PDA

View Full Version : Dems get their asses shouted down on DAY ONE!



BigBadBrian
01-04-2007, 07:55 AM
Protesters disrupt press conference on lobbying reform
Washington Business Journal - 3:07 PM EST Wednesdayby Kent HooverWashington Bureau Chief

House Democrats tried to unveil their lobbying reform package today, but their press conference was drowned out by chants from anti-war activists who want Congress to stop funding the Iraq war before taking on other issues.

Led by Cindy Sheehan, the mother of a slain soldier, the protesters chanted "De-escalate, investigate, troops home now" as Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., began outlining the Democrats' plans to ban lobbyist-funded travel and institute other ethics reforms. The press conference was held in the Cannon House Office Building in an area open to the public.


Emanuel finally gave up trying to be heard over the chants, and retreated to a caucus room where Democrats were meeting.

Sheehan says she has nothing against lobbying reform, but she and her fellow anti-war activists want Democrats to know they will keep pressuring Congress to end the war in Iraq.

"We wanted the Democrats to know they're back in power because of the grass roots," Sheehan says.

The anti-war activists held their own Capitol Hill press conference earlier in the day before deciding to attend the lobbying reform press conference as well.

Before the chanting started, Sheehan got a hug from Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., the new chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

Link (http://www.bizjournals.com/washington/stories/2007/01/01/daily13.html?from_rss=1)

LoungeMachine
01-04-2007, 09:09 AM
LMAO

God, you're so desperate to spin anything your way.

:gulp:

It's going to be fun watching Brie flail like this.

knuckleboner
01-04-2007, 09:54 AM
eh, i don't know. there's no question that some democrats benefited from certain portions of the electorate voting against the republican incumbants due to the situation in iraq.

if the democrats don't change much, those voters aren't likely to swing republican, but if they simply drop out of the voting process altogether, it will be a bit tougher for some democrats in 2008.

Hardrock69
01-04-2007, 10:12 AM
Wow! Brian is in favor of ending the war on Iraq...who woulda thunk? :confused:

FORD
01-04-2007, 04:56 PM
You should see the DLC shitheads over at DU scrambling to defend their AIPAC shitheads Rahm & Steny from Cindy Sheehan.

Fact is that if the so called Democrats don't do something to stop this motherfucking waste of time, lives, and resources, then they deserve the wrath of Cindy Sheehan and everyone else on the planet - myself included - who voted for AN END TO THIS BULLSHIT in November.

Warham
01-04-2007, 05:44 PM
Cindy is wrong.

The Democrats aren't in power because of her or any other left-wing loonie groups' efforts.

The Democrats are in power because the Republicans left their base, and when the Republicans leave their base, their base votes them out.

EAT MY ASSHOLE
01-04-2007, 08:32 PM
Brian gave a thumbs up towards ANYTHING that Cindy Sheehan took part in??? :confused:

Oh my God. At least Global warming will no longer be a concern.

Hell Hath Frozen Over. :)

knuckleboner
01-04-2007, 10:55 PM
Originally posted by Warham
Cindy is wrong.

The Democrats aren't in power because of her or any other left-wing loonie groups' efforts.

The Democrats are in power because the Republicans left their base, and when the Republicans leave their base, their base votes them out.

nah, the war was a big part. a lot of swing voters went democrat simply because they didn't approve of the job bush, and the republicans by association, were doing in general.

FORD
01-05-2007, 05:27 AM
Seems the GOP has changed their party symbol in light of their new (hypocritical) cries for "bipartisanship".......


http://star.walagata.com/w/angelika/unity.jpg

Nitro Express
01-05-2007, 05:41 AM
Originally posted by FORD
Seems the GOP has changed their party symbol in light of their new (hypocritical) cries for "bipartisanship".......


http://star.walagata.com/w/angelika/unity.jpg
LOL! I want that on a T-Shirt!

Warham
01-05-2007, 04:52 PM
The Democrats are going to take care of the important issues facing America, like putting a national ban on trans fats.

blueturk
01-05-2007, 04:54 PM
Originally posted by Warham
The Democrats are going to take care of the important issues facing America, like putting a national ban on trans fats.

Yeah, they should spend more time taking care of Big Oil like the GOP did....

Warham
01-05-2007, 05:05 PM
Originally posted by blueturk
Yeah, they should spend more time taking care of Big Oil like the GOP did....

They aren't that competent.

blueturk
01-05-2007, 06:06 PM
Originally posted by Warham
They aren't that competent.

It takes competence to rip off the American people so you can look after your buddies in the oil biz? You're almost as ignorant as your president.

