View Full Version : Senate goes Demo!

05-22-2001, 08:44 PM
CNN just reported that staff members of the Senator from Vermont have confirmed his switch from the Repubs to the Demos. What is interesting was a meeting to punish his constituents for his votes. Obviously, Bush didn't think of him just switching!

05-22-2001, 10:23 PM

The Senate was already liberal anyway.

We'll see what happens...

Rick Stephens
05-22-2001, 10:36 PM
Another pile of worthless Democrap!

05-22-2001, 11:04 PM
Actually, the Republicans blew their opportunities while in control of both the Senate and the House... While I do not look forward to Democrat control of the Senate, all I can say is the Republicans did it to themselves... wasted their opportunities and blew their chances...

05-22-2001, 11:16 PM
There is a Republican contigent in the Senate that I refer to as 'Country Club Republicans'.

They tend to be liberal in their views (or what the press calls 'mainstream'.

McCain falls into this category.

the freshman class of '94 is still fighting the good fight!!!...

05-23-2001, 05:03 AM
As I posted on the other BB (Pigskin Park) I believe this is probably a good thing. Our government works best when it does nothing. I believe the best possible combination is a Republican President and Democratic Congress, but visa-versa seems to do the job also. The fewer new laws passed by our Congress, the better off we are. :p

05-23-2001, 06:04 AM
Well you can kiss any chance of a tax cut goodbye now.

05-23-2001, 07:28 AM

I still think there will be a tax cut. I think there will still be enough support for it to pass. It has been talked about so much that it could be devistating to Dems & Reps. who are looking to get elected to another term soon.

05-23-2001, 07:38 AM
I hope you're right 47, but I wouldn't count on it. The way Democrats act, you would think ANY tax cut was coming directly out of their own personal bank accounts. I just don't understand why it's such a big sin to let people keep their OWN money.

05-23-2001, 07:45 AM
I couldn't agree more

05-23-2001, 07:50 AM
It is not really your money...It belongs to the Demorats for giving you the privilege of sharing this country with them...You should just be thankful that they allow you to keep a little stipend for yourself.

You are not smart enough to handle your money, you need them to show you how....:D

05-23-2001, 07:51 AM
That would be funny jl except I think they actually do believe that.

05-23-2001, 08:18 AM
I think you will definitely see a lot of gridlock now. Unfortunatley, unless the Republicans can get Miller from GA to switch, we have to put up with Puff Daschele and his fellow lap-dogs in the Senate.

In my opinion, this really sucks.......

05-23-2001, 08:21 AM
You guys didn't think you were REALLY getting a tax cut, did you?

05-23-2001, 08:23 AM
Jeffords to go independant...


05-23-2001, 08:35 AM
Yes Brock I did expect a tax cut as long as the GOP was in control of the Congress and the White House. That's over now. Even with Jeffers becoming an Independent (what a spineless jellyfish) the Democrats will now take control of the Senate.

05-23-2001, 09:51 AM
I refuse to vote for ANY politician who agrees to subscribe to the INFINITE AMOUNT OF BS that entails being a democrat OR a republican...

I like to vote for people, but people don't run anymore...:mad:

05-23-2001, 10:01 AM
Expecting these clowns to follow through on campaign promises is the highest of naivete. Whatever happened to the "Contract with America"? What happened to real campaign finance reform, or for that matter, any issue that requires effort and political guts?

As far as I am concerned, the less these a-holes do to try to "help" me, the better.

05-23-2001, 10:01 AM
Brad is right, they are just suits owned by their contributors. Some just have different contributors. Money wins.

05-23-2001, 11:04 AM
I'll have to do some research (later), but I'm pretty sure that 7 out of 10 items of the Contract with America were passed. If so that is 70%, not bad considering that the Republicans had to go trhough Slick Willie.

