Apparently Democrats stand for nothing...or...

[OCinBuffalo]

...they have suddenly taken up the George Costanza "do the opposite" mantra. 

 

Examples:

1) How can any Democrat complain about leaving Syria? Did you forget your own behavior, from 2003-8 regarding the Iraq war? "No Blood For Oil!" We haven't forgotten. On this very board it was proclaimed daily how we shouldn't be involved in Middle Eastern fiascoes. Syria, clowns, is definitionally a ME fiasco. Either you weren't serious then or you aren't serious now. Or more likely, you aren't serious about the topic at all, and automatically come down on the opposite side of whatever the Rs are saying.

 

Which == you stand for nothing.

 

2) This is a great one: the WTO. Pardon us, but we seem to recall you clowns rioting in Seattle, and many other places, against the WTO. Now, when Trump threatens them with reprisals if they try to take advantage of our workers...you're their staunch supporters? The WTO. Rocks, bottles, lighting things on fire. Remember? We do. We saw you. We heard what elected Democrats said(or more correctly, what their union paymasters told them to say.) The WTO is an organization that for YEARS you said was directly responsible for keeping whole countries in poverty, AND, depressing American worker's wages. Now, because Trump actually does what you said needed to be done? Well, what, are you gonna replace your Che Guevera T-Shirts with WTO blazers?

 

So again I ask: what do you stand for? I bet you have no defensible argument either way, which is: nothing.

 

3) Apparently you think we forgot "General Betray Us". So let's get this straight: if you like what a general officer has to say, then generals are there to make sure a POTUS doesn't start wars you don't like, subsume a R president's Constitutional authority, and be the source of absolute truth on all things military(which is how Mad Dog is now being portrayed). But, if you don't like what he says, then generals are merely empty-headed tools of the military industrial complex, stooges of the R president, probable war criminals, and perhaps even treasonous. And, if they dare to contradict the all-knowing Obama, then they have committed prima facie treason, should be fired immediately, and investigated via star-chamber.

 

Yeah, nothing like making it up as you go along, which again, means you stand for nothing.

 

4) I spent my entire childhood and early teens listening to Democrats embarrass themselves by claiming that Reagan's rhetoric alone would likely start WW3. That's HOF wrong. MTV had videos they played every hour with puppets of Reagan the fool. Democrats constantly told us that diplomacy was the answer to all, and that we'd be much better off getting along with Russia than confronting her. When Mitt Romney said that Russia was the biggest threat to us in his debate with Obama, Obama said "the 1980s called and they want their foreign policy back". And, when Russia attacked Crimea, Obama did what? Sanctions. Diplomacy.

 

Now, apparently we can throw ALL of that out the window, because the minute Trump tries diplomacy with Russia, hell, he might as well be Nevile Chamaberlain? Trump colluded with the Russians, and yet, as a massive idiot, with no foreign policy experience, or real connections....

 

...is incapable of doing any such thing, at the same time.

 

WTF?  

 

 

That's just 4 examples. There are 8 more I can think of as I write this. Who are you people, and what have you done with the Democrats? I have never seen so much blatant contradiction, by people who are on record saying the exact opposite of what they are now.

 

And you think: we forgot. No. I know my history, and those don't are doomed to remain as children for life. I know what you've said, I read it, right here on this board. Tell me: what do Democrats believe? What is their actual position on ANYTHING? What policies and programs do they support, right now, today? Because after last week: I honestly have no idea.

Edited December 31, 2018 by OCinBuffalo

[/dev/null]

You will probably enjoy the article I posted in the "What have Democrats done" thread yesterday.  

 

 

[DC Tom]

Just now, /dev/null said:

You will probably enjoy the article I posted in the "What have Democrats done" thread yesterday.  

 

 

 

Yeah, but OC has to start his own threads.  He craves the attention.  

 

(Cue him telling everyone he's "got my number" in 3...2...1...)

[Foxx]

suddenly?

Edited December 31, 2018 by Foxx

[BeginnersMind]

6 hours ago, DC Tom said:

 

Yeah, but OC has to start his own threads.  He craves the attention.  

 

(Cue him telling everyone he's "got my number" in 3...2...1...)

 

The overused cliche these days has something to do with renting space inside your head. 

 

Getting someone’s number is from the 70s old man. 

[mead107]

They all wanted a big fence several years ago. Perhaps trump should call it a super fence instead of a wall. ?. Then the democrats could say it was their idea ??

[DC Tom]

1 hour ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

The overused cliche these days has something to do with renting space inside your head. 

 

Getting someone’s number is from the 70s old man. 

 

1) Wrong.

2) Tell OC.  He's the one that uses it.

[OCinBuffalo]

On 12/31/2018 at 2:47 PM, DC Tom said:

 

Yeah, but OC has to start his own threads.  He craves the attention.  

 

(Cue him telling everyone he's "got my number" in 3...2...1...)

At least I start them. All you do is wait in the wings and comment on everybody else's thread. In fact, offhand I cannot remember a single thread you've ever started. Much easier to wait until somebody else puts down their thoughts, in full, on a topic and then find a small error...than do any real work yourself.

 

Please. This entire board knows the score. They may be afraid of you, they may feel inferior to you. I am not, and I do not. I've seen you screw up lots of times. The difference is: I don't feel the need to post about every single instance. You do.

 

EDIT: Also, I can't help but notice that you have nothing substantive to contribute to this thread. Once again, it's all about the process, and never the content with you.

Edited January 2, 2019 by OCinBuffalo

[boyst]

˙ɐǝpᴉ ou ǝʌɐɥ ʎlʇsǝuoɥ I :ʞǝǝʍ ʇsɐl ɹǝʇɟɐ ǝsnɐɔǝq ¿ʎɐpoʇ 'ʍou ʇɥƃᴉɹ 'ʇɹoddns ʎǝɥʇ op sɯɐɹƃoɹd puɐ sǝᴉɔᴉlod ʇɐɥM ¿פNIH┴⅄N∀ uo uoᴉʇᴉsod lɐnʇɔɐ ɹᴉǝɥʇ sᴉ ʇɐɥM ¿ǝʌǝᴉlǝq sʇɐɹɔoɯǝp op ʇɐɥʍ :ǝɯ llǝ┴ ˙pɹɐoq sᴉɥʇ uo ǝɹǝɥ ʇɥƃᴉɹ 'ʇᴉ pɐǝɹ I 'pᴉɐs ǝʌ,noʎ ʇɐɥʍ ʍouʞ I ˙ǝɟᴉl ɹoɟ uǝɹplᴉɥɔ sɐ uᴉɐɯǝɹ oʇ pǝɯoop ǝɹɐ ʇ,uop ǝsoɥʇ puɐ 'ʎɹoʇsᴉɥ ʎɯ ʍouʞ I ˙oN ˙ʇoƃɹoɟ ǝʍ :ʞuᴉɥʇ noʎ pu∀

 

˙ʍou ǝɹɐ ʎǝɥʇ ʇɐɥʍ ɟo ǝʇᴉsoddo ʇɔɐxǝ ǝɥʇ ƃuᴉʎɐs pɹoɔǝɹ uo ǝɹɐ oɥʍ ǝldoǝd ʎq 'uoᴉʇɔᴉpɐɹʇuoɔ ʇuɐʇɐlq ɥɔnɯ os uǝǝs ɹǝʌǝu ǝʌɐɥ I ¿sʇɐɹɔoɯǝp ǝɥʇ ɥʇᴉʍ ǝuop noʎ ǝʌɐɥ ʇɐɥʍ puɐ 'ǝldoǝd noʎ ǝɹɐ oɥM ˙sᴉɥʇ ǝʇᴉɹʍ I sɐ ɟo ʞuᴉɥʇ uɐɔ I ǝɹoɯ 8 ǝɹɐ ǝɹǝɥ┴ ˙sǝldɯɐxǝ ㄣ ʇsnɾ s,ʇɐɥ┴

 

 

 :oʞɔɐʍ: ¿Ⅎ┴M

 

˙ǝɯᴉʇ ǝɯɐs ǝɥʇ ʇɐ 'ƃuᴉɥʇ ɥɔns ʎuɐ ƃuᴉop ɟo ǝlqɐdɐɔuᴉ sᴉ˙˙˙

 

˙˙˙˙suoᴉʇɔǝuuoɔ lɐǝɹ ɹo 'ǝɔuǝᴉɹǝdxǝ ʎɔᴉlod uƃᴉǝɹoɟ ou ɥʇᴉʍ 'ʇoᴉpᴉ ǝʌᴉssɐɯ ɐ sɐ 'ʇǝʎ puɐ 'suɐᴉssnɹ ǝɥʇ ɥʇᴉʍ pǝpnlloɔ dɯnɹ┴ ¿uᴉɐlɹǝqɐɯɐɥƆ ǝlᴉʌǝN ǝq llǝʍ sɐ ʇɥƃᴉɯ ǝɥ 'llǝɥ 'ɐᴉssnɹ ɥʇᴉʍ ʎɔɐɯoldᴉp sǝᴉɹʇ dɯnɹ┴ ǝʇnuᴉɯ ǝɥʇ ǝsnɐɔǝq 'ʍopuᴉʍ ǝɥʇ ʇno ʇɐɥʇ ɟo ˥˥∀ ʍoɹɥʇ uɐɔ ǝʍ ʎlʇuǝɹɐddɐ 'ʍoN

 

˙ʎɔɐɯoldᴉp ˙suoᴉʇɔuɐS ¿ʇɐɥʍ pᴉp ɐɯɐqO 'ɐǝɯᴉɹƆ pǝʞɔɐʇʇɐ ɐᴉssnɹ uǝɥʍ 'pu∀ ˙,,ʞɔɐq ʎɔᴉlod uƃᴉǝɹoɟ ɹᴉǝɥʇ ʇuɐʍ ʎǝɥʇ puɐ pǝllɐɔ s086Ɩ ǝɥʇ,, pᴉɐs ɐɯɐqO 'ɐɯɐqO ɥʇᴉʍ ǝʇɐqǝp sᴉɥ uᴉ sn oʇ ʇɐǝɹɥʇ ʇsǝƃƃᴉq ǝɥʇ sɐʍ ɐᴉssnɹ ʇɐɥʇ pᴉɐs ʎǝuɯoɹ ʇʇᴉW uǝɥM ˙ɹǝɥ ƃuᴉʇuoɹɟuoɔ uɐɥʇ ɐᴉssnɹ ɥʇᴉʍ ƃuolɐ ƃuᴉʇʇǝƃ ɟɟo ɹǝʇʇǝq ɥɔnɯ ǝq p,ǝʍ ʇɐɥʇ puɐ 'llɐ oʇ ɹǝʍsuɐ ǝɥʇ sɐʍ ʎɔɐɯoldᴉp ʇɐɥʇ sn ploʇ ʎlʇuɐʇsuoɔ sʇɐɹɔoɯǝp ˙looɟ ǝɥʇ uɐƃɐǝɹ ɟo sʇǝddnd ɥʇᴉʍ ɹnoɥ ʎɹǝʌǝ pǝʎɐld ʎǝɥʇ soǝpᴉʌ pɐɥ Λ┴W ˙ƃuoɹʍ ℲOH s,ʇɐɥ┴ ˙ƐMM ʇɹɐʇs ʎlǝʞᴉl plnoʍ ǝuolɐ ɔᴉɹoʇǝɥɹ s,uɐƃɐǝɹ ʇɐɥʇ ƃuᴉɯᴉɐlɔ ʎq sǝʌlǝsɯǝɥʇ ssɐɹɹɐqɯǝ sʇɐɹɔoɯǝp oʇ ƃuᴉuǝʇsᴉl suǝǝʇ ʎlɹɐǝ puɐ pooɥplᴉɥɔ ǝɹᴉʇuǝ ʎɯ ʇuǝds I (ㄣ

 

˙ƃuᴉɥʇou ɹoɟ puɐʇs noʎ suɐǝɯ 'uᴉɐƃɐ ɥɔᴉɥʍ 'ƃuolɐ oƃ noʎ sɐ dn ʇᴉ ƃuᴉʞɐɯ ǝʞᴉl ƃuᴉɥʇou 'ɥɐǝ⅄

 

˙ɹǝqɯɐɥɔ-ɹɐʇs ɐᴉʌ pǝʇɐƃᴉʇsǝʌuᴉ puɐ 'ʎlǝʇɐᴉpǝɯɯᴉ pǝɹᴉɟ ǝq plnoɥs 'uosɐǝɹʇ ǝᴉɔɐɟ ɐɯᴉɹd pǝʇʇᴉɯɯoɔ ǝʌɐɥ ʎǝɥʇ uǝɥʇ 'ɐɯɐqO ƃuᴉʍouʞ-llɐ ǝɥʇ ʇɔᴉpɐɹʇuoɔ oʇ ǝɹɐp ʎǝɥʇ ɟᴉ 'pu∀ ˙snouosɐǝɹʇ uǝʌǝ sdɐɥɹǝd puɐ 'slɐuᴉɯᴉɹɔ ɹɐʍ ǝlqɐqoɹd 'ʇuǝpᴉsǝɹd ɹ ǝɥʇ ɟo sǝƃooʇs 'xǝldɯoɔ lɐᴉɹʇsnpuᴉ ʎɹɐʇᴉlᴉɯ ǝɥʇ ɟo slooʇ pǝpɐǝɥ-ʎʇdɯǝ ʎlǝɹǝɯ ǝɹɐ slɐɹǝuǝƃ uǝɥʇ 'sʎɐs ǝɥ ʇɐɥʍ ǝʞᴉl ʇ,uop noʎ ɟᴉ 'ʇnq ˙(pǝʎɐɹʇɹod ƃuᴉǝq ʍou sᴉ ƃop pɐW ʍoɥ sᴉ ɥɔᴉɥʍ)ʎɹɐʇᴉlᴉɯ sƃuᴉɥʇ llɐ uo ɥʇnɹʇ ǝʇnlosqɐ ɟo ǝɔɹnos ǝɥʇ ǝq puɐ 'ʎʇᴉɹoɥʇnɐ lɐuoᴉʇnʇᴉʇsuoƆ s,ʇuǝpᴉsǝɹd ɹ ɐ ǝɯnsqns 'ǝʞᴉl ʇ,uop noʎ sɹɐʍ ʇɹɐʇs ʇ,usǝop S∩┴OԀ ɐ ǝɹns ǝʞɐɯ oʇ ǝɹǝɥʇ ǝɹɐ slɐɹǝuǝƃ uǝɥʇ 'ʎɐs oʇ sɐɥ ɹǝɔᴉɟɟo lɐɹǝuǝƃ ɐ ʇɐɥʍ ǝʞᴉl noʎ ɟᴉ :ʇɥƃᴉɐɹʇs sᴉɥʇ ʇǝƃ s,ʇǝl oS ˙,,s∩ ʎɐɹʇǝq lɐɹǝuǝפ,, ʇoƃɹoɟ ǝʍ ʞuᴉɥʇ noʎ ʎlʇuǝɹɐdd∀ (Ɛ

 

˙ƃuᴉɥʇou :sᴉ ɥɔᴉɥʍ 'ʎɐʍ ɹǝɥʇᴉǝ ʇuǝɯnƃɹɐ ǝlqᴉsuǝɟǝp ou ǝʌɐɥ noʎ ʇǝq I ¿ɹoɟ puɐʇs noʎ op ʇɐɥʍ :ʞsɐ I uᴉɐƃɐ oS

 

¿sɹǝzɐlq O┴M ɥʇᴉʍ sʇɹᴉɥS-┴ ɐɹǝʌǝnפ ǝɥƆ ɹnoʎ ǝɔɐldǝɹ ɐuuoƃ noʎ ǝɹɐ 'ʇɐɥʍ 'llǝM ¿ǝuop ǝq oʇ pǝpǝǝu pᴉɐs noʎ ʇɐɥʍ sǝop ʎllɐnʇɔɐ dɯnɹ┴ ǝsnɐɔǝq 'ʍoN ˙sǝƃɐʍ s,ɹǝʞɹoʍ uɐɔᴉɹǝɯ∀ ƃuᴉssǝɹdǝp 'pN∀ 'ʎʇɹǝʌod uᴉ sǝᴉɹʇunoɔ ǝloɥʍ ƃuᴉdǝǝʞ ɹoɟ ǝlqᴉsuodsǝɹ ʎlʇɔǝɹᴉp sɐʍ pᴉɐs noʎ Sɹ∀Ǝ⅄ ɹoɟ ʇɐɥʇ uoᴉʇɐzᴉuɐƃɹo uɐ sᴉ O┴M ǝɥ┴ (˙ʎɐs oʇ ɯǝɥʇ ploʇ sɹǝʇsɐɯʎɐd uoᴉun ɹᴉǝɥʇ ʇɐɥʍ 'ʎlʇɔǝɹɹoɔ ǝɹoɯ ɹo)pᴉɐs sʇɐɹɔoɯǝp pǝʇɔǝlǝ ʇɐɥʍ pɹɐǝɥ ǝM ˙noʎ ʍɐs ǝM ˙op ǝM ¿ɹǝqɯǝɯǝɹ ˙ǝɹᴉɟ uo sƃuᴉɥʇ ƃuᴉʇɥƃᴉl 'sǝlʇʇoq 'sʞɔoɹ ˙O┴M ǝɥ┴ ¿sɹǝʇɹoddns ɥɔunɐʇs ɹᴉǝɥʇ ǝɹ,noʎ˙˙˙sɹǝʞɹoʍ ɹno ɟo ǝƃɐʇuɐʌpɐ ǝʞɐʇ oʇ ʎɹʇ ʎǝɥʇ ɟᴉ slɐsᴉɹdǝɹ ɥʇᴉʍ ɯǝɥʇ suǝʇɐǝɹɥʇ dɯnɹ┴ uǝɥʍ 'ʍoN ˙O┴M ǝɥʇ ʇsuᴉɐƃɐ 'sǝɔɐld ɹǝɥʇo ʎuɐɯ puɐ 'ǝlʇʇɐǝS uᴉ ƃuᴉʇoᴉɹ suʍolɔ noʎ llɐɔǝɹ oʇ ɯǝǝs ǝʍ ʇnq 'sn uopɹɐԀ ˙O┴M ǝɥʇ :ǝuo ʇɐǝɹƃ ɐ sᴉ sᴉɥ┴ (ᄅ

 

˙ƃuᴉɥʇou ɹoɟ puɐʇs noʎ == ɥɔᴉɥM

 

˙ƃuᴉʎɐs ǝɹɐ sɹ ǝɥʇ ɹǝʌǝʇɐɥʍ ɟo ǝpᴉs ǝʇᴉsoddo ǝɥʇ uo uʍop ǝɯoɔ ʎllɐɔᴉʇɐɯoʇnɐ puɐ 'llɐ ʇɐ ɔᴉdoʇ ǝɥʇ ʇnoqɐ snoᴉɹǝs ʇ,uǝɹɐ noʎ 'ʎlǝʞᴉl ǝɹoɯ ɹO ˙ʍou snoᴉɹǝs ʇ,uǝɹɐ noʎ ɹo uǝɥʇ snoᴉɹǝs ʇ,uǝɹǝʍ noʎ ɹǝɥʇᴉƎ ˙oɔsɐᴉɟ ƎW ɐ ʎllɐuoᴉʇᴉuᴉɟǝp sᴉ 'suʍolɔ 'ɐᴉɹʎS ˙sǝoɔsɐᴉɟ uɹǝʇsɐƎ ǝlppᴉW uᴉ pǝʌloʌuᴉ ǝq ʇ,uplnoɥs ǝʍ ʍoɥ ʎlᴉɐp pǝɯᴉɐlɔoɹd sɐʍ ʇᴉ pɹɐoq ʎɹǝʌ sᴉɥʇ uO ˙uǝʇʇoƃɹoɟ ʇ,uǝʌɐɥ ǝM ,,¡lᴉO ɹoℲ poolq oN,, ¿ɹɐʍ bɐɹI ǝɥʇ ƃuᴉpɹɐƃǝɹ 8-Ɛ00ᄅ ɯoɹɟ 'ɹoᴉʌɐɥǝq uʍo ɹnoʎ ʇǝƃɹoɟ noʎ pᴉp ¿ɐᴉɹʎS ƃuᴉʌɐǝl ʇnoqɐ uᴉɐldɯoɔ ʇɐɹɔoɯǝp ʎuɐ uɐɔ ʍoH (Ɩ

:sǝldɯɐxƎ

 

 ˙ɐɹʇuɐɯ ,,ǝʇᴉsoddo ǝɥʇ op,, ɐzuɐʇsoƆ ǝƃɹoǝפ ǝɥʇ dn uǝʞɐʇ ʎluǝppns ǝʌɐɥ ʎǝɥʇ˙˙˙

[3rdnlng]

If you can read the above you have an IQ in 1% of English speaking readers. If you say you can understand it in its original form, you are a liar.

[reddogblitz]

It's the oldest rule in politics. If you're person does it, it's pure brilliance. If their person does it, it's dumber than dog *****.  And evil.

[Foxx]

12 hours ago, OCinBuffalo said:

At least I start them. All you do is wait in the wings and comment on everybody else's thread. In fact, offhand I cannot remember a single thread you've ever started. Much easier to wait until somebody else puts down their thoughts, in full, on a topic and then find a small error...than do any real work yourself.

 

Please. This entire board knows the score. They may be afraid of you, they may feel inferior to you. I am not, and I do not. I've seen you screw up lots of times. The difference is: I don't feel the need to post about every single instance. You do.

 

EDIT: Also, I can't help but notice that you have nothing substantive to contribute to this thread. Once again, it's all about the process, and never the content with you.

does this invalidate the rest of your post?

https://www.twobillsdrive.com/community/profile/68-dc-tom/?do=content&type=forums_topic&change_section=1

[Tiberius]

 

 

 

Quote

 

House Democrats are set to pursue legislation that squarely targets President Trump by requiring presidential candidates to disclose 10 years of tax returns, mandating more transparency for presidential inaugural and transition committees and tightening White House ethics standards.

Those provisions are only a small part of a broad reform bill — to be titled the “For the People Act” — that encompasses campaign finance, election integrity and security, congressional ethics and more. But they are clear signals that Democrats intend to take an aggressive approach to Trump and his administration.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and other Democrats are set to unveil an outline of the legislation Friday in the Capitol. The Washington Post obtained an advance blueprint of the bill, which will move through several House committees over the coming weeks and is tentatively set for floor consideration early this year.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/house-democrats-unveil-bill-targeting-trump-on-tax-returns-and-transparency/2019/01/04/43f429a8-102d-11e9-831f-3aa2c2be4cbd_story.html?utm_term=.19c2cf00a0af

Quote

Under the blueprint, presidents, vice presidents and candidates for those offices would all be required to release 10 years of returns — a move prompted by Trump’s refusal to release any returns throughout the 2016 campaign up to the present day, breaking with the practice of both Democratic and Republican presidential candidates in recent decades.

This effort to secure Trump’s tax returns is moving in parallel to an effort to use existing federal law that allows the chairs of the congressional taxation committees to inspect any U.S. tax return. Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard E. Neal (D-Mass.) has said he expects to move deliberately in that direction over the coming months, though that gambit will probably be subject to litigation.

 

[outsidethebox]

Democratic party has turned into diaper rash party. 

Keep pushing your childish agendas, you'll just guarantee six more years of President Trump. 

[Foxx]

perhaps it is just me, but isn't the IRS responsible for discerning personal tax returns and tax audits and referring anyone for charges found to have committed an unlawful act? 

 

just more posturing by the swamp.

[3rdnlng]

27 minutes ago, Foxx said:

perhaps it is just me, but isn't the IRS responsible for discerning personal tax returns and tax audits and referring anyone for charges found to have committed an unlawful act? 

 

just more posturing by the swamp.

Trump would be a fool to release his tax returns. With all of his properties and businesses they are extremely complex and the dems would have a field day distorting them.  

[DC Tom]

3 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Trump would be a fool to release his tax returns. With all of his properties and businesses they are extremely complex and the dems would have a field day distorting them.  

 

Hell, they didn't even understand his 2005 1040 when it was leaked to them.

[The_Dude]

2 hours ago, DC Tom said:

 

Hell, they didn't even understand his 2005 1040 when it was leaked to them.

 

The release of that was about as damning as the report on Ms. Lippy’s car being green. 

Edited January 4, 2019 by The_Dude

[B-Man]

The Coming Democratic Disillusion by Matthew Continetti   Original Article

 

On Thursday, after eight years in the minority, Nancy Pelosi returned to power as speaker of the House of Representatives. Her party controls 235 seats to the Republicans' 199. 

 

{snip}

 

I suspect Pelosi is aware of this lesson. I doubt her caucus is. More than a quarter of them are freshmen, many are young, and two are self-avowed democratic socialists. They are inclined to believe history began when Barack Obama entered Mile High Stadium in Denver. It's an impression encouraged by cable news, which spent the run up to Pelosi's investiture celebrating the youth, diversity, and ambition of the House Democratic freshmen. And yet, for all the talk of Alison Spanberger and the "Badass Caucus," of how Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Rashida Tlaib "aren't going to take no for an answer," of grand plans for a Green New Deal and Medicare for All, there remains the inescapable reality of power. Democrats don't really have it. Indeed, they have even less than the last time Pelosi became speaker.

 

Yes, they can fire their subpoena cannon at the White House. They can interrogate cabinet officials, subpoena Jared and Ivanka, leak scoops to reporters, maybe force a cabinet official or two to resign, if any are left. When Mueller delivers his findings, they could begin impeachment proceedings. But impeachment, like progressive legislation, won't get far. A decade ago the House could pass bills and hope that Harry Reid would persuade his Democratic Senate majority to support them. All Pelosi had to worry about was President Bush's veto. Now, Pelosi has to deal with Mitch McConnell's Republican Senate even before her policies reach Donald Trump.

 

She's in the same situation as John Boehner, who became speaker after the Tea Party election in 2010. No one envied Boehner.

 

The main product of the Tea Party Congress (2011-2013) was frustration. Votes to repeal Obamacare went nowhere. Negotiations over a rise in the debt ceiling produced a fiscal sequester that hardly anyone liked. Through it all, Boehner faced sniping from within his party by newcomers short on experience but long on ideological zeal. It so wore him down that he resigned his post in 2015. His replacement's tenure was even briefer.

 

More at the link:

 

 

.

Edited January 5, 2019 by B-Man

[Foxx]

i guess this is as good a place as any...

 

the hits just keep on coming. really just unbelievable.

 

Rep. Jackson Lee refuses to step down from CBC Foundation amid retaliation allegations

 

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee is refusing demands to step down as leader of the Congressional Black Caucus’ nonprofit arm amid claims she fired one of her congressional staffers over rape allegations.

 

Jackson Lee was told by the CBC Foundation’s board to resign during a lengthy call on Thursday night, according to two sources with knowledge of the conversation. Jackson Lee resisted those demands, and the call abruptly ended as other board members were trying to figure out how to continue the conversation without the Texas Democrat. ...

 

... According to the lawsuit at the center of the controversy, the former staffer, identified only as Jane Doe, alleges that she was fired from Jackson Lee’s office last year after she indicated that she wanted to pursue legal action against a man whom she says raped her when she was an intern for the CBCF. The man worked as intern coordinator for the CBCF at the time of the alleged incident. ...