When is enough finally enough?

[Foxfyre]

Senate blocks census US-citizenship question
.Andrew Taylor, Associated Press Writer – Thu Nov 5, 12:52 pm ET

WASHINGTON – Senate Democrats have blocked a GOP attempt to require next year's census forms to ask people whether they are a U.S. citizen.

The proposal by Louisiana Republican Sen. David Vitter was aimed at excluding immigrants from the population totals that are used to figure the number of congressional representatives for each state. Critics said Vitter's plan would discourage immigrants from responding to the census and would be hugely expensive. They also said that it's long been settled law that the apportionment of congressional seats is determined by the number of people living in each state, regardless of whether they are citizens. A separate survey already collects the data.

The plan fell after a 60-39 procedural vote made it ineligible for attachment to a bill funding the census

I did not realize that illegal aliens were included in the census and that the border states which heavily benefit from the influx of illegals, both my native state and my current state of residence would be included in that, would benefit from the fact that so many illegals settle there.

The simple fact that these states get more representation in the electoral college by having illegals is a benefit and seems to be unfair.

Immie

I get frustrated with media accounts that fail to distinguish between 'immigrants' and 'illegal immigrants'. I think that failure is often intentional--part of the way they hoodwink and fool their uninformed constituencies.

But how expensive could it be to add a simple question to the census: Are you a U.S. citizen? As the law requires persons to respond to the Census, anybody who refused to do so would certainly be here illegally and SHOULD be identified. Why shouldn't we know who are citizens and who aren't in every district? That is something the leftists in Congress don't want for whatever reason though. I guess they think they can't do without the illegals' votes or presumed votes.

 

[Immanuel]

Senate blocks census US-citizenship question
.Andrew Taylor, Associated Press Writer – Thu Nov 5, 12:52 pm ET

WASHINGTON – Senate Democrats have blocked a GOP attempt to require next year's census forms to ask people whether they are a U.S. citizen.

The proposal by Louisiana Republican Sen. David Vitter was aimed at excluding immigrants from the population totals that are used to figure the number of congressional representatives for each state. Critics said Vitter's plan would discourage immigrants from responding to the census and would be hugely expensive. They also said that it's long been settled law that the apportionment of congressional seats is determined by the number of people living in each state, regardless of whether they are citizens. A separate survey already collects the data.

The plan fell after a 60-39 procedural vote made it ineligible for attachment to a bill funding the census

I did not realize that illegal aliens were included in the census and that the border states which heavily benefit from the influx of illegals, both my native state and my current state of residence would be included in that, would benefit from the fact that so many illegals settle there.

The simple fact that these states get more representation in the electoral college by having illegals is a benefit and seems to be unfair.

Immie

I get frustrated with media accounts that fail to distinguish between 'immigrants' and 'illegal immigrants'. I think that failure is often intentional--part of the way they hoodwink and fool their uninformed constituencies.

But how expensive could it be to add a simple question to the census: Are you a U.S. citizen? As the law requires persons to respond to the Census, anybody who refused to do so would certainly be here illegally and SHOULD be identified. Why shouldn't we know who are citizens and who aren't in every district? That is something the leftists in Congress don't want for whatever reason though. I guess they think they can't do without the illegals' votes or presumed votes.

Supposedly, and hopefully, illegals can't vote and I would hope that those on the left here agree with that statement. However, if illegals are counted in the census and states get better representation in Congress (increasing pork to state) as well as more electoral college representation, then the states with illegals benefit from this oversight.

On the other hand, putting a simple question like, "are you a U.S. Citizen?" or even "are you a U.S. Citizen (Y/N) or a legal resident (Y/N)" is not going to change things much because even if an illegal should respond to the census, the chances are good that the question will not be answered truthfully. Are you going to answer No to that question if you are here illegally?

Immie

 

[California Girl]

I'd like them to add to that amendment.

Congress shall pass no law that does not specifically site the section of the Constitution that gives Congress the power to pass said law.

Wow. Wouldn't that be an interesting turn of events. We should put it in.

I can't take the credit for it - Ron Paul has been trying to get that past for years.

 

[Foxfyre]

I'd like them to add to that amendment.