"And so during these holiday seasons, we thank our blessings." --George W. Bush, Fort Belvoir, Va., Dec. 10, 2004

ODShowtime
01-05-2007, 07:28 PM
Originally posted by Warham
The Democrats are going to take care of the important issues facing America, like putting a national ban on trans fats.

What a ridiculously hypocritical statement.

The Teri Shiavo saga is a embarrassment! The gay marriage nonsense is even worse!

Both are un-American.

ODShowtime
01-05-2007, 07:29 PM
Originally posted by Warham
They aren't that competent.

:rolleyes:

NightProwler
01-05-2007, 07:58 PM
So what's up with bush and all of his recent flip flops?


Originally posted by Warham
Cindy is wrong.

The Democrats aren't in power because of her or any other left-wing loonie groups' efforts.

The Democrats are in power because the Republicans left their base, and when the Republicans leave their base, their base votes them out.

blueturk
01-05-2007, 08:41 PM
Originally posted by Warham


...The Democrats are in power because the Republicans left their base, and when the Republicans leave their base, their base votes them out.

"This is an impressive crowd - the haves and the have-mores. Some people call you the elites; I call you my base." George W. Bush, Oct. 20, 2000

Warham
01-07-2007, 09:45 AM
Originally posted by blueturk
It takes competence to rip off the American people so you can look after your buddies in the oil biz? You're almost as ignorant as your president.

"And so during these holiday seasons, we thank our blessings." --George W. Bush, Fort Belvoir, Va., Dec. 10, 2004

Tax revenues are up, unemployment rates are down, and I'm not getting taxed as much as I did when Bill was president.

I don't see any problems with the economy.

LoungeMachine
01-07-2007, 09:47 AM
Originally posted by Warham
Tax revenues are up, unemployment rates are down, and I'm not getting taxed as much as I did when Bill was president.

I don't see any problems with the economy.


Your children and grandchildren will, assuming you'll get laid and have some someday ;)

Warham
01-07-2007, 09:47 AM
Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Your children and grandchildren will, assuming you'll get laid and have some someday ;)

Don't know about the grandchildren yet. I don't want to get too old too fast.

blueturk
01-07-2007, 09:59 AM
Originally posted by Warham
Don't know about the grandchildren yet. I don't want to get too old too fast.

Why not? You're already senile!

LoungeMachine
01-07-2007, 10:39 AM
Originally posted by Warham
Tax revenues are up, unemployment rates are down, and I'm not getting taxed as much as I did when Bill was president.

I don't see any problems with the economy.


How's Social Security and Medicare holding up?

You guys fix the problems in the last 6 years?

blueturk
01-07-2007, 12:43 PM
Warham is a lot like his leader. As long as he and his buds (assuming he has any) are alright, then fuck everybody else.

"Let me put it to you bluntly. In a changing world, we want more people to have control over your own life." --George W. Bush, Annandale, Va, Aug. 9, 2004

Nickdfresh
01-07-2007, 12:57 PM
Originally posted by Warham
The Democrats are going to take care of the important issues facing America, like putting a national ban on trans fats.

And Kool Aid drinking bitches like you are going to sit on your asses as Bush uses US servicemen as human shields and hostages to his shitty legacy....

LoungeMachine
01-07-2007, 12:57 PM
I've missed Nick...

:gulp:

Nickdfresh
01-07-2007, 01:00 PM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Protesters disrupt press conference on lobbying reform
Washington Business Journal - 3:07 PM EST Wednesdayby Kent HooverWashington Bureau Chief

House Democrats tried to unveil their lobbying reform package today, but their press conference was drowned out by chants from anti-war activists who want Congress to stop funding the Iraq war before taking on other issues.

Led by Cindy Sheehan, the mother of a slain soldier, the protesters chanted "De-escalate, investigate, troops home now" as Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., began outlining the Democrats' plans to ban lobbyist-funded travel and institute other ethics reforms. The press conference was held in the Cannon House Office Building in an area open to the public.


Emanuel finally gave up trying to be heard over the chants, and retreated to a caucus room where Democrats were meeting.

Sheehan says she has nothing against lobbying reform, but she and her fellow anti-war activists want Democrats to know they will keep pressuring Congress to end the war in Iraq.

"We wanted the Democrats to know they're back in power because of the grass roots," Sheehan says.

The anti-war activists held their own Capitol Hill press conference earlier in the day before deciding to attend the lobbying reform press conference as well.

Before the chanting started, Sheehan got a hug from Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., the new chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

Link (http://www.bizjournals.com/washington/stories/2007/01/01/daily13.html?from_rss=1)

Look at the partisan fool avoid any actual discussion of policy by pulling the Cindy Sheehan card out of his vagina....

Nickdfresh
01-07-2007, 01:01 PM
Originally posted by LoungeMachine
I've missed Nick...