05-23-2001, 11:20 AM
Honestly, How many of these items would be a bad thing:

Here is the link :


Here is the story: (you must click on the link to go to the links within the story)

As Republican Members of the House of Representatives and as citizens seeking to join that body we propose not just to change its policies, but even more important, to restore the bonds of trust between the people and their elected representatives.
That is why, in this era of official evasion and posturing, we offer instead a detailed agenda for national renewal, a written commitment with no fine print.

This year's election offers the chance, after four decades of one-party control, to bring to the House a new majority that will transform the way Congress works. That historic change would be the end of government that is too big, too intrusive, and too easy with the public's money. It can be the beginning of a Congress that respects the values and shares the faith of the American family.

Like Lincoln, our first Republican president, we intend to act "with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right." To restore accountability to Congress. To end its cycle of scandal and disgrace. To make us all proud again of the way free people govern themselves.

On the first day of the 104th Congress, the new Republican majority will immediately pass the following major reforms, aimed at restoring the faith and trust of the American people in their government:

FIRST, require all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply equally to the Congress;
SECOND, select a major, independent auditing firm to conduct a comprehensive audit of Congress for waste, fraud or abuse;
THIRD, cut the number of House committees, and cut committee staff by one-third;
FOURTH, limit the terms of all committee chairs;
FIFTH, ban the casting of proxy votes in committee;
SIXTH, require committee meetings to be open to the public;
SEVENTH, require a three-fifths majority vote to pass a tax increase;
EIGHTH, guarantee an honest accounting of our Federal Budget by implementing zero base-line budgeting.
Thereafter, within the first 100 days of the 104th Congress, we shall bring to the House Floor the following bills, each to be given full and open debate, each to be given a clear and fair vote and each to be immediately available this day for public inspection and scrutiny.

1. THE FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT: A balanced budget/tax limitation amendment and a legislative line-item veto to restore fiscal responsibility to an out- of-control Congress, requiring them to live under the same budget constraints as families and businesses. (Bill Text) (Description)

2. THE TAKING BACK OUR STREETS ACT: An anti-crime package including stronger truth-in- sentencing, "good faith" exclusionary rule exemptions, effective death penalty provisions, and cuts in social spending from this summer's "crime" bill to fund prison construction and additional law enforcement to keep people secure in their neighborhoods and kids safe in their schools. (Bill Text) (Description)

3. THE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT: Discourage illegitimacy and teen pregnancy by prohibiting welfare to minor mothers and denying increased AFDC for additional children while on welfare, cut spending for welfare programs, and enact a tough two-years-and-out provision with work requirements to promote individual responsibility. (Bill Text) (Description)

4. THE FAMILY REINFORCEMENT ACT: Child support enforcement, tax incentives for adoption, strengthening rights of parents in their children's education, stronger child pornography laws, and an elderly dependent care tax credit to reinforce the central role of families in American society. (Bill Text) (Description)

5. THE AMERICAN DREAM RESTORATION ACT: A S500 per child tax credit, begin repeal of the marriage tax penalty, and creation of American Dream Savings Accounts to provide middle class tax relief. (Bill Text) (Description)

6. THE NATIONAL SECURITY RESTORATION ACT: No U.S. troops under U.N. command and restoration of the essential parts of our national security funding to strengthen our national defense and maintain our credibility around the world. (Bill Text) (Description)

7. THE SENIOR CITIZENS FAIRNESS ACT: Raise the Social Security earnings limit which currently forces seniors out of the work force, repeal the 1993 tax hikes on Social Security benefits and provide tax incentives for private long-term care insurance to let Older Americans keep more of what they have earned over the years. (Bill Text) (Description)

8. THE JOB CREATION AND WAGE ENHANCEMENT ACT: Small business incentives, capital gains cut and indexation, neutral cost recovery, risk assessment/cost-benefit analysis, strengthening the Regulatory Flexibility Act and unfunded mandate reform to create jobs and raise worker wages. (Bill Text) (Description)

9. THE COMMON SENSE LEGAL REFORM ACT: "Loser pays" laws, reasonable limits on punitive damages and reform of product liability laws to stem the endless tide of litigation. (Bill Text) (Description)

10. THE CITIZEN LEGISLATURE ACT: A first-ever vote on term limits to replace career politicians with citizen legislators. (Description)

Further, we will instruct the House Budget Committee to report to the floor and we will work to enact additional budget savings, beyond the budget cuts specifically included in the legislation described above, to ensure that the Federal budget deficit will be less than it would have been without the enactment of these bills.