Congress shall pass no law that does not specifically site the section of the Constitution that gives Congress the power to pass said law.

Wow. Wouldn't that be an interesting turn of events. We should put it in.

I can't take the credit for it - Ron Paul has been trying to get that past for years.

You can take credit for recognizing the truly common sense practicality of it and for posting it.

 

[Foxfyre]

Supposedly, and hopefully, illegals can't vote and I would hope that those on the left here agree with that statement. However, if illegals are counted in the census and states get better representation in Congress (increasing pork to state) as well as more electoral college representation, then the states with illegals benefit from this oversight.

On the other hand, putting a simple question like, "are you a U.S. Citizen?" or even "are you a U.S. Citizen (Y/N) or a legal resident (Y/N)" is not going to change things much because even if an illegal should respond to the census, the chances are good that the question will not be answered truthfully. Are you going to answer No to that question if you are here illegally?

Immie

Okay, you've identified one of those 'devil in the details' things that will make me rethink this one. It would be unfortunate for all those illegals to say they are U.S. citizens and distort the numbers there which, of course, you are right that they would almost certainly do that.

Unless. . . .

It was announced up front that any person claiming U.S. Citizenship who was not in fact a U.S. Citizen would be subject to prosecution, fine, and deportation or some such combination.

Of course fear of prosecution has not stopped fraud and abuse of the system in the past.

So I'm rethinking it. Thanks.

 

[Foxfyre]

Another gleaning from my morning e-mail:

The following letter is reported as read on Glenn Beck's show, and is rapidly circulating
around the country.. Many Americans identify with this supposedly 53-year-old woman. I could have written a letter similar to this:

GLENN BECK: I got a letter from a woman in Arizona . She writes an open
letter to our nation's leadership:


"I am a home grown American citizen, 53, registered Democrat all my life.
Before the last presidential election I registered as a Republican because I
no longer felt the Democratic Party represents my views or works to pursue
issues important to me.. Now I no longer feel the Republican Party represents
my views or works to pursue issues important to me. The fact is I no longer
feel any political party or representative in Washington represents my views
or works to pursue the issues important to me. Instead, we are burdened with
Congressional Dukes and Duchesses who think they know better than the
citizens they are supposed to represent.

There must be someone. Please tell me who you are. Please stand up and tell
me that you are there and that you're willing to fight for our Constitution
as it was written. Please stand up now.

You might ask yourself what my views and issues are that I would feel so
horribly disenfranchised by both major political parties. What kind of
nut-job am I? Well, these briefly are the views and issues for which I seek
representation:

One, illegal immigration. I want you to stop coddling illegal immigrants and
secure our borders. Close the underground tunnels. Stop the violence and the
trafficking in drugs and people. No amnesty, not again. Been there, done
that, no resolution. P.S., I'm not a racist. This is not to be confused with
legal immigration.

Two, the STIMULUS bill. I want it repealed and I want no further funding
supplied to it. We told you No, but you did it anyway. I want the remaining
unfunded 95% repealed. Freeze, repeal.

Three: Czars. I want the circumvention of our constitutional checks and
balances stopped immediately. Fire the czars. No more czars. Government
officials answer to the process, not to the president. Stop trampling on our
Constitution, and honor it.

Four, cap and trade. The debate on global warming is not over. There are
many conflicting opinions and it is too soon for this radical legislation.
Quit throwing our nation into politically-correct quicksand.

Five, universal healthcare. I will not be rushed into another expensive
decision that will burden me, my children, and grandchildren... Don't you dare
try to pass this in the middle of the night without even reading it. Slow
down! Fix only what is broken -- we have the best health care system in the
world -- and test any new program in one or two states first.

Six, growing government control. I want states rights and sovereignty fully
restored. I want less government in my life, not more. More is not better!
Shrink it down. Mind your own business.. You have enough to take care of with
your real [Constitutional] obligations. Why don't you start there.