:gulp:

Glad to be back with a new rig...

Good to see ya' Lounge...

:gulp:

ULTRAMAN VH
01-07-2007, 04:09 PM
Originally posted by LoungeMachine
I've missed Nick...

:gulp:

Oh great, Lounge Queef and Nicky are having a love fest. Get a room gentlemen.

Nickdfresh
01-07-2007, 04:44 PM
Originally posted by ULTRAMAN VH
Oh great, Lounge Queef and Nicky are having a love fest. Get a room gentlemen.

Oh look, Ultrafag is too dumb to actually post anything worthwhile....

You broke away from your ambiguously gay cartoons for this?

ULTRAMAN VH
01-07-2007, 06:33 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Oh look, Ultrafag is too dumb to actually post anything worthwhile....

You broke away from your ambiguously gay cartoons for this?

Anything I post gets thrown in the dump by Lounge Queen (aka) Joseph Stalin. It appears anything with a Conservative view point is cast into the dump. Oh and Happy New Year to ya Nick.

LoungeMachine
01-07-2007, 06:40 PM
Originally posted by ULTRAMAN VH
Anything I post gets thrown in the dump by Lounge Queen (aka) Joseph Stalin. It appears anything with a Conservative view point is cast into the dump. Oh and Happy New Year to ya Nick.

More bullshit whining from the Mangina.

We have plenty of "conservative" threads going right now douche tube.

YOUR shit gets dumped because you post crap and NEVER bother to post your own opnions in your own fucking threads.

But then, hardly anyone else ever posts in your threads.


The last "conservative" op-ed you posted had NO POSTS in 4 days.

Don't blame me because your boring shit gets ignored and clogs up the forum.

Whiney ass little NeoCon wannabe.

Leave the threads to the REAL cons in here. THEY at least know what the fuck they're talking about.

LoungeMachine
01-07-2007, 06:44 PM
And isn't it funny you don't even bother to post in REAL Conservative threads in here.....

If you didnt whine, you'd have no reason to post at all.

ULTRAMAN VH
01-07-2007, 06:58 PM
Whatever Lounge Waitress, I don't post crap, I post threads that you, Furd and Nick despise because they simply do not fit in with your far left of center agenda. I guess now that the Democratic party is running congress, you feel the lefty machine should be shown in all its self proclaimed glory without any input from the right. As for the Con labeling, it is really getting old. We are all quite aware of your vitriolic distain for the current administration, but understand that numerous real conservatives feel the same way. So have a nice evening and go fuck yourself.

LoungeMachine
01-07-2007, 07:04 PM
We "despise" them?

Who in here actually posts in your threads?

Certainly not you.

You never even bother to post on your own topics, dumbass.

But then, no one else posts in your threads either.

So who really cares.

:gulp:

Nickdfresh
01-07-2007, 07:09 PM
Originally posted by ULTRAMAN VH
Whatever Lounge Waitress, I don't post crap, I post threads that you, Furd and Nick despise because they simply do not fit in with your far left of center agenda. I guess now that the Democratic party is running congress, you feel the lefty machine should be shown in all its self proclaimed glory without any input from the right. As for the Con labeling, it is really getting old. We are all quite aware of your vitriolic distain for the current administration, but understand that numerous real conservatives feel the same way. So have a nice evening and go fuck yourself.

Um, happy new year...

And you post boring cliche partisan crap that has little or nothing to do with any current events....

ULTRAMAN VH
01-07-2007, 07:21 PM
Originally posted by Warham
The Democrats are going to take care of the important issues facing America, like putting a national ban on trans fats.

That is hilarious but true, and don't forget the smoking bans and the future money maker for the Dumbocrats at the expense of tax payers, GLOBAL WARMING.


Energy & Environment

Trading Hot Air?
by Steven Milloy
Posted Jan 05, 2007










Hot air is often associated with politicians, but the new 110th Congress will try elevating that unflattering characterization to the status of a tradable commodity in hopes of stemming the perceived problem of manmade global warming.

New Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.) and Senate Environment and Public Works Committee chairman Sen. Barbara Boxer (D.-Calif.) support Kyoto Protocol-like plans to limit greenhouse gas emissions and to trade permits to emit greenhouse gases -- a.k.a “cap-and-trade.”

Speaker Pelosi’s and Sen. Boxer’s plans are supported by investment banking firms, such as Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs, that plan on profiting from trading so-called “carbon credits.”

Toward that end, Morgan Stanley vice chairman Jon Anda argued for cap-and-trade this week in a commentary in the Financial Times (Jan. 3). It’s a useful place for starting the debate over what will likely be a major political issue during 2007.

Anda starts out by saying that, “Whether you believe the science [of global warming] or not is beside the point. Policy should be more about risk than proof.” He suggests that the financial markets are best suited to assess such risk.

