• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

I have a question?

A

Anonymous

Guest
hypocritexposer said:
during Clinton's 2nd term, were the Republicans in control of Congress?

Yep from 1994 to 2000...

In 2000 they had the majority in the House- it was an even tie in the Senate but the Repubs retained control because of VP Cheney-as the breaking vote..
Dems didn't get total control until 2006...
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Mike said:
hypocritexposer said:
during Clinton's 2nd term, were the Republicans in control of Congress?

Yep................................. how do you think the budget got balanced?

They sure forgot how when they were rubberstamping GW's exploits :wink: :roll: :(
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Mike said:
hypocritexposer said:
during Clinton's 2nd term, were the Republicans in control of Congress?

Yep................................. how do you think the budget got balanced?

They sure forgot how when they were rubberstamping GW's exploits :wink: :roll: :(

That's what I can't understand Mike. How is it that Clinton gets credit for the surpluses during that time?
 

MsSage

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Mike said:
hypocritexposer said:
during Clinton's 2nd term, were the Republicans in control of Congress?

Yep................................. how do you think the budget got balanced?

They sure forgot how when they were rubberstamping GW's exploits :wink: :roll: :(
hmmm your talking about Clinton's 2nd term...so how are they rubberstampig GW's exploits??????
 

Tam

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
hypocritexposer said:
during Clinton's 2nd term, were the Republicans in control of Congress?

Yep from 1994 to 2000...

In 2000 they had the majority in the House- it was an even tie in the Senate but the Repubs retained control because of VP Cheney-as the breaking vote..
Dems didn't get total control until 2006...

So there was an even tie in the Senate. since 2000 :???:
Don't you need a vote of 60 to pass a bill in the Senate? :?
Would that not mean more than a few Dems were also rubberstamping GW's exploits? :wink:
And why are the Republicans taking the blame for government spending after 2006 if the Dems had TOTAL CONTROL?
If the Dems didn't agree with what Bush wanted why did they vote to pass the spending bills?
Why didn't Obama vote "no" on the spending bills instead of "Present" if he disagreed with the spending?
Please explain how you can blame Bush for the last two years when the DEMS HAD TOTAL CONTROL OF THE SENATE?
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Tam said:
Oldtimer said:
hypocritexposer said:
during Clinton's 2nd term, were the Republicans in control of Congress?

Yep from 1994 to 2000...

In 2000 they had the majority in the House- it was an even tie in the Senate but the Repubs retained control because of VP Cheney-as the breaking vote..
Dems didn't get total control until 2006...

So there was an even tie in the Senate. since 2000 :???:
Don't you need a vote of 60 to pass a bill in the Senate? :?
Would that not mean more than a few Dems were also rubberstamping GW's exploits? :wink:
And why are the Republicans taking the blame for government spending after 2006 if the Dems had TOTAL CONTROL?
If the Dems didn't agree with what Bush wanted why did they vote to pass the spending bills?
Why didn't Obama vote "no" on the spending bills instead of "Present" if he disagreed with the spending?
Please explain how you can blame Bush for the last two years when the DEMS HAD TOTAL CONTROL OF THE SENATE?

oldtimer will find a way to BLAME BUSH after all it is the BUSH BUST :roll: :roll: :roll:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Since you all seem so confused...

In the 1996, 1998, and 2000 elections,Republicans lostCongressional seats but still retainedcontrol of the House and, more narrowly, the Senate. After the 2000 election, the Senate was divided evenly between the parties, withRepublicans retaining the right to organize the Senate due to the electionof Dick Cheney as Vice President and exofficio presidingofficerof the Senate. The Senate shifted tocontrol by the Democrats (though they technically were the pluralityparty as they were one shortof a majority) after GOP senator Jim Jeffordschanged party registration to "Independent" in June 2001, but later returned toRepublican control after the November 2002 elections. In the 2006 elections, Democrats won both the Houseof Representatives (233 Democrats, 202Republicans) and the Senate (49 Democrats, 49Republicans, and 2 Independents caucusingwith the Democrats) as well as the majorityof state governorships (28-22).
 

Tam

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Since you all seem so confused...