Seven, ACORN. I do not want ACORN and its affiliates in charge of our 2010
census. I want them investigated. I also do not want mandatory escrow fees
contributed to them every time on every real estate deal that closes -- how
did they pull that one off? Stop the funding to ACORN and its affiliates
pending impartial audits and investigations. I do not trust them with taking
the census with our taxpayer money. I don't trust them with any of our
taxpayer money. Face up to the allegations against them and get it resolved
before taxpayers get any more involved with them. If it walks like a duck
and talks like a duck, hello. Stop protecting your political buddies... You
work for us, the people. Investigate.

Eight, redistribution of wealth. No, no, no. I work for my money. It is
mine. I have always worked for people with more money than I have because
they gave me jobs -- and that is the only redistribution of wealth that I
will support. I never got a job from a poor person! Why do you want me to
hate my employers? And what do you have against shareholders making a
profit?

Nine, charitable contributions. Although I never got a job from a poor
person, I have helped many in need. Charity belongs in our local
communities, where we know our needs best and can use our local talent and
our local resources. Butt out, please. We want to do it ourselves.

Ten, corporate bailouts. Knock it off. Every company must sink or swim like
the rest of us. If there are hard times ahead, we'll be better off just
getting into it and letting the strong survive. Quick and painful. (Have you
ever ripped off a Band-Aid?) We will pull together. Great things happen in
America under great hardship. Give us the chance to innovate. We cannot
disappoint you more than you have disappointed us.

Eleven, transparency and accountability. How about it? No, really, how about
it? Let's have it. Let's say we give the buzzwords a rest and have some
straight honest talk. Please stop trying to manipulate and appease me with
clever wording. I am not the idiot you obviously take me for. Stop sneaking
around and meeting in back rooms making deals with your friends. It will
only be a prelude to your criminal investigation. Stop hiding things from
me.

Twelve, unprecedented quick spending. Stop it now.
Take a breath. Listen to the people. Slow down and get some input from
nonpoliticians and experts on the subject. Stop making everything an
emergency. Stop speed-reading our bills into law. I am not an activist. I am
not a community organizer. Nor am I a terrorist, a militant or a violent
person. I am a parent and a grandparent. I work. I'm busy. I am busy, and I
am tired. I thought we elected competent people to take care of the business
of government so that we could work, raise our families, pay our bills, have
a little recreation, complain about taxes, endure our hardships, pursue our
personal goals, cut our lawn, wash our cars on the weekends and be
responsible contributing members of society and teach our children to be the
same all while living in the home of the free and land of the brave.

I entrusted you with upholding the Constitution. I believed in the checks
and balances to keep from getting far off course. What happened? You are
very far off course. Do you really think I find humor in the hiring of a
speed reader to unintelligently ramble all through a bill that you signed
into law without knowing what it contained? I do not.

It is a mockery of the responsibility I have entrusted to you. It is a slap
in the face. I am not laughing at your arrogance. Why is it that I feel as
if you would not trust me to make a single decision about my own life and
how I would live it but you should expect that I should trust you with the
debt that you have laid on all of us and our children. We did not want the
TARP bill. We said no. We would repeal it if we could. I am sure that we
still cannot. There is needless urgency and recklessness in all of your
recent spending of our tax dollars.

From my perspective, it seems that all of you have gone insane. I also know
that I am far from alone in these feelings. Do you honestly feel that your
current pursuits have merit to patriotic Americans? We want it to stop. We
want to put the brakes on everything that is being rushed by us and forced
upon us. We want our voice back. You have forced us to put our lives on hold
to straighten out the mess that you are making. We will have to give up our
vacations, our time spent with our children, any relaxation time we may have
had and money we cannot afford to spend on bringing our concerns to
Washington . Our president often knows all the right buzzwords like
unsustainable. Well, no kidding. How many tens of thousands of dollars did
the focus group cost to come up with that word? We don't want your
overpriced words. Stop treating us like we're morons.


We want all of you to stop focusing on your reelection and do the job we
want done, not the job you want done or the job your party wants done. You
work for us and at this rate I guarantee you not for long because we are
coming. We will be heard and we will be represented.. You think we're so
busy with our lives that we will never come for you? We are the formerly
silent majority, all of us who quietly work, pay taxes, obey the law, vote,
save money, keep our noses to the grindstone... and we are now looking at
you.