Respecting the judgment of our fellow citizens as we seek their mandate for reform, we hereby pledge our names to this Contract with America.

Lightning Rod
05-23-2001, 11:24 AM
I would be very happy to get 1, 7 and 8

05-23-2001, 11:59 AM
2. THE TAKING BACK OUR STREETS ACT: An anti-crime package including stronger truth-in- sentencing, "good faith" exclusionary rule exemptions, effective death penalty provisions, and cuts in social spending from this summer's "crime" bill to fund prison construction and additional law enforcement to keep people secure in their neighborhoods and kids safe in their schools. (Bill Text) (Description)

7. THE SENIOR CITIZENS FAIRNESS ACT: Raise the Social Security earnings limit which currently forces seniors out of the work force,

Let's see.. #2.. keep people srcure in their neighborhoods and kids safe in schools? I think they meant to continue to wage their lost war on drugs.

#7.. Nice spin, but the SS earnings limit does not "force" seniors out of the workforce. That is totally bogus. First off, people don't work just to get the SS benefit. And secondly, my father was a surgeon and he did not meet the earnings limit for 25 years of his. Besides, the limit may have been 30,000 twenty years ago and now is 75,000. (The gist is correct, I looked this up with him one day, but the numbers are probably wrong). So, any additionaly year he can make the limit of 75,000, he replaces a 30,000 year. Actually, he quit his practice and is working for the state in computers at 30,000 and it STILL helps him to work until he is 65 or 70.


05-23-2001, 12:35 PM
Sunshine: the Earnings limit on SS refers to how much a Senior who is currently receiving SS can earn at a job w/o having their SS taxed at 50% or higher.

Retired people who are receiving SS can only earn about 30k per year before their SS benefits are taxed at a 50% tax rate.

This has nothing to do with the taxation cap which is around 80k--ie, when SS is no longer deducted and your company no longer has to pay it's share of your SS--6.2% of the 7.65% payroll taxes. The other 2.45% is medicare taxes and has no cap.

05-23-2001, 02:15 PM
Wednesday May 23, 2001; 2:52 p.m. EDT
Georgia Democrat Keys Statement to Jeffords' Announcement

A spokeswoman in the office of Georgia Senator Zell Miller has confirmed reports that the key Democrat will release a statement as soon as Vermont Republican James Jeffords announces his decision on whether he'll bolt the GOP and hand control of the Senate to Democrats.

Miller's office said the statement would respond to "all the calls we've been getting from our constituents" about Jeffords' expected defection. She also said rumors that Miller had scheduled a press conference for today were untrue.

Word that Miller has keyed his mystery announcement to Jeffords' decision prompted a firestorm of speculation on the website FreeRepublic.com, where news of the Georgia Senator's plans surfaced at midday.

Curiosity centers on suspicions that the conservative Democrat would counter Jeffords' move and cross the aisle to the Republican side, thereby maintaining the Senate's 50/50 split.

Miller has recently said he has no plans to become a Republican.

His spokeswoman would not comment on the content of the upcoming announcement.

Read more on this subject in related

05-23-2001, 02:27 PM
Fact #1 of Politics: Be rich or be-gotten...

ALL politicians are rich, all have money and recieve even MORE from big coorporations. This has, does, and will continue to happen. If you think they care about you or the common man you are a fool. You don't give them enough money to even CONSIDER caring about...

Well, until election time...:rolleyes:

05-23-2001, 02:32 PM
It's like being a Chiefs fan all your life and then deciding one day that you've changed your allegiance to the Raiders. WTF!

