ED, I’m willing.

Tanbark drop me a line at ekunin@optonline.net
We’ll talk.

Alice @ 54

Maybe we don’t need to replace all the bad ones, just make some examples?

Or maybe we need change in leadersheep? Maybe Reid, Schumer, Emmaual, and Hoyer need to be replaced. …

I like Pelosi, but I think the rest of our leaders are a lost cause.

i used to too… but (to break my own rule) the best spin i can put on it is that pelosi provides the cover while hoyer et al fuck us over.

in either case (she mostly agrees with them, or she doesn’t but she provides the cover) she’s failing us and the country.

I don’t see how you can blame her. The Blue Dog votes are certainly there. How can you say it’s her fault? If there are ways for the Blue Dogs to get votes on things she doesn’t really want to bring up, then what is she to do to hold them at bay?

Plus, is it really Democracy for one person to stifle the rest of Congress?

I know it stinks, but if this is the play the Blue Dogs want to make, then let them and counter-attack in the primaries. Replace them just as we would replace Republicans.

When Blue Dogs triangulate and join Republicans, then that definitely puts Pelosi (and us) in the minority!

Ed*ard Teller @ 5

Anyone want a slighly soiled used Pelosi 2007 bumper sticker?

The bloom is off that rose, isn’t it.

Why blame her? Isn’t it the Blue dogs who have taken control?

If Harry Reid is willing to let majority rule go down the drain with the silly filibuster rule, then let’s blame him. If Hoyer and Emanuel want to ruin the House, then blame them.

So far I’ve only seen a couple of missteps from Spkr. Pelosi. Nope, this debacle is all Blue Dog and Republican.

I’d like to add this:

If ANYONE on that stage believes, as Clinton said:

“It’s very difficult to know what we’re going to be inheriting…”

Then they should get the fuck OFF that stage, instanter, and OUT of the race, and go home to eat fish, or sardines, or Omega-D oils, or something to improve their cognitive ability.

John, Hillary, and Barak, let me help you:

The next president is going to inherit one HELL of a wall-banging, insoluble, CLUSTERFUCK!

Wednesday nights proceedings locked in a HUGE factoid; that being, that the leading candidates for the democratic nomination for the presidency of the United States, are quite comfortable with letting george bush sacrifice the lives of several hundred more of our troops (at minimum, and not to mention the Iraqi lives, plus a few zillion more dollars) to cover his political ass, while he strings things out, and generously bequeathes the radioactive turd that he’s created in Iraq to their eager and willing hands.

And of course, I’m not just pickin’ on Hillary here; Edwards and Obama were right there with her in the “Gosharootie! Who knows what’s gonna happen?” canoe; oaring and whoring with the “we need more time…” shitspeak, like they were the bushCo-Oxford shell team.

By God, the obscenity of what they were saying made me yearn for the good, clean, fun, of the juiciest porn-flick ever made.

My stomach literally turned when I read their statements.

Don’t don’t know what else to rant. I’m stunned.

We need to elect some replacements for Waxman and Levin and Leahy and all those other defeatist Democratic blow hards who won’t use their power to confront the corrupt Bush sycopants. MoveOn.net has the right idea; let’s clear those timid Democrats out and find new more effective representatives. Until then, it’s letter-writing, jaw-flapping blowhard time.

Waxman has been doing his legal best to dog these guys right out of office. Leahy has been connecting the dots in preparation for whatever he can leverage. I think that you’re right about Levin, though.

“You’re either with us or you’re against us.”

is only fair. Besides, we’ve been hearing it for nearly 7 years now, from the asshole whose butt they keep kissing.

Under the Constitution, all appropriation bills must arise in the House. No monies can be appropriated for any federally funded project — including earmarks or “pork” — unless authorized by bills initiated or approved in the Democratic House.

The Constitution says

All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

What this means is that all bills that propose new taxes, or changes in taxes, have to start in the House. But bills that spend rather than raise money can start in the Senate.

However, the Constitution also says

No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law …

and since an appropriation requires the consent of both houses, either house has a veto over any spending. 41 senators can block an appropriation.