You have awakened us, the patriotic freedom spirit so strong and so powerful
that it had been sleeping too long. You have pushed us too far. Our numbers
are great. They may surprise you. For every one of us who will be there,
there will be hundreds more that could not come. Unlike you, we have their
trust. We will represent them honestly, rest assured. They will be at the
polls on voting day to usher you out of office.

We have cancelled vacations. We will use our last few dollars saved. We will
find the representation among us and a grassroots campaign will flourish. We
didn't ask for this fight. But the gloves are coming off. We do not come in
violence, but we are angry. You will represent us or you will be replaced
with someone who will. There are candidates among us who will rise like a
Phoenix from the ashes that you have made of our constitution.

Democrat, Republican, independent, libertarian. Understand this. We don't
care. Political parties are meaningless to us Patriotic Americans are
willing to do right by us and our Constitution, and that is all that matters
to us now. We are going to fire all of you who abuse power and seek more. It
is not your power. It is ours and we want it back. We entrusted you with it
and you abused it. You are dishonorable. You are dishonest. As Americans we
are ashamed of you. You have brought shame to us. If you are not
representing the wants and needs of your constituency loudly and
consistently, in spite of the objections of your party, you will be fired.
Did you hear? We no longer care about your political parties. You need to be
loyal to us, not to them.. Because we will get you fired and they will not
save you.

If you do or can represent me, my issues, my views, please stand up. Make
your identity known. You need to make some noise about it. Speak up. I need
to know who you are. If you do not speak up, you will be herded out with the
rest of the sheep and we will replace the whole damn congress if need be one
by one. We are coming. Are we coming for you? Who do you represent? What do
you represent? Listen... Because we are coming. We the people are coming."

 

[HUGGY]

As I read this short piece tonight, all the broken promises, disappoinments, boondoggles, and downright lies and hypocrisy of the last two decades seemed to flash before my eyes.

How much of this kind of dishonesty will we accept from our government before we say enough is enough? How much hypocrisy and/or duplicity is tolerable from our elected leaders?

Is there no alternative to accepting the bad with the good? If not, what should we do about it?

Pelosi Breaks Pledge to Put Final Health Care Bill Online for 72 Hours Before Vote

Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office tells THE WEEKLY STANDARD that the speaker will not allow the final language of the health care to be posted online for 72 hours before bringing the bill to a vote on the House floor, despite her September 24 statement that she was "absolutely" committed to doing so.

House members are still negotiating important issues in the bill--whether it will provide taxpayer-funding for abortions, for example. Pelosi is pushing for a Saturday House vote, and a number of big changes will be introduced, likely less than 24 hours before the vote takes place (if in fact it does). The Rules Committee hasn't yet released its resolution, or rule, that must be passed before the bill can move from committee to the floor. The rule will set the terms of debate and determine what amendments are in order.

It seems likely that the rule will allow very few, if any, up-or-down votes on amendments on the House floor. Rather, the rule will include a series of amendments that will all be adopted at once if the rule passes.

On September 24, Speaker Nancy Pelosi told THE WEEKLY STANDARD that she was "absolutely" committed to putting the text of the final House bill online for 72 hours before the House votes:

TWS: Madam Speaker, do you support the measure to put the final House bill online for 72 hours before it's voted on at the very end?

PELOSI: Absolutely. Without question.


But tonight, when asked if Speaker Pelosi will leave the bill online for 72 hours after we see what's in the rule, Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly replied in an email: "No; [the] pledge was to have manager’s amendment online for 72 hours, and we will do that."

Apparently Pelosi's agreement to leave the "final" bill online "at the very end" of the process wasn't such a straightforward pledge.
The Weekly Standard

Check with your sec of state for an election schedule. Prez..every four years..etc...

 

[Immanuel]

Supposedly, and hopefully, illegals can't vote and I would hope that those on the left here agree with that statement. However, if illegals are counted in the census and states get better representation in Congress (increasing pork to state) as well as more electoral college representation, then the states with illegals benefit from this oversight.

On the other hand, putting a simple question like, "are you a U.S. Citizen?" or even "are you a U.S. Citizen (Y/N) or a legal resident (Y/N)" is not going to change things much because even if an illegal should respond to the census, the chances are good that the question will not be answered truthfully. Are you going to answer No to that question if you are here illegally?

