority". Despite their minority status, the Democrats are still in a position to interfere with the Republican agenda, and they have.

Part of the reason is because the Republicans allowed them to do it. They allowed it for various reasons at various times. Sometimes they just want to appear to be reasonable and cooperative, and sometimes they may simply not want the measure to pass anyway.

You do have to bear in mind that the differences between the two parties are about the same as the differences between Wal Mart and Target. Both have the same motives (personal profit) and make fortunes selling the same things. The difference is the target market, that's all.

2006-09-23 02:08:12 · answer #2 · answered by open4one 7 · 0 0

Because the minority party is not impotent. If they were then every judge the Bush administration sent down would have been confirmed. Social security would look different today. The minority party has the power of the filibuster. They can obstruct. They still wield power.

2006-09-23 02:15:14 · answer #3 · answered by JB 6 · 1 1

ought to be, the plot is thickening. ought to be that Hillary is environment the point to return ordinary approximately her very own involvement in Benghazi. The Clinton's famously have a clarification for each flow they make and that i at the instant are not waiting to think of Hillary taking the autumn for Obama. She purely would be cleverly throwing him below the bus on the same time exonerating herself. She have have been given to have had a purely suited clarification for making any such needed assertion from Peru...a approaches a approaches from Obama...Why now not Washington? what's so central that took her to Peru? The worry of constrained risk-free practices would desire to be buried some the place in Obama's international coverage guidelines. if actuality be recommended that Obama coverage would not enable for risk-free practices of Stevens and his workers.....any greater which you would be waiting to tell a unusual and wonderful neighbor how plenty you trusted him, although deliver an armed shield which incorporate your new child each and every time he walked previously that neighbor's place of residing. Obama has long recommended an environment of mutual have faith with the Islamic extremists. This coverage would necessitate a loss of risk-free practices for American Diplomats to make certain that Obama to represent that have confidence. Any contingency of army risk-free practices assigned to Stevens and his workers would have served to enhance questions related to this coverage of mutual have confidence. i think that, someplace, one in each of many effective print of Obama distant places coverage, lies the guidelines for restrained risk-free practices which resulted interior the loss of life of Ambassador Stevens. The denial of risk-free practices assets in Libya would desire to be a impression of a few coverage. Hillary knows this. and she or he knows make herself seem solid. a minimum of politically ;-) She although has her eye on 2016.

2016-12-18 15:29:09 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Who says we do. BTW, unless you are braindead and or stupid, you have seen the numerous times the Dems have brought up filibuster threats to stop things. If you have any Amgov classes after 5th grade this question should never have come up

2006-09-23 02:15:36 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

Although the Democrats are in the minority, they still have the power to sabotage everything good for the country:
Keeping the tax cuts temporary.
Stopping drilling to raise the price of gasoline.
(Anything to hurt the country until they regain power.)

2006-09-23 01:54:15 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 6 1

Your question just goes to show how little you know about Congress...

BTW, your new name is even less original than KFC, but your turtleneck still looks gay...

2006-09-23 05:46:38 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

it takes two, all the parties do it and yet they are all a bunchs of legal crooks that we pay them to steal more......go figure......have a great weekend.....

2006-09-23 01:53:29 · answer #8 · answered by lost&confused 5 · 4 0

Because they think democrats are to blame but their not!

2006-09-23 01:52:32 · answer #9 · answered by angelwinks619@sbcglobal.net 2 · 1 3

because they are rightwing cry babies

2006-09-23 03:32:21 · answer #10 · answered by just_me_1955 5 · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers