For Markle and other disillusioned Repugs: No! Obama did not have control of Congress his first two years!

NaNook wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

Markle wrote:

Markle wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

PkrBum wrote:60 is needed for cloture to end filibuster... that is not what is needed to pass legislation.

these rules prevent either side from complete control... excluding reconciliation which was used to pass obamacare.

The dems have controlled the senate by majority since 2007... it's not supposed to be a rubber stamp for either party.

We weren't talking about that. He said the dems controlled both houses for two years.

Actually, it was FOUR years, two with President Barack Hussein Obama.

In the 110th Congress, (Jan. 2007 to Jan. 2009)the breakdown in the House is 239 Democrats (including four Delegates) and 200 Republicans (including the Resident Commissioner).

The Senate has 49 Democrats; two Independents, who have aligned themselves with the Democrats; and 49 Republicans.

In the 111th Congress (Jan 2009 to Jan. 2011) the current party breakdown in the House is 233 Democrats and 202 Republicans.

The Senate had 57 Democrats 2 independents who vote with the Democrats and 41 Republicans

In the current, 112th Congress (Jan. 2011 to Jan. 2013) the current party breakdown in the House is 191 Democrats and 241 Republicans and 3 vacancies.

The Senate has 53 Democrats and 47 Republicans and 2 Independents who caucus and vote with the Democrats.

Didn't President Barack Hussein Obama campaign on being so good at reaching across the aisle? Hmmmm...I guess not so much.

Try again Dreamsglore.

You believe that the country should be run like Cuba or North Korea with a dictatorship?

That our country became the greatest nation the world has ever seen using the system you deplore is irrelevant, immaterial and unimportant to you. Why is that?

Dreamsglore...IF the legislation proposed by the Democrats had any merit at all, don't you think the great unifier, President Barack Hussein Obama could have persuaded a few Republicans to vote with his master plan?

Do you think it MIGHT have something to do with his arrogance and divisiveness starting from day one. In spite of that he got everything he wanted past those first two years. And look where we are...chaos in domestic and foreign policies.

I'm glad to see you finally admit, Markle that your party has no interest in what's best for the American people but rather w/ personality contests w/ the President. No, he didn't get everything he wanted. You can spin that garbage about chaos and foreign domestic policy but he got a Nobel Peace Prize. No matter what you say the rest of the world apparently feels differently. LOL!

NOBEL PEACE PRIZE, are you serious? It's as funny as Krugman winning the Economic Prize from a Bank. Proof of the dumbing down of society....let's try again....

Dreamsglore wrote:

Markle wrote:

Dreamsglore...IF the legislation proposed by the Democrats had any merit at all, don't you think the great unifier, President Barack Hussein Obama could have persuaded a few Republicans to vote with his master plan?

Do you think it MIGHT have something to do with his arrogance and divisiveness starting from day one. In spite of that he got everything he wanted past those first two years. And look where we are...chaos in domestic and foreign policies.

I'm glad to see you finally admit, Markle that your party has no interest in what's best for the American people but rather w/ personality contests w/ the President. No, he didn't get everything he wanted. You can spin that garbage about chaos and foreign domestic policy but he got a Nobel Peace Prize. No matter what you say the rest of the world apparently feels differently. LOL!

PkrBum wrote:lol... what did obama accomplish that deserved the nobel peace prize?

it just proved that the prize no longer has any value or significance.

NaNook wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:

Markle wrote:

Markle wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

PkrBum wrote:60 is needed for cloture to end filibuster... that is not what is needed to pass legislation.

these rules prevent either side from complete control... excluding reconciliation which was used to pass obamacare.

The dems have controlled the senate by majority since 2007... it's not supposed to be a rubber stamp for either party.

We weren't talking about that. He said the dems controlled both houses for two years.

Actually, it was FOUR years, two with President Barack Hussein Obama.

In the 110th Congress, (Jan. 2007 to Jan. 2009)the breakdown in the House is 239 Democrats (including four Delegates) and 200 Republicans (including the Resident Commissioner).

The Senate has 49 Democrats; two Independents, who have aligned themselves with the Democrats; and 49 Republicans.

In the 111th Congress (Jan 2009 to Jan. 2011) the current party breakdown in the House is 233 Democrats and 202 Republicans.

The Senate had 57 Democrats 2 independents who vote with the Democrats and 41 Republicans

In the current, 112th Congress (Jan. 2011 to Jan. 2013) the current party breakdown in the House is 191 Democrats and 241 Republicans and 3 vacancies.

The Senate has 53 Democrats and 47 Republicans and 2 Independents who caucus and vote with the Democrats.

Didn't President Barack Hussein Obama campaign on being so good at reaching across the aisle? Hmmmm...I guess not so much.

Try again Dreamsglore.

You believe that the country should be run like Cuba or North Korea with a dictatorship?

That our country became the greatest nation the world has ever seen using the system you deplore is irrelevant, immaterial and unimportant to you. Why is that?

Dreamsglore...IF the legislation proposed by the Democrats had any merit at all, don't you think the great unifier, President Barack Hussein Obama could have persuaded a few Republicans to vote with his master plan?

Do you think it MIGHT have something to do with his arrogance and divisiveness starting from day one. In spite of that he got everything he wanted past those first two years. And look where we are...chaos in domestic and foreign policies.

That, as usual, is a completely boldfaced lie. I watched in dismay as Obama continually "reached across the aisle", knowing that he could expect only complete obstruction and every attempt imaginable to discredit him from day one. That is how the right operates...dirty tricks, propaganda, smear tactics. You're current profession is a great example.

I guess you haven't read Bob Woodwards book. Obama refused to meet with Republicans, 9 fingers said, "f*ckem". Bring back memories yet?

NaNook wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:

Markle wrote:

Markle wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

PkrBum wrote:60 is needed for cloture to end filibuster... that is not what is needed to pass legislation.

these rules prevent either side from complete control... excluding reconciliation which was used to pass obamacare.

The dems have controlled the senate by majority since 2007... it's not supposed to be a rubber stamp for either party.

We weren't talking about that. He said the dems controlled both houses for two years.

Actually, it was FOUR years, two with President Barack Hussein Obama.

In the 110th Congress, (Jan. 2007 to Jan. 2009)the breakdown in the House is 239 Democrats (including four Delegates) and 200 Republicans (including the Resident Commissioner).

The Senate has 49 Democrats; two Independents, who have aligned themselves with the Democrats; and 49 Republicans.

In the 111th Congress (Jan 2009 to Jan. 2011) the current party breakdown in the House is 233 Democrats and 202 Republicans.

The Senate had 57 Democrats 2 independents who vote with the Democrats and 41 Republicans

In the current, 112th Congress (Jan. 2011 to Jan. 2013) the current party breakdown in the House is 191 Democrats and 241 Republicans and 3 vacancies.

The Senate has 53 Democrats and 47 Republicans and 2 Independents who caucus and vote with the Democrats.

Didn't President Barack Hussein Obama campaign on being so good at reaching across the aisle? Hmmmm...I guess not so much.

Try again Dreamsglore.

You believe that the country should be run like Cuba or North Korea with a dictatorship?

That our country became the greatest nation the world has ever seen using the system you deplore is irrelevant, immaterial and unimportant to you. Why is that?

Dreamsglore...IF the legislation proposed by the Democrats had any merit at all, don't you think the great unifier, President Barack Hussein Obama could have persuaded a few Republicans to vote with his master plan?

Do you think it MIGHT have something to do with his arrogance and divisiveness starting from day one. In spite of that he got everything he wanted past those first two years. And look where we are...chaos in domestic and foreign policies.

That, as usual, is a completely boldfaced lie. I watched in dismay as Obama continually "reached across the aisle", knowing that he could expect only complete obstruction and every attempt imaginable to discredit him from day one. That is how the right operates...dirty tricks, propaganda, smear tactics. You're current profession is a great example.

I guess you haven't read Bob Woodwards book. Obama refused to meet with Republicans, 9 fingers said, "f*ckem". Bring back memories yet?

PkrBum wrote:whelp... maybe the left shouldn't promote legislation that so divisive and unpopular that it requires a super-majority to shove it down our throat. the senate is controlled by a majority and biden is the tie breaker... exactly how much do you and the left want to control?

knothead wrote:

PkrBum wrote:whelp... maybe the left shouldn't promote legislation that so divisive and unpopular that it requires a super-majority to shove it down our throat. the senate is controlled by a majority and biden is the tie breaker... exactly how much do you and the left want to control?

****************************************************

Sounds as though you advocate gridlock . . . if so you should pleased as punch.