But Anda already errs here in a major way. First, while we are unlikely to ever have definitive proof regarding the extent of human impact on global climate, science is crucial in assessing the risk of manmade global warming. Financial markets regularly assess the risk of real events -- life insurance companies, for example, base premiums on actuarial tables. But what is the actuarial table-equivalent for manmade global warming if not the relevant science?

Anda wants us “to think of climate change in cash flow terms: imagine a series of payments over many years to cover the damage from carbon emissions… Simply put, we have a carbon liability and the value of that liability is rising”

Here too, Anda errs in assuming that climate change must be a net loss for society. How does he know it won’t be a net benefit to society? Agricultural production, for example, has likely been significantly enhanced by the Northern Hemisphere warming that appears to have occurred over the past 200 years.

Accepting Anda’s carbon liability assumption for the sake of argument, how precisely would we identify “damage from carbon emissions”? Anda might claim, for example, that the damage to New Orleans caused by Hurricane Katrina resulted from manmade global warming. But bad weather is not unique to the post-Industrial Revolution world and fingerprint/DNA evidence equivalents for weather events don’t exist.

What about the lull in hurricanes during 2006? Since atmospheric carbon dioxide levels only increased between 2005 and 2006? Was the lull a “benefit” of manmade global warming? Anda has obviously stepped into a scientific quagmire.

Anda argues that “voluntary corporate actions are inadequate in managing climate risk” and that a cap-and-trade “market” is the answer to our supposed carbon “liability.” He asserts, “The rationale is simple: market forces pick the winning green technologies.”

Ironically, Anda also observes in his article that, “[i]f consumers are willing to pay a premium price for green products, businesses will certainly produce them. Yet premium green products lack the market share to make a difference.”

So as much as he claims to like markets, Anda apparently doesn’t like the answer that markets are already providing on green products as demonstrated by their limited and, so far, unpromising market share. His appeal for a government-ordered cap-and-trade scheme to compel market interest in green products is as quintessentially anti-market as it gets.

Anda concludes his article by saying that approaching global warming from a financial perspective “allows the market to pick winners.” While it’s not so clear that mandatory cap-and-trade of the right to release an invisible and difficult-to-measure gas equates to any sort of genuine “market” for a truly valuable commodity, just who will Anda’s “winners” be?

Although he doesn’t mention this in his Financial Times article, one big future winner may be Anda’s own firm. Morgan Stanley announced last October that it “plans to invest in approximately $3 billion of carbon/emission credits, projects and other initiatives related to greenhouse gas emissions over the next five years.”

Another big winner may be Wall Street powerhouse Goldman Sachs, part owner of the European Climate Exchange and the Chicago Climate Exchange -- the exclusive marketplaces for trading carbon credits.

Goldman Sachs doesn’t even have to place a bet on whether carbon credits are going up or down in value. Under cap-and-trade, the climate exchanges would be government-sanctioned climate bookies, so to speak, making money from the forced trading of carbon credits.

And although Anda avoids discussing the all-important flip side of his conclusion, just who are the “losers” providing the “winners” with their dubiously-gained profits?

That’s easy. Just look in the mirror. As outgoing chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Sen. James Inhofe (R.-Okla.) wrote in the Wall Street Journal (Dec. 18), cap-and-trade “would cost the average American family more than $2,700 a year while having no measurable impact on global temperature.”

It’s no wonder that Morgan Stanley’s Anda urges us to ignore the scientific debate about global warming and to rush to embrace cap-and-trade. A few thousand dollars from each of us might mean billions for his firm and other Wall Street “winners” -- giving a whole new meaning to “green investment.”

Mr. Milloy is executive director of the Free Enterprise Education Institute. He publishes JunkScience.com and CSRWatch.com. He is a junk science expert, an advocate of free enterprise and an adjunct scholar at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

Nickdfresh
01-07-2007, 07:31 PM
ZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZz zzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZzzzzz

ULTRAMAN VH
01-07-2007, 07:35 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Um, happy new year...

And you post boring cliche partisan crap that has little or nothing to do with any current events....

Um yeah right, Illegal aliens, Multiculturalism and Terrorism have nothing to do with current events. Just keep standing in that circle jerk with LoungeQueen and Furd until these so called non issues come up and bite your ass.

Nickdfresh
01-07-2007, 07:46 PM
I think you mean really, really simplistically retarded takes on "Illegal Aliens, Multiculturalism, and Terrorism" by shitty writers and know-nothing jackoffs...

LoungeMachine
01-07-2007, 08:39 PM
Fucking idiot can't even make a point within a thread without a cut-n-paste neocon op-ed.

:rolleyes:

What a moron.