|
Excellent Republican amendment to HCR
"H the K (I post with a Mac)" wrote in message ... In article 222d9e17-caaf-4f80-9217-32714a2c51e1 @g22g2000prf.googlegroups.com, says... On Dec 9, 12:36 pm, "Don White" wrote: "John H" wrote in message ... On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 22:21:38 -0800, "Bill McKee" wrote: You must be a lot more stupid than I figured you were. Congratulations! The 'a-ha' light came on bright enough to see on the east coast. -- John H You sayin' Bill's usually a dim bulb? Can you even READ you idiot? That's about enough of you picking on my Donny, you Schitt. For one, I'm taller than you, that makes me a manly sort. And I have guns. So you better leave Donny alone or I'll have my closed circuit surveillance system identify you, got it SFB? -- I'm not 'your' anything, PseudoBoy. |
Excellent Republican amendment to HCR
"Don White" wrote in message ... "John H" wrote in message ... On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 22:21:38 -0800, "Bill McKee" wrote: You must be a lot more stupid than I figured you were. Congratulations! The 'a-ha' light came on bright enough to see on the east coast. -- John H You sayin' Bill's usually a dim bulb? Nope, he is saying Donnie is a drunken, burned out bulb. |
Excellent Republican amendment to HCR
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "jps" wrote in message ... On Mon, 7 Dec 2009 11:10:18 -0800, "Bill McKee" wrote: "H the K (I post with a Mac)" wrote in message news:ebqdnX20bqROb4HWnZ2dnUVZ_uGdnZ2d@earth link.com... Bill McKee wrote: "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "CalifBill" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "jps" wrote in message ... On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 22:32:26 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "jps" wrote in message ... This politics stuff is getting kind of fun. When Sen. Vitter and Sen. Coburn introduced a health care amendment that would require all senators and representatives to be enrolled in the public option, they expected the Democrats to rise in opposition. What happened next is just RICH. Julie Gulden's diary :: :: On Thursday, thinking Democratic senators would balk at the idea, Sens. David Vitter (R-La.) and Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) introduced the gimmick health-care amendment. "The idea, broad-brush, is that whatever government option is in the bill, every senator and every representative should be enrolled in it," Vitter told The Hill. "No other possibilities, no other choices." "It's called leadership," Coburn said. "If it's good enough for everybody else, we ought to be leading by example." But Democrats called their bluff, and the Republicans wouldn't allow it. When Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) tried to become a co-sponsor of the amendment, he got the cold shoulder. So Brown, joined by Sens. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.), and Al Franken (D-Minn.), forced his way onto the amendment with a unanimous consent vote. Franken: I rise and ask for unanimous consent to be a co-sponsor to Senator Coburn's Amendment #2789 requiring all members of congress to enroll in the public option. I am pleased to co-sponsor this because I strongly support the public option and would have no qualms at all about enrolling in this plan. Brown: And it's a little curious that some of these, these two sponsors are so much against the public option but they want to pass this amendment. It sounds to me like you are as serious about going on the public option as I am. Franken: Well, I talked to my wife Franny, we've been married 34 years now, I talked to her a couple weeks ago and I said if this thing passes we should go on the public option. She said absolutely. Presider of the Senate: Without objection Senator Franken's motion to be a co-sponsor of the amendment is approved. From Julie Gulden on Kos. Franken must have been born in Kenya. :) Coburn and Vitter are both idiots. They didn't bother to look one move further on the board before they moved their man. Kudos to Franken and Sherrod Brown. Lets look at the the item. The Republicans come up with a great idea. The Dem's say let us take a lot of the credit for this idea. And the Dem majority goes along with the theft of credit. So wanting to co-sponor a bill is "theft of credit" on your planet? -- Nom=de=Plume Normally the cosponsors sign on ahead of time. Nope.... Co-sponsors may be added to a bill prior to introduction of the bill in the Senate. Co-sponsors may also be added to a Senate bill or a House bill immediately following adoption of the bill on third reading or on final passage. The addition of any co-sponsors shall be subject to the approval of the Senate prime sponsor of the bill and the approval of any co-sponsor who is being added. -- Nom=de=Plume c. Seems as if that rule is no more. I know that the word "may" is difficult for you to understand. Perhaps you should look it up. -- Nom=de=Plume I understand you have reading comprehension problems. Let me repeat: "At the approval of the prime sponsor of the bill" No need to repeat, oh well... here it is anyway: "Co-sponsors may be added to a bill prior to introduction of the bill in the Senate." There are obviously other ways to be a co-sponsor, since that's what happened. So, pray tell, if the amendment was so wonderful, why wouldn't a Senator want a co-sponsor? I'm not sure what mental problems you have, since you seem to be denying reality. -- Nom=de=Plume Mental problems? That seems to be you. As I reported the rules. "At the approval of the prime sponsor of the bill" Bill, Bill, Bill...there's more than one way for co-sponsors to "attach" themselves to a bit of legislation or an amendment to same. What happened here, and what everyone realizes (except you), is that two of your boys, neither of whom are among the brightest boys in the Senate, introduced an amendment they thought would either help kill off health care legislation or embarrass the Democrats. What they did not expect was that the Democrats would embrace the idea. In other words, their little idea backfired on Vitter and Coburn. Perhaps Vitter ought to stick to whoremongering and Coburn to his boys at the "C Street House" of ill repute. Nope, is a case of well we will steal the glory. Kill it in the end, but say we were those for it. Pigs. Your brain is a very capable organ. It seems even to be manufacturing serious hallucinations in this case. It was a bluff by Republicans, the Dems called 'em on it. The only glory stealing that exists is in your head. They actually did steal the glory. Good politicking! I agree, but it was pretty much the Republican's own doing. They probably thought they could make some political points, and then it backfired. If they want their party to survive, they need to stop thinking just about themselves and start thinking smart politics, which means inclusion not exclusion. -- Nom=de=Plume Both the ****ing parties need to think of the people, not what is best for the party. Neither is including the people who voted for them and also pay the bills. I disagree. It's pretty clear that the Democrats, at least wrt to healthcare reform are doing (or at least most of them are attempting to do) what the people want. -- Nom=de=Plume You must be a lot more stupid than I figured you were. Wow... you're so articulate! -- Nom=de=Plume |
Excellent Republican amendment to HCR
"jps" wrote in message
... On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 22:21:38 -0800, "Bill McKee" wrote: "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "jps" wrote in message ... On Mon, 7 Dec 2009 11:10:18 -0800, "Bill McKee" wrote: "H the K (I post with a Mac)" wrote in message news:ebqdnX20bqROb4HWnZ2dnUVZ_uGdnZ2d@eart hlink.com... Bill McKee wrote: "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "CalifBill" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "jps" wrote in message ... On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 22:32:26 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "jps" wrote in message ... This politics stuff is getting kind of fun. When Sen. Vitter and Sen. Coburn introduced a health care amendment that would require all senators and representatives to be enrolled in the public option, they expected the Democrats to rise in opposition. What happened next is just RICH. Julie Gulden's diary :: :: On Thursday, thinking Democratic senators would balk at the idea, Sens. David Vitter (R-La.) and Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) introduced the gimmick health-care amendment. "The idea, broad-brush, is that whatever government option is in the bill, every senator and every representative should be enrolled in it," Vitter told The Hill. "No other possibilities, no other choices." "It's called leadership," Coburn said. "If it's good enough for everybody else, we ought to be leading by example." But Democrats called their bluff, and the Republicans wouldn't allow it. When Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) tried to become a co-sponsor of the amendment, he got the cold shoulder. So Brown, joined by Sens. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.), and Al Franken (D-Minn.), forced his way onto the amendment with a unanimous consent vote. Franken: I rise and ask for unanimous consent to be a co-sponsor to Senator Coburn's Amendment #2789 requiring all members of congress to enroll in the public option. I am pleased to co-sponsor this because I strongly support the public option and would have no qualms at all about enrolling in this plan. Brown: And it's a little curious that some of these, these two sponsors are so much against the public option but they want to pass this amendment. It sounds to me like you are as serious about going on the public option as I am. Franken: Well, I talked to my wife Franny, we've been married 34 years now, I talked to her a couple weeks ago and I said if this thing passes we should go on the public option. She said absolutely. Presider of the Senate: Without objection Senator Franken's motion to be a co-sponsor of the amendment is approved. From Julie Gulden on Kos. Franken must have been born in Kenya. :) Coburn and Vitter are both idiots. They didn't bother to look one move further on the board before they moved their man. Kudos to Franken and Sherrod Brown. Lets look at the the item. The Republicans come up with a great idea. The Dem's say let us take a lot of the credit for this idea. And the Dem majority goes along with the theft of credit. So wanting to co-sponor a bill is "theft of credit" on your planet? -- Nom=de=Plume Normally the cosponsors sign on ahead of time. Nope.... Co-sponsors may be added to a bill prior to introduction of the bill in the Senate. Co-sponsors may also be added to a Senate bill or a House bill immediately following adoption of the bill on third reading or on final passage. The addition of any co-sponsors shall be subject to the approval of the Senate prime sponsor of the bill and the approval of any co-sponsor who is being added. -- Nom=de=Plume c. Seems as if that rule is no more. I know that the word "may" is difficult for you to understand. Perhaps you should look it up. -- Nom=de=Plume I understand you have reading comprehension problems. Let me repeat: "At the approval of the prime sponsor of the bill" No need to repeat, oh well... here it is anyway: "Co-sponsors may be added to a bill prior to introduction of the bill in the Senate." There are obviously other ways to be a co-sponsor, since that's what happened. So, pray tell, if the amendment was so wonderful, why wouldn't a Senator want a co-sponsor? I'm not sure what mental problems you have, since you seem to be denying reality. -- Nom=de=Plume Mental problems? That seems to be you. As I reported the rules. "At the approval of the prime sponsor of the bill" Bill, Bill, Bill...there's more than one way for co-sponsors to "attach" themselves to a bit of legislation or an amendment to same. What happened here, and what everyone realizes (except you), is that two of your boys, neither of whom are among the brightest boys in the Senate, introduced an amendment they thought would either help kill off health care legislation or embarrass the Democrats. What they did not expect was that the Democrats would embrace the idea. In other words, their little idea backfired on Vitter and Coburn. Perhaps Vitter ought to stick to whoremongering and Coburn to his boys at the "C Street House" of ill repute. Nope, is a case of well we will steal the glory. Kill it in the end, but say we were those for it. Pigs. Your brain is a very capable organ. It seems even to be manufacturing serious hallucinations in this case. It was a bluff by Republicans, the Dems called 'em on it. The only glory stealing that exists is in your head. They actually did steal the glory. Good politicking! I agree, but it was pretty much the Republican's own doing. They probably thought they could make some political points, and then it backfired. If they want their party to survive, they need to stop thinking just about themselves and start thinking smart politics, which means inclusion not exclusion. -- Nom=de=Plume Both the ****ing parties need to think of the people, not what is best for the party. Neither is including the people who voted for them and also pay the bills. I disagree. It's pretty clear that the Democrats, at least wrt to healthcare reform are doing (or at least most of them are attempting to do) what the people want. -- Nom=de=Plume You must be a lot more stupid than I figured you were. Bill can't be wrong, it must be you. You're better off letting him think he won and move on. I guess saying "I disagree" and stating why must mean I think for myself, which must be threatening to him. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Excellent Republican amendment to HCR
"John H" wrote in message
... On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 22:21:38 -0800, "Bill McKee" wrote: "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "jps" wrote in message ... On Mon, 7 Dec 2009 11:10:18 -0800, "Bill McKee" wrote: "H the K (I post with a Mac)" wrote in message news:ebqdnX20bqROb4HWnZ2dnUVZ_uGdnZ2d@eart hlink.com... Bill McKee wrote: "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "CalifBill" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "jps" wrote in message ... On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 22:32:26 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "jps" wrote in message ... This politics stuff is getting kind of fun. When Sen. Vitter and Sen. Coburn introduced a health care amendment that would require all senators and representatives to be enrolled in the public option, they expected the Democrats to rise in opposition. What happened next is just RICH. Julie Gulden's diary :: :: On Thursday, thinking Democratic senators would balk at the idea, Sens. David Vitter (R-La.) and Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) introduced the gimmick health-care amendment. "The idea, broad-brush, is that whatever government option is in the bill, every senator and every representative should be enrolled in it," Vitter told The Hill. "No other possibilities, no other choices." "It's called leadership," Coburn said. "If it's good enough for everybody else, we ought to be leading by example." But Democrats called their bluff, and the Republicans wouldn't allow it. When Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) tried to become a co-sponsor of the amendment, he got the cold shoulder. So Brown, joined by Sens. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.), and Al Franken (D-Minn.), forced his way onto the amendment with a unanimous consent vote. Franken: I rise and ask for unanimous consent to be a co-sponsor to Senator Coburn's Amendment #2789 requiring all members of congress to enroll in the public option. I am pleased to co-sponsor this because I strongly support the public option and would have no qualms at all about enrolling in this plan. Brown: And it's a little curious that some of these, these two sponsors are so much against the public option but they want to pass this amendment. It sounds to me like you are as serious about going on the public option as I am. Franken: Well, I talked to my wife Franny, we've been married 34 years now, I talked to her a couple weeks ago and I said if this thing passes we should go on the public option. She said absolutely. Presider of the Senate: Without objection Senator Franken's motion to be a co-sponsor of the amendment is approved. From Julie Gulden on Kos. Franken must have been born in Kenya. :) Coburn and Vitter are both idiots. They didn't bother to look one move further on the board before they moved their man. Kudos to Franken and Sherrod Brown. Lets look at the the item. The Republicans come up with a great idea. The Dem's say let us take a lot of the credit for this idea. And the Dem majority goes along with the theft of credit. So wanting to co-sponor a bill is "theft of credit" on your planet? -- Nom=de=Plume Normally the cosponsors sign on ahead of time. Nope.... Co-sponsors may be added to a bill prior to introduction of the bill in the Senate. Co-sponsors may also be added to a Senate bill or a House bill immediately following adoption of the bill on third reading or on final passage. The addition of any co-sponsors shall be subject to the approval of the Senate prime sponsor of the bill and the approval of any co-sponsor who is being added. -- Nom=de=Plume c. Seems as if that rule is no more. I know that the word "may" is difficult for you to understand. Perhaps you should look it up. -- Nom=de=Plume I understand you have reading comprehension problems. Let me repeat: "At the