Immie

Okay, you've identified one of those 'devil in the details' things that will make me rethink this one. It would be unfortunate for all those illegals to say they are U.S. citizens and distort the numbers there which, of course, you are right that they would almost certainly do that.

Unless. . . .

It was announced up front that any person claiming U.S. Citizenship who was not in fact a U.S. Citizen would be subject to prosecution, fine, and deportation or some such combination.

Of course fear of prosecution has not stopped fraud and abuse of the system in the past.

So I'm rethinking it. Thanks.

Are they not already facing prosecution, fines and deportation just for being in the country illegally? Although the normal course of action is simply deportation.

Answering, "No" to those two questions would be like standing up and waving a sign saying, "Hey, Uncle Sam, I'm here illegally, come get me."

Immie

 

[Foxfyre]

So how much more are we going to tolerate before we all join the Tea Partiers and Tax Protest groups?

This did not originate with me, but it strongly reflects how I’m feeling about the way things are going these days. Among the many unflattering labels attached to President George W. Bush over his eight years, the most popular was probably ‘stupid’ or ‘idiot’. So. . . .

If George Bush were an idiot. . . .

If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a teleprompter installed to be able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said this is more proof of how he inept he is on his own and is really controlled by smarter men behind the scenes?

If George W.. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take Laura Bush to a play in NYC, would you have approved?

If George W.. Bush had reduced your retirement plan's holdings of GM stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have approved?

If George W.. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special Olympics, would you have approved?

If George W.. Bush had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would you have approved?

If George W.. Bush had given the Queen of England an IPod containing videos of his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly narcissistic and tacky?

If George W.. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia , would you have approved?

If George W.. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the non-existent "Austrian language," would you have brushed it off as a minor slip?

If George W.. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current in their income taxes, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to "Cinco de Cuatro" in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the 5th of May (Cinco de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again, would you have winced in embarrassment?

If George W. Bush had mis-spelled the word "advice" would you have hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and potatoe as proof of what a dunce he is?

If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a single tree on Earth Day, would you have concluded he's a hypocrite?

If George W. Bush's administration had okayed Air Force One flying low over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually get what happened on 9-11?

If George W. Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New Orleans , would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with claims of racism and incompetence?

If George W. Bush had created the position of 32 Czars who report directly to him, bypassing the House and Senate on much of what is happening in America, would you have approved?

If George W.. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved?

If George W Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year and did so on purpose, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within 10 years, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had referred to the 58 states that make up these United States, would you have thought him "geographically challenged"?

So, tell me again, what is it about Obama that makes him so much more brilliant and impressive than President Bush? Can't think of anything? Don't worry. He's done all this in 10months. You have three years and two months to come up with an answer.

 

[Titanic Sailor]

All Democrats suck complete ass, and many Republicans who act like Democrats suck as well. Once everyone realizes the rich represent both Parties and sold our ass out we will be a better nation. Blowbama!

 

[JakeStarkey]

The libertarian philosophy is simply not the way. The Conservative philosophy as represented by Palin, Hoffman, etc., is simply not the way. However, if you agree with them, then get working and stop shouting, because when you shout, mainstream America stops listening.

 

[Oscar Wao]

The libertarian philosophy is simply not the way. The Conservative philosophy as represented by Palin, Hoffman, etc., is simply not the way. However, if you agree with them, then get working and stop shouting, because when you shout, mainstream America stops listening.

The libertarian philosophy has never been truly tried in modern America, so you can't make that judgement yet.

You can say the neo-con philosophy doesn't work, because we've already tried it and it has failed and continues to fail to this day.

 

[BasicGreatGuy]

I am well passed fed up. My enough is enough came and went in the early 80s.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

As I read the nonsense by the wingnut far right, seven words come to mind: "Mainstream America does not listen to you."

Mainstream America will not let the hopelesschangeless Republican far right wing run things any more. The NY 23d race shows that.

Your utter stupidity and lack of intelligence never ceases to amaze mainstream America.

 

[Foxfyre]

The libertarian philosophy is simply not the way. The Conservative philosophy as represented by Palin, Hoffman, etc., is simply not the way. However, if you agree with them, then get working and stop shouting, because when you shout, mainstream America stops listening.

