GOP already backing away from campaign promises.....

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Are you shocked?

By ANDREW TAYLOR and CALVIN WOODWARD, Associated Press Andrew Taylor And Calvin Woodward, Associated Press – 2 hrs 44 mins ago

WASHINGTON – Republicans have already violated some of the vows they made in taking stewardship of the House.

Their pledge to cut $100 billion from the budget in one year won't be kept.

And for a coming vote seeking to repeal the health care overhaul, the first major initiative of the new Congress, lawmakers won't be allowed to propose changes to the legislation despite Republican promises to end such heavy-handed tactics from the days of Democratic control.

[exopolitician]

I would have never guessed.

[Landslide Lyndon]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIX_0nMlIBU

[tpfkaw]

Wait, I was under the impression that they were really extreme extremists!  What happened?

[Torie]

Reality is such a bitch isn't it?

[anvi]

'Tis.  Campaign in poetry, govern in...well, not exactly prose...

I guess the health care repeal vote going through without possible amendment is, despite what Beohner says in speeches, what the GOP considers payback.

[Mr. Taft Republican]

Shocker, no really, totally didn't see it coming/sarcasm.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Why would anyone be shocked? All you need to do is look at the Republican's pledges.


As I understand it, Boehner will bring up two bills on health care. One is a clean repeal that is one page long. The other is the replacement bill which as I understand it, amendments will be allowed. If the goal is a clean slate to start from it makes perfect sense to not allow the initial repeal to be significantly altered to the point that it changes the original intent of a full repeal. Of course explaining the mechanics takes time and as we can already see the mainstream media isn't going to be doing the Republicans any favors. So it is simiply a violation of their promises. Did the Republicans not promise "an up or down vote on a clean repeal bill". I do beleive they did. Are the promises contradictory? Yes, but so were the Democrat promises. How is this different then Pelosi waiving her own paygo rules or Obama violating his pledge to veto pork filled bills? It's not. The Republican's would loose more by not having an up or down vote on a clean repeal bill.

[Nhoj]

Its not different and that's the problem, the fact of the matter is neither party seems to have any intention of doing anything that could negatively affect them. But they sure love to say they will change things.

[Keystone Phil]

I'm just waiting for Senator Kyl and/or Speaker Boehner to turn to the President at a meeting and say, "We won."

[Landslide Lyndon]

I'm just waiting for Senator Kyl and/or Speaker Boehner to turn to the President at a meeting and say, "We won."

In what world Kyl won? The Democrats still control the Senate.

[Keystone Phil]

I'm just waiting for Senator Kyl and/or Speaker Boehner to turn to the President at a meeting and say, "We won."

In what world Kyl won? The Democrats still control the Senate.

He obviously didn't win but it would be in response to a greater GOP presence in Congress. They'll have some "bipartisan" event soon, the President will act like he still runs everything and Kyl could simply make a general comment (could even be referring to the House). He'd be saying it since the great uniter we have as President decided to say it to him in early 2009. I'm sure Boehner will be kind enough to let Kyl say it on his behalf if Obama starts complaining about something in the House.

[Landslide Lyndon]

I'm just waiting for Senator Kyl and/or Speaker Boehner to turn to the President at a meeting and say, "We won."

In what world Kyl won? The Democrats still control the Senate.

He obviously didn't win but it would be in response to a greater GOP presence in Congress. They'll have some "bipartisan" event soon, the President will act like he still runs everything and Kyl could simply make a general comment (could even be referring to the House). He'd be saying it since the great uniter we have as President decided to say it to him in early 2009. I'm sure Boehner will be kind enough to let Kyl say it on his behalf if Obama starts complaining about something in the House.

Apparently you're confused. Bush isn't president anymore.

[Keystone Phil]

I'm just waiting for Senator Kyl and/or Speaker Boehner to turn to the President at a meeting and say, "We won."

In what world Kyl won? The Democrats still control the Senate.

He obviously didn't win but it would be in response to a greater GOP presence in Congress. They'll have some "bipartisan" event soon, the President will act like he still runs everything and Kyl could simply make a general comment (could even be referring to the House). He'd be saying it since the great uniter we have as President decided to say it to him in early 2009. I'm sure Boehner will be kind enough to let Kyl say it on his behalf if Obama starts complaining about something in the House.