approval of the prime sponsor of the bill" No need to repeat, oh well... here it is anyway: "Co-sponsors may be added to a bill prior to introduction of the bill in the Senate." There are obviously other ways to be a co-sponsor, since that's what happened. So, pray tell, if the amendment was so wonderful, why wouldn't a Senator want a co-sponsor? I'm not sure what mental problems you have, since you seem to be denying reality. -- Nom=de=Plume Mental problems? That seems to be you. As I reported the rules. "At the approval of the prime sponsor of the bill" Bill, Bill, Bill...there's more than one way for co-sponsors to "attach" themselves to a bit of legislation or an amendment to same. What happened here, and what everyone realizes (except you), is that two of your boys, neither of whom are among the brightest boys in the Senate, introduced an amendment they thought would either help kill off health care legislation or embarrass the Democrats. What they did not expect was that the Democrats would embrace the idea. In other words, their little idea backfired on Vitter and Coburn. Perhaps Vitter ought to stick to whoremongering and Coburn to his boys at the "C Street House" of ill repute. Nope, is a case of well we will steal the glory. Kill it in the end, but say we were those for it. Pigs. Your brain is a very capable organ. It seems even to be manufacturing serious hallucinations in this case. It was a bluff by Republicans, the Dems called 'em on it. The only glory stealing that exists is in your head. They actually did steal the glory. Good politicking! I agree, but it was pretty much the Republican's own doing. They probably thought they could make some political points, and then it backfired. If they want their party to survive, they need to stop thinking just about themselves and start thinking smart politics, which means inclusion not exclusion. -- Nom=de=Plume Both the ****ing parties need to think of the people, not what is best for the party. Neither is including the people who voted for them and also pay the bills. I disagree. It's pretty clear that the Democrats, at least wrt to healthcare reform are doing (or at least most of them are attempting to do) what the people want. -- Nom=de=Plume You must be a lot more stupid than I figured you were. Congratulations! The 'a-ha' light came on bright enough to see on the east coast. -- John H We're all hoping that happens for you, whereever you're located! -- Nom=de=Plume |
Excellent Republican amendment to HCR
"Don White" wrote in message
... "John H" wrote in message ... On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 22:21:38 -0800, "Bill McKee" wrote: You must be a lot more stupid than I figured you were. Congratulations! The 'a-ha' light came on bright enough to see on the east coast. -- John H You sayin' Bill's usually a dim bulb? I think he's saying he's been staring into a bulb for too long. The sad part is the bulb burned out long ago. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Excellent Republican amendment to HCR
On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 11:18:32 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote: "Bill McKee" wrote in message om... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "jps" wrote in message ... On Mon, 7 Dec 2009 11:10:18 -0800, "Bill McKee" wrote: "H the K (I post with a Mac)" wrote in message news:ebqdnX20bqROb4HWnZ2dnUVZ_uGdnZ2d@eart hlink.com... Bill McKee wrote: "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "CalifBill" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "jps" wrote in message ... On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 22:32:26 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "jps" wrote in message ... This politics stuff is getting kind of fun. When Sen. Vitter and Sen. Coburn introduced a health care amendment that would require all senators and representatives to be enrolled in the public option, they expected the Democrats to rise in opposition. What happened next is just RICH. Julie Gulden's diary :: :: On Thursday, thinking Democratic senators would balk at the idea, Sens. David Vitter (R-La.) and Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) introduced the gimmick health-care amendment. "The idea, broad-brush, is that whatever government option is in the bill, every senator and every representative should be enrolled in it," Vitter told The Hill. "No other possibilities, no other choices." "It's called leadership," Coburn said. "If it's good enough for everybody else, we ought to be leading by example." But Democrats called their bluff, and the Republicans wouldn't allow it. When Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) tried to become a co-sponsor of the amendment, he got the cold shoulder. So Brown, joined by Sens. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.), and Al Franken (D-Minn.), forced his way onto the amendment with a unanimous consent vote. Franken: I rise and ask for unanimous consent to be a co-sponsor to Senator Coburn's Amendment #2789 requiring all members of congress to enroll in the public option. I am pleased to co-sponsor this because I strongly support the public option and would have no qualms at all about enrolling in this plan. Brown: And it's a little curious that some of these, these two sponsors are so much against the public option but they want to pass this amendment. It sounds to me like you are as serious about going on the public option as I am. Franken: Well, I talked to my wife Franny, we've been married 34 years now, I talked to her a couple weeks ago and I said if this thing passes we should go on the public option. She said absolutely. Presider of the Senate: Without objection Senator Franken's motion to be a co-sponsor of the amendment is approved. From Julie Gulden on Kos. Franken must have been born in Kenya. :) Coburn and Vitter are both idiots. They didn't bother to look one move further