The libertarian philosophy has never been truly tried in modern America, so you can't make that judgement yet.

You can say the neo-con philosophy doesn't work, because we've already tried it and it has failed and continues to fail to this day.

A strong 'libertarian' philosophy worked very well until early in the 20th Century when some in government started us on the slow but relentless path to socialism by confiscating wealth from some in order to benefit others. The problem with socialism is, as Maggie Thatcher once observed, that sooner or later you run out of other peoples' money. The worst sin is that once those in government experience the heady narcotic of unrestrained power to do whatever they want to anybody, they are unwilling to relinquish that power. That is why Marxism was a doomed philosophy from the beginning. He thought you used a strong central government to achieve desired goals of equality for everybody and then that strong central government will no longer be necessary. Given human nature being what it is, it was an idea doomed to failure from the beginning.

The government our Founders gave us was NEVER intended to solve our problems. It was intended to provide a never-before-known freedom to live and prosper and achieve ability to solve our own problems. The government would set in place and enforce sufficient laws and regulation to prohibit us doing violence to each other, and then leave us alone to live our lives.

And that, in a nutshell, is what modern conservatism is. It does work. It always has. And it will again if we have the courage to implement it.

 

[Foxfyre]

And when will we finally say enough is enough about this crap?:

David Hamilton is the federal judge who believes it is a violation of the first amendment for Christians to pray at school events, but is not a violation of the first amendment when Muslims pray at school events. He was also cited by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals for abusing his power by keeping an injunction in place on an informed consent law despite the fact that the law was clearly unconstitutional.

Barack Obama has now appointed David Hamilton to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals — the very court that said Hamilton had abused his power.

I suggest every one of us who thinks enough is enough should write their senators and adamently demand that they vote against this nominee.

 

[KMAN]

As I read this short piece tonight, all the broken promises, disappoinments, boondoggles, and downright lies and hypocrisy of the last two decades seemed to flash before my eyes.

How much of this kind of dishonesty will we accept from our government before we say enough is enough? How much hypocrisy and/or duplicity is tolerable from our elected leaders?

Is there no alternative to accepting the bad with the good? If not, what should we do about it?

Pelosi Breaks Pledge to Put Final Health Care Bill Online for 72 Hours Before Vote

Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office tells THE WEEKLY STANDARD that the speaker will not allow the final language of the health care to be posted online for 72 hours before bringing the bill to a vote on the House floor, despite her September 24 statement that she was "absolutely" committed to doing so.

House members are still negotiating important issues in the bill--whether it will provide taxpayer-funding for abortions, for example. Pelosi is pushing for a Saturday House vote, and a number of big changes will be introduced, likely less than 24 hours before the vote takes place (if in fact it does). The Rules Committee hasn't yet released its resolution, or rule, that must be passed before the bill can move from committee to the floor. The rule will set the terms of debate and determine what amendments are in order.

It seems likely that the rule will allow very few, if any, up-or-down votes on amendments on the House floor. Rather, the rule will include a series of amendments that will all be adopted at once if the rule passes.

On September 24, Speaker Nancy Pelosi told THE WEEKLY STANDARD that she was "absolutely" committed to putting the text of the final House bill online for 72 hours before the House votes:

TWS: Madam Speaker, do you support the measure to put the final House bill online for 72 hours before it's voted on at the very end?

PELOSI: Absolutely. Without question.


But tonight, when asked if Speaker Pelosi will leave the bill online for 72 hours after we see what's in the rule, Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly replied in an email: "No; [the] pledge was to have manager’s amendment online for 72 hours, and we will do that."

Apparently Pelosi's agreement to leave the "final" bill online "at the very end" of the process wasn't such a straightforward pledge.
The Weekly Standard

Well, I think just about everyone except for liberals are fed up with this... Liberals will never get fed up with it unless George Bush was behind it that is...

 

[ncarolinadixie]

"But then how do you account for their opposition to conservatives like Sarah Palin and Fred Thompson as well as the conservative television and radio hosts and political commentators? When they criticize rather than utilize the conservative voices out there, their failure to actively confront the bad legislation coming from the Left doesn't look so much like lack of caring as much as it looks like complicity."