Apparently you're confused. Bush isn't president anymore.

Right because, despite the example I cited, this President doesn't act like he's entitled to everything he wants.

"We won." Really changed Washington, Mr. President!

[SvenssonRS]

I'm so glad I didn't actually contribute anything to these liars, since Lummis was never going to get my vote anyway.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Apparently you're confused. Bush isn't president anymore.

Right because, despite the example I cited, this President doesn't act like he's entitled to everything he wants.

"We won." Really changed Washington, Mr. President!
[/quote]

Are you kind enough to remind us the circumstances under which he uttered that phrase?

[Keystone Phil]

Are you kind enough to remind us the circumstances under which he uttered that phrase?

He said it during negotiations with Congressional Republicans after Republicans noted their concern with spending. Great negotiating.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Are you kind enough to remind us the circumstances under which he uttered that phrase?

He said it during negotiations with Congressional Republicans after Republicans noted their concern with spending. Great negotiating.

Well, as much as it may surprise you the minority can't FORCE their policies on the majority. Especially when they have settled on a strategy of "No Compromise".

[Keystone Phil]

Are you kind enough to remind us the circumstances under which he uttered that phrase?

He said it during negotiations with Congressional Republicans after Republicans noted their concern with spending. Great negotiating.

Well, as much as it may surprise you the minority can't FORCE their policies on the majority. Especially when they have settled on a strategy of "No Compromise".

Who said anything about forcing policies on anyone? You don't say "I won" after campaigning on changing politics and all of his other nonsense at negotiations.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Are you kind enough to remind us the circumstances under which he uttered that phrase?

He said it during negotiations with Congressional Republicans after Republicans noted their concern with spending. Great negotiating.

Well, as much as it may surprise you the minority can't FORCE their policies on the majority. Especially when they have settled on a strategy of "No Compromise".

Who said anything about forcing policies on anyone? You don't say "I won" after campaigning on changing politics and all of his other nonsense at negotiations.

You can if the losing side behaves as if they own the place.

[Keystone Phil]

Are you kind enough to remind us the circumstances under which he uttered that phrase?

He said it during negotiations with Congressional Republicans after Republicans noted their concern with spending. Great negotiating.

Well, as much as it may surprise you the minority can't FORCE their policies on the majority. Especially when they have settled on a strategy of "No Compromise".

Who said anything about forcing policies on anyone? You don't say "I won" after campaigning on changing politics and all of his other nonsense at negotiations.

You can if the losing side behaves as if they own the place.

Right, px.    They were acting like they owned the place by voicing their concerns over spending. Thanks for your daily dose of hackery.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Are you kind enough to remind us the circumstances under which he uttered that phrase?

He said it during negotiations with Congressional Republicans after Republicans noted their concern with spending. Great negotiating.

Well, as much as it may surprise you the minority can't FORCE their policies on the majority. Especially when they have settled on a strategy of "No Compromise".

Who said anything about forcing policies on anyone? You don't say "I won" after campaigning on changing politics and all of his other nonsense at negotiations.

You can if the losing side behaves as if they own the place.

Right, px.    They were acting like they owned the place by voicing their concerns over spending. Thanks for your daily dose of hackery.

Where were those concerns during the Bush years? They remembered them when a Democrat was in the White House as a fig-leaf for their obstruction.

[Napoleon]

The Republicans in the House and Bill Clinton as President disagreed but they were still able to get major things accomplished, both liberal and conservative. Obama lacks the ability to be a leader and these Tea Party tools have no idea what a statesman is supposed to do.

[Keystone Phil]

Where were those concerns during the Bush years? They remembered them when a Democrat was in the White House as a fig-leaf for their obstruction.

Hey, it happens on both sides and I don't like when either party does it. However, it was Obama that trumpeted that nonsense that he "transcends politics."

[Landslide Lyndon]

Where were those concerns during the Bush years? They remembered them when a Democrat was in the White House as a fig-leaf for their obstruction.

Hey, it happens on both sides and I don't like when either party does it. However, it was Obama that trumpeted that nonsense that he "transcends politics."

Because he was naive enough to believe that Republicans would negotiate in good faith.