on the board before they moved their man. Kudos to Franken and Sherrod Brown. Lets look at the the item. The Republicans come up with a great idea. The Dem's say let us take a lot of the credit for this idea. And the Dem majority goes along with the theft of credit. So wanting to co-sponor a bill is "theft of credit" on your planet? -- Nom=de=Plume Normally the cosponsors sign on ahead of time. Nope.... Co-sponsors may be added to a bill prior to introduction of the bill in the Senate. Co-sponsors may also be added to a Senate bill or a House bill immediately following adoption of the bill on third reading or on final passage. The addition of any co-sponsors shall be subject to the approval of the Senate prime sponsor of the bill and the approval of any co-sponsor who is being added. -- Nom=de=Plume c. Seems as if that rule is no more. I know that the word "may" is difficult for you to understand. Perhaps you should look it up. -- Nom=de=Plume I understand you have reading comprehension problems. Let me repeat: "At the approval of the prime sponsor of the bill" No need to repeat, oh well... here it is anyway: "Co-sponsors may be added to a bill prior to introduction of the bill in the Senate." There are obviously other ways to be a co-sponsor, since that's what happened. So, pray tell, if the amendment was so wonderful, why wouldn't a Senator want a co-sponsor? I'm not sure what mental problems you have, since you seem to be denying reality. -- Nom=de=Plume Mental problems? That seems to be you. As I reported the rules. "At the approval of the prime sponsor of the bill" Bill, Bill, Bill...there's more than one way for co-sponsors to "attach" themselves to a bit of legislation or an amendment to same. What happened here, and what everyone realizes (except you), is that two of your boys, neither of whom are among the brightest boys in the Senate, introduced an amendment they thought would either help kill off health care legislation or embarrass the Democrats. What they did not expect was that the Democrats would embrace the idea. In other words, their little idea backfired on Vitter and Coburn. Perhaps Vitter ought to stick to whoremongering and Coburn to his boys at the "C Street House" of ill repute. Nope, is a case of well we will steal the glory. Kill it in the end, but say we were those for it. Pigs. Your brain is a very capable organ. It seems even to be manufacturing serious hallucinations in this case. It was a bluff by Republicans, the Dems called 'em on it. The only glory stealing that exists is in your head. They actually did steal the glory. Good politicking! I agree, but it was pretty much the Republican's own doing. They probably thought they could make some political points, and then it backfired. If they want their party to survive, they need to stop thinking just about themselves and start thinking smart politics, which means inclusion not exclusion. -- Nom=de=Plume Both the ****ing parties need to think of the people, not what is best for the party. Neither is including the people who voted for them and also pay the bills. I disagree. It's pretty clear that the Democrats, at least wrt to healthcare reform are doing (or at least most of them are attempting to do) what the people want. -- Nom=de=Plume You must be a lot more stupid than I figured you were. Wow... you're so articulate! Bill just had a new crop of Blue Lightening Bud come in from Santa Rosa. Based on his posts of the last several weeks, his bong must be going 24/7. |
Excellent Republican amendment to HCR
On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 11:19:59 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote: "John H" wrote in message .. . On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 22:21:38 -0800, "Bill McKee" wrote: "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "jps" wrote in message ... On Mon, 7 Dec 2009 11:10:18 -0800, "Bill McKee" wrote: "H the K (I post with a Mac)" wrote in message news:ebqdnX20bqROb4HWnZ2dnUVZ_uGdnZ2d@ear thlink.com... Bill McKee wrote: "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "CalifBill" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "jps" wrote in message ... On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 22:32:26 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "jps" wrote in message ... This politics stuff is getting kind of fun. When Sen. Vitter and Sen. Coburn introduced a health care amendment that would require all senators and representatives to be enrolled in the public option, they expected the Democrats to rise in opposition. What happened next is just RICH. Julie Gulden's diary :: :: On Thursday, thinking Democratic senators would balk at the idea, Sens. David Vitter (R-La.) and Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) introduced the gimmick health-care amendment. "The idea, broad-brush, is that whatever government option is in the bill, every senator and every representative should be enrolled in it," Vitter told The Hill. "No other possibilities, no other choices." "It's called leadership," Coburn said. "If it's good enough for everybody else, we ought to be leading by example." But Democrats called their bluff, and the Republicans wouldn't allow it. When Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) tried to become a co-sponsor of the amendment, he got the cold shoulder. So Brown, joined by Sens. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.), and Al Franken (D-Minn.), forced his way onto the amendment with a unanimous consent vote. Franken: I rise and ask for unanimous consent to be a co-sponsor to Senator Coburn's Amendment #2789 requiring all members of congress to enroll in the public option. I am pleased to co-sponsor this because I strongly support the public option and would have no qualms at all about enrolling in this plan. Brown: And it's a little curious that some of these, these two sponsors are so much against the public option but they want to pass this amendment. It sounds to me like you are as serious about going on the public option as I am. Franken: Well, I talked to my wife Franny, we've been married 34 years now, I talked to her a couple weeks ago and I said if this thing passes we should go on the public option. She said absolutely. Presider of the Senate: Without objection Senator Franken's motion to be a co-sponsor of the amendment is approved. From Julie Gulden on Kos. Franken must have been born in Kenya. :) Coburn and Vitter are both idiots. They didn't bother to look one move further on the board before they moved their man. Kudos to Franken and Sherrod Brown. Lets look at the the item. The Republicans come up with a great idea. The Dem's say let us take a lot of the credit for this idea. And the Dem majority goes along with the theft of credit. So wanting to co-sponor a bill is "theft of credit" on your planet? -- Nom=de=Plume Normally the cosponsors sign on ahead of time. Nope.... Co-sponsors may be added to a bill prior to introduction of the bill in the Senate. Co-sponsors may also be added to a Senate bill or a House bill immediately following adoption of the bill on third reading or on final passage. The addition of any co-sponsors shall be subject to the approval of the Senate prime sponsor of the bill and the approval of any co-sponsor who is being added. -- Nom=de=Plume c. Seems as if that rule is no more. I know that the word "may" is difficult for you to understand. Perhaps you should look it up. -- Nom=de=Plume I understand you have reading comprehension problems. Let me repeat: "At the approval of the prime sponsor of the bill" No need to repeat, oh well... here it is anyway: "Co-sponsors may be added to a bill prior to introduction of the bill in the Senate." There are obviously other ways to be a co-sponsor, since that's what happened. So, pray tell, if the amendment was so wonderful, why wouldn't a Senator want a co-sponsor? I'm not sure what mental problems you have, since you seem to be denying reality. -- Nom=de=Plume Mental problems? That seems to be you. As I reported the rules. "At the approval of the prime sponsor of the bill" Bill, Bill, Bill...there's more than one way for co-sponsors to "attach" themselves to a bit of legislation or an amendment to same. What happened here, and what everyone realizes (except you), is that two of your boys, neither of whom are among the brightest boys in the Senate, introduced an amendment they thought would either help kill off health care legislation or embarrass the Democrats. What they did not expect was that the Democrats would embrace the idea. In other words, their little idea backfired on Vitter and Coburn. Perhaps Vitter ought to stick to whoremongering and Coburn to his boys at the "C Street House" of ill repute. Nope, is a case of well we will steal the glory. Kill it in the end, but say we were those for it. Pigs. Your brain is a very capable organ. It seems even to be manufacturing serious hallucinations in this case. It was a bluff by Republicans, the Dems called 'em on it. The only glory stealing that exists is in your head. They actually did steal the glory. Good politicking! I agree, but it was pretty much the Republican's own doing. They probably thought they could make some political points, and then it backfired. If they want their party to survive, they need to stop thinking just about themselves and start thinking smart politics, which means inclusion not exclusion. -- Nom=de=Plume Both the ****ing parties need to think of the people, not what is best for the party. Neither is including the people who voted for them and also pay the bills. I disagree. It's pretty clear that the Democrats, at least wrt to healthcare reform are doing (or at least most of them are attempting to do) what the people want. -- Nom=de=Plume You must be a lot more stupid than I figured you were. Congratulations! The 'a-ha' light came on bright enough to see on the east coast. -- John H We're all hoping that happens for you, whereever you're located! Herring's orbit takes him past many twinkly lights. His own twinkly light turns on and off with no regard to time, mirroring the randomness of the universe and life itself. And like life, Herring remains a mystery -- apart from the fact that he's a horse's ass. |
Excellent Republican amendment to HCR
"jps" wrote in message ... On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 11:18:32 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "Bill McKee" wrote in message news:ccOdnVTZaad33ILWnZ2dnUVZ_oydnZ2d@earthlink. com... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "jps" wrote in message ... On Mon, 7 Dec 2009 11:10:18 -0800, "Bill McKee" wrote: "H the K (I post with a Mac)" wrote in message news:ebqdnX20bqROb4HWnZ2dnUVZ_uGdnZ2d@ear thlink.com... Bill McKee wrote: "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "CalifBill" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "jps" wrote in message ... On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 22:32:26 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "jps" wrote in message ... This politics stuff is getting kind of fun. When Sen. Vitter and Sen. Coburn introduced a health care amendment that would require all senators and representatives to be enrolled in the public option, they expected the Democrats to rise in opposition. What happened next is just RICH. Julie Gulden's diary :: :: On Thursday, thinking Democratic senators would balk at the idea, Sens. David Vitter (R-La.) and Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) introduced the gimmick health-care amendment. "The idea, broad-brush, is that whatever government option is in the bill, every senator and every representative should be enrolled in it," Vitter told The Hill. "No other possibilities, no other choices." "It's called leadership," Coburn said. "If it's good enough for everybody else, we ought to be leading by example." But Democrats called their bluff, and the Republicans wouldn't allow it. When Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) tried to become a co-sponsor of the amendment, he got the cold shoulder. So Brown, joined by Sens. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.), and Al Franken (D-Minn.), forced his way onto the amendment with a unanimous consent vote. Franken: I rise and ask for unanimous consent to be a co-sponsor to Senator Coburn's Amendment #2789 requiring all members of congress to enroll in the public option. I am pleased to co-sponsor this because I strongly support the public option and would have no qualms at all about enrolling in this plan. Brown: And it's a little curious that some of these, these two sponsors are so much against the public option but they want to pass this amendment. It sounds to me like you are as serious about going on the public option as I am. Franken: Well, I talked to my wife Franny, we've been married 34 years now, I talked to her a couple weeks ago and I said if this thing passes we should go on the public option. She said absolutely. Presider of the Senate: Without objection Senator Franken's motion to be a co-sponsor of the amendment is approved. From Julie Gulden on Kos. Franken must have been born in Kenya. :) Coburn and Vitter are both idiots. They didn't bother to look one move further on the board before they moved their man. Kudos to Franken and Sherrod Brown. Lets look at the the item. The Republicans come up with a great idea. The Dem's say let us take a lot of the credit for this idea. And the Dem majority goes along with the theft of credit. So wanting to co-sponor a bill is "theft of credit" on your planet? -- Nom=de=Plume Normally the cosponsors sign on ahead of time. Nope.... Co-sponsors may be added to a bill prior to introduction of the bill in the Senate. Co-sponsors may also be added to a Senate bill or a House bill immediately following adoption of the bill on third reading or on final passage. The addition of any co-sponsors shall be subject to the approval of the Senate prime sponsor of the bill and the approval of any co-sponsor who is being added. -- Nom=de=Plume c. Seems as if that rule is no more. I know that the word "may" is difficult for you to understand. Perhaps you should look it up. -- Nom=de=Plume I understand you have reading comprehension problems. Let me repeat: "At the approval of the prime sponsor of the bill" No need to repeat, oh well... here it is anyway: "Co-sponsors may be added to a bill prior to introduction of the bill in the Senate." There are obviously other ways to be a co-sponsor, since that's what happened. So, pray tell, if the amendment was so wonderful, why wouldn't a Senator want a co-sponsor? I'm not sure what mental problems you have, since you seem to be denying reality. -- Nom=de=Plume Mental problems? That seems to be you. As I reported the rules. "At the approval of the prime sponsor of the bill" Bill, Bill, Bill...there's more than one way for co-sponsors to "attach" themselves to a bit of legislation or an amendment to same. What happened here, and what everyone realizes (except you), is that two of your boys, neither of whom are among the brightest boys in the Senate, introduced an amendment they thought would either help kill off health care legislation or embarrass the Democrats. What they did not expect was that the Democrats would embrace the idea. In other words, their little idea backfired on Vitter and Coburn. Perhaps Vitter ought to stick to whoremongering and Coburn to his boys at the "C Street House" of ill repute. Nope, is a case of well we will steal the glory. Kill it in the end, but say we were those for it. Pigs. Your brain is a very capable organ. It seems even to be manufacturing serious hallucinations in this case. It was a bluff by Republicans, the Dems called 'em on it. The only glory stealing that exists is in your head. They actually did steal the glory. Good politicking! I agree, but it was pretty much the Republican's own doing. They probably thought they could make some political points, and then it backfired. If they want their party to survive, they need to stop thinking just about themselves and start thinking smart politics, which means inclusion not exclusion. -- Nom=de=Plume Both the ****ing parties need to think of the people, not what is best for the party. Neither is including the people who voted for them and also pay the bills. I disagree. It's pretty clear that the Democrats, at least wrt to healthcare reform are doing (or at least most of them are attempting to do) what the people want. -- Nom=de=Plume You must be a lot more stupid than I figured you were. Wow... you're so articulate! Bill just had a new crop of Blue Lightening Bud come in from Santa Rosa. Based on his posts of the last several weeks, his bong must be going 24/7. Is that your excuse? |
Excellent Republican amendment to HCR
On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 18:23:56 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote: "jps" wrote in message .. . On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 11:18:32 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "Bill McKee" wrote in message news:ccOdnVTZaad33ILWnZ2dnUVZ_oydnZ2d@earthlink .com... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "jps" wrote in message ... On Mon, 7 Dec 2009 11:10:18 -0800, "Bill McKee" wrote: "H the K (I post with a Mac)" wrote in message news:ebqdnX20bqROb4HWnZ2dnUVZ_uGdnZ2d@ea rthlink.com... Bill McKee wrote: "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "CalifBill" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "jps" wrote in message ... On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 22:32:26 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "jps" wrote in message ... This politics stuff is getting kind of fun. When Sen. Vitter and Sen. Coburn introduced a health care amendment that would require all senators and representatives to be enrolled in the public option, they expected the Democrats to rise in opposition. What happened next is just RICH. Julie Gulden's diary :: :: On Thursday, thinking Democratic senators would balk at the idea, Sens. David Vitter (R-La.) and Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) introduced the gimmick health-care amendment. "The idea, broad-brush, is that whatever government option is in the bill, every senator and every representative should be enrolled in it," Vitter told The Hill. "No other possibilities, no other choices." "It's called leadership," Coburn said. "If it's good enough for everybody else, we ought to be leading by example." But Democrats called their bluff, and the Republicans wouldn't allow it. When Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) tried to become a co-sponsor of the amendment, he got the cold shoulder. So Brown, joined by Sens. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.), and Al Franken (D-Minn.), forced his way onto the amendment with a unanimous consent vote. Franken: I rise and ask for unanimous consent to be a co-sponsor to Senator Coburn's Amendment #2789 requiring all members of congress to enroll in the public option. I am pleased to co-sponsor this because I strongly support the public option and would have no qualms at all about enrolling in this plan. Brown: And it's a little curious that some of these, these two sponsors are so much against the public option but they want to pass this amendment. It sounds to me like you are as serious about going on the public option as I am. Franken: Well, I talked to my wife Franny, we've been married 34 years now, I talked to her a couple weeks ago and I said if this thing passes we should go on the public option. She said absolutely. Presider of the Senate: Without objection Senator Franken's motion to be a co-sponsor of the amendment is approved. From Julie Gulden on Kos. Franken must have been born in Kenya. :) Coburn and Vitter are both idiots. They didn't bother to look one move further on the board before they moved their man. Kudos to Franken and Sherrod Brown. Lets look at the the item. The Republicans come up with a great idea. The Dem's say let us take a lot of the credit for this idea. And the Dem majority goes along with the theft of credit. So wanting to co-sponor a bill is "theft of credit" on your planet? -- Nom=de=Plume Normally the cosponsors sign on ahead of time. Nope.... Co-sponsors may be added to a bill prior to introduction of the bill in the Senate. Co-sponsors may also be added to a Senate bill or a House bill immediately following adoption of the bill on third reading or on final passage. The addition of any co-sponsors shall be subject to the approval of the Senate prime sponsor of the bill and the approval of any co-sponsor who is being added. -- Nom=de=Plume c. Seems as if that rule is no more. I know that the word "may" is difficult for you to understand. Perhaps you should look it up. -- Nom=de=Plume I understand you have reading comprehension problems. Let me repeat: "At the approval of the prime sponsor of the bill" No need to repeat, oh well... here it is anyway: "Co-sponsors may be added to a bill prior to introduction of the bill in the Senate." There are obviously other ways to be a co-sponsor, since that's what happened. So, pray tell, if the amendment was so wonderful, why wouldn't a Senator want a co-sponsor? I'm not sure what mental problems you have, since you seem to be denying reality. -- Nom=de=Plume Mental problems? That seems to be you. As I reported the rules. "At the approval of the prime sponsor of the bill" Bill, Bill, Bill...there's more than one way for co-sponsors to "attach" themselves to a bit of legislation or an amendment to same. What happened here, and what everyone realizes (except you), is that two of your boys, neither of whom are among the brightest boys in the Senate, introduced an amendment they thought would either help kill off health care legislation or embarrass the Democrats. What they did not expect was that the Democrats would embrace the idea. In other words, their little idea backfired on Vitter and Coburn. Perhaps Vitter ought to stick to whoremongering and Coburn to his boys at the "C Street House" of ill repute. Nope, is a case of well we will steal the glory. Kill it in the end, but say we were those for it. Pigs. Your brain is a very capable organ. It seems even to be manufacturing serious hallucinations in this case. It was a bluff by Republicans, the Dems called 'em on it. The only glory stealing that exists is in your head. They actually did steal the glory. Good politicking! I agree, but it was pretty much the Republican's own doing. They probably thought they could make some political points, and then it backfired. If they want their party to survive, they need to stop thinking just about themselves and start thinking smart politics, which means inclusion not exclusion. -- Nom=de=Plume Both the ****ing parties need to think of the people, not what is best for the party. Neither is including the people who voted for them and also pay the bills. I disagree. It's pretty clear that the Democrats, at least wrt to healthcare reform are doing (or at least most of them are attempting to do) what the people want. -- Nom=de=Plume You must be a lot more stupid than I figured you were. Wow... you're so articulate! Bill just had a new crop of Blue Lightening Bud come in from Santa Rosa. Based on his posts of the last several weeks, his bong must be going 24/7. Is that your excuse? I don't use excuses. I'm trying to understand how your brain, which appears to intermittently function, can come to the simple-minded conclusions that show up in your posts. I've concluded you must be a pothead. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:00 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com