The only thing is here is it is NOT just Conservatives that voice an opposition to other Conservatives. All you have to do is read and listen daily and you hear from the left how bad Palin and Thompson are. Thompson was smart, he walked away early. They're defiled beyond measure and other Republicans sit and do nothing. And yes, you're absolutely correct. Their lack of caring DOES make them complicit. What truely concerns me about the obvious lack of caring AND their complicity is what I see it doing to this country. In a time when WE THE PEOPLE should be coming together and rallying for OUR rights, we're more divided than we've ever been. We're more concerned with "backing" our party then holding them responsible for what they're doing. We're more concered with "WE WON" than making them do what we elected them for. We're more concerned with being able to say "we're right you're wrong" than standing up to those that pull the strings. We're far to easily led around by those strings and the only people that are really paying for it are US. To many people laughed about the tea parties without understanding that the general premise behind them was really a good thing. Did many convolute it and turn it into what it was being accused of? YES But there were many that went to participate for the original premise. IMO they also just gave up because of what they were called and what they were accused of. That is what truely frightens me at this point. The giving up. The "it's all on me now" mindset that many are adopting just to survive and keep what they've worked for and to keep something in place for thier children and grandchildren. And by doing so they're then accused of being the "I've got mine that's all that matters" group.

My husband and I worked hard for what we have and we worked hard to be able to continue our lifestyle with my not working due to medical problems. I could very easily go along with my doctor and allow myself to be permanently disabled. But by doing that I would feel that I am giving up. No, I can't go back to work right now because I'm still in a "healing mode" but to accept disability would mean that basically, IMO, my life comes to an end. Sure there would be enough money coming in but I wouldn't be able to do anything of value or substance. But I digress, our hard work has made all this possible so if I feel that "I've got mine" that is my right. We were in the position to give two of our tenants Decembers rent for Christmas. Trust me, it wasn't just because we're really good landlords. They earned it tenfold. The work they do around the yard, one is a showplace, the work they do in the houses, frees my husband up from a lot of small repair jobs, one is finishing off the basement just because they want to. So they more than earned a months free rent and it will probably happen again. But we worked hard to be able to do these things. Why should we, by our own elected Government, be made to feel that it's not right. That we shouldn't have more than the guy down the street who didn't work as hard?

I hold both parties responsible for what is going on in this country right now. NOT just one man. There in again lies many of the problems. To much of "YOUR GUY" did it all without seeing the entire picture. So is it complicity more than giving up? You betcha!!

 

[Foxfyre]

I hold both parties responsible for what is going on in this country right now. NOT just one man. There in again lies many of the problems. To much of "YOUR GUY" did it all without seeing the entire picture. So is it complicity more than giving up? You betcha!!

Absolutely Dixie. I would like the informed voter to start looking at issues, principles, values, and universal truths and begin a proactive process to educate our fearless leaders in those issues, principles, values, and universal truths. Let's do that instead of trying to 'get' somebody.

Issue of the hour: It seems that we will be taxed on any 'stimulus' funds we received in 2008 or 2009. That isn't such a big deal other than in the absurdity of it.

Principle of the year: You cannot dispense any form of charity from the public treasury without corrupting those in government and those receiving the charity.

Value: Whether or not one is a Christian and/or approve of the Puritan religion, the "Puritan work ethic" served them well and serves us well. The emphasis should be on personal responsibility and accountability, not on who has the most versus who needs the most.

Universal truth: You cannot lift up the poor and weak by tearing down the rich and strong.

 

[HUGGY]

Reid & Pelosi have presided over by far the worst U.S. Congress in History. This is not very surprising to me. Look for the coming Hopey Changey Talking Points to go something like..."BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSSSHHHHHH!!!!!!!! FOXXXXXXXXXXXXXX NOOOOOOOOOOOOZZ!!!!!" How sad.

You are nothing short of a hack and an idiot. Would you care to list the "worst" legislation enacted into law by this congress. You descriptions are so stupid and partisan that it makes me wonder if you are paid by neo cons to be here spreading disinformation.