Joe Seahawk
05-23-2001, 03:02 PM
Chitown, I've actually seen that happen...It can happen...:)

Baby Lee
05-23-2001, 03:16 PM
C'Mon Joe. Maybe I could see fostering a respect for a certain player on a team like the Raiders, but switching allegiances??? Balderdash. The mind cannot even conceive. :p

05-23-2001, 03:18 PM
Caudle's right. They could care less about the commom man. The common man has to earn at least 35k to support a family of three..Over 50% of the common man does NOT earn this. When I got out of the Military in the Early eighties, the Min. wage was around three dollars...now 20 years later it's gone up a whole WHOPPING 2 dollars. The rich want to keep you poor by design.

This country is steadily becoming more financially segregated by the day. Hell we don't even treat each other nice anymore. It's all about image and money. You don't need talent to be a singer, you don't need to win a major tennis tournament to be one of the best, you just have to be marketable. And look good doing it.

We don't respect firemen, policemen or teachers, if we did, we would pay them better. But instead, we pay athletes and entertainers absolutely STUPID money for what? Rich white people who want to watch the dancing monkey.

Old people are ripped off daily by greedy pharmaceutical companies. The list goes on and on.

All this brought to you by the Clinton administration. you can back him and his party all you want, but the bottom line is he spawned a whole breed of men without souls.

Last line from Don Henley.

05-24-2001, 09:13 AM
He'll sit on the fence as an Independent, but vote Democrat. What a, excuse me, WUSSY

05-24-2001, 06:30 PM
When people need to choose principles over party, I hope they always choose their principles...

As far as a Chiefs fan suddenly becoming a Raiders fan, I think that has already happened once that I know of...


05-25-2001, 06:14 AM
I agree with the prinicples comment Fly but Jeffords is crybabying over the fact that he didn't get invited to the Whitehouse when Bush presented the teach of the year award. ChiTown you were being kind when you only called him a wussy.

Mile High Mania
05-25-2001, 06:29 AM
StevieRay.... I agree with you on some points, but blaming the Clinton Administration blows your case. You said that minimum wage had gone up a whopping $2 in 20 years. Hmmm, I guess I was wrong in thinking that Bill was only President for 8.

Democrats and Republicans have both done their fair share of "breaking one off in the common man".

Jim Hunter
05-25-2001, 06:46 AM
It does make one wonder about the intelligence level of the Bush camp....not to anticipate a switch from Jeffords and treat him with kid-gloves. Instead they play hardball with him & show him contempt & disrespect. I hope this kind of stupidity isn't an example of future political dealings or we could be in big doo-doo.

05-25-2001, 07:24 AM
this guy made a drama out of this deal, and was out to prove a point. That's B.S. IMO. His constituents voted him in as a Republican Senator. He should at least had thesack to finish out his term as such, and re-run as a Demo in the next race.

I hate politicians and how they use the American people as their personal trampoline. We would all be far better off in this country if we didn't glamorize these people, and give them a soap box to pimp their personal (vs. constituents) views.

Jeffords, no matter how he was treated, is a gutless loser.

~woke up on the wrong side of the couch

05-25-2001, 07:56 AM
Do you remember how Newt Gingrich was crucified in the press for daring to complain about being seated at the back of the President's plane? Now Jeffords is doing the same kind of thing with this "teacher of the year" award but now he's a hero to the press, standing on his principles, etc, etc, etc.

05-25-2001, 08:32 PM
No law against changing parties that I know of... It's been going on for a long, long time. And if Jeffords had the "sack" to change during election time he still would have won re-election.

Republicans did this to themselves. They've been timid and afraid to stick to their principles. So they drag things out until everyone is thoroughly frustrated. Why did they want control of the Congress if they weren't going to use it?

Being a libertarian, I think Republicans seem to be better as obstacles rather than as leaders. They can stop bad stuff from happening, but they sure don't know how to make good things happen...