In the 1996, 1998, and 2000 elections,Republicans lostCongressional seats but still retainedcontrol of the House and, more narrowly, the Senate. After the 2000 election, the Senate was divided evenly between the parties, withRepublicans retaining the right to organize the Senate due to the electionof Dick Cheney as Vice President and exofficio presidingofficerof the Senate. The Senate shifted tocontrol by the Democrats (though they technically were the pluralityparty as they were one shortof a majority) after GOP senator Jim Jeffordschanged party registration to "Independent" in June 2001, but later returned toRepublican control after the November 2002 elections. In the 2006 elections, Democrats won both the Houseof Representatives (233 Democrats, 202Republicans) and the Senate (49 Democrats, 49Republicans, and 2 Independents caucusingwith the Democrats) as well as the majorityof state governorships (28-22).
Since you seem to be confused :wink: This was one of the largest spending bill passed during the Bush Presidency and look who supported it. Want to tell us again how the Republicans rubberstamped anything Bush wanted?
XML U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 110th Congress - 2nd Session

as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate


Vote Summary

Question: On Passage of the Bill (H. R. 1424 As Amended )
Vote Number: 213 Vote Date: October 1, 2008, 09:22 PM
Required For Majority: 3/5 Vote Result: Bill Passed
Measure Number: H.R. 1424 (A bill to provide authority for the Federal Government to purchase and insure certain types of troubled assets for the purposes of providing stability to and preventing disruption in the economy and financial system and protecting taxpayers, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide incentives for energy production and conservation, to extend certain expiring provisions, to provide individual income tax relief, and for other purposes. )
Measure Title: A bill to provide authority for the Federal Government to purchase and insure certain types of troubled assets for the purposes of providing stability to and preventing disruption in the economy and financial system and protecting taxpayers, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide incentives for energy production and conservation, to extend certain expiring provisions, to provide individual income tax relief, and for other purposes.
Vote Counts: YEAs 74
NAYs 25
Not Voting 1
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State


Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State


Grouped By Vote Position YEAs ---74
Akaka (D-HI)
Alexander (R-TN)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Bond (R-MO)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Burr (R-NC)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Coburn (R-OK)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Dodd (D-CT)
Domenici (R-NM)
Durbin (D-IL)
Ensign (R-NV)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inouye (D-HI)
Isakson (R-GA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)

Kyl (R-AZ)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)

Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McCaskill (D-MO)
McConnell (R-KY)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)

Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-NE)
Obama (D-IL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)

Salazar (D-CO)
Schumer (D-NY)

Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Thune (R-SD)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)


NAYs ---25
Allard (R-CO)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cochran (R-MS)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Dole (R-NC)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feingold (D-WI)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Johnson (D-SD)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sanders (I-VT)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Vitter (R-LA)
Wicker (R-MS)
Wyden (D-OR)

Not Voting - 1
Kennedy (D-MA)

So I ask you again Oldtimer if the Dems INCLUDING OBAMA didn't like the spending why did 40 of them vote for it while 15 Republicans voted NO? :?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Tam said:
Oldtimer said:
Since you all seem so confused...

In the 1996, 1998, and 2000 elections,Republicans lostCongressional seats but still retainedcontrol of the House and, more narrowly, the Senate. After the 2000 election, the Senate was divided evenly between the parties, withRepublicans retaining the right to organize the Senate due to the electionof Dick Cheney as Vice President and exofficio presidingofficerof the Senate. The Senate shifted tocontrol by the Democrats (though they technically were the pluralityparty as they were one shortof a majority) after GOP senator Jim Jeffordschanged party registration to "Independent" in June 2001, but later returned toRepublican control after the November 2002 elections. In the 2006 elections, Democrats won both the Houseof Representatives (233 Democrats, 202Republicans) and the Senate (49 Democrats, 49Republicans, and 2 Independents caucusingwith the Democrats) as well as the majorityof state governorships (28-22).
Since you seem to be confused :wink: This was one of the largest spending bill passed during the Bush Presidency and look who supported it. Want to tell us again how the Republicans rubberstamped anything Bush wanted?
XML U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 110th Congress - 2nd Session

as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate


Vote Summary

Question: On Passage of the Bill (H. R. 1424 As Amended )
Vote Number: 213 Vote Date: October 1, 2008, 09:22 PM
Required For Majority: 3/5 Vote Result: Bill Passed
Measure Number: H.R. 1424 (A bill to provide authority for the Federal Government to purchase and insure certain types of troubled assets for the purposes of providing stability to and preventing disruption in the economy and financial system and protecting taxpayers, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide incentives for energy production and conservation, to extend certain expiring provisions, to provide individual income tax relief, and for other purposes. )
Measure Title: A bill to provide authority for the Federal Government to purchase and insure certain types of troubled assets for the purposes of providing stability to and preventing disruption in the economy and financial system and protecting taxpayers, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide incentives for energy production and conservation, to extend certain expiring provisions, to provide individual income tax relief, and for other purposes.
Vote Counts: YEAs 74
NAYs 25
Not Voting 1
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State


Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State


Grouped By Vote Position YEAs ---74
Akaka (D-HI)
Alexander (R-TN)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Bond (R-MO)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Burr (R-NC)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Coburn (R-OK)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Dodd (D-CT)
Domenici (R-NM)
Durbin (D-IL)
Ensign (R-NV)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inouye (D-HI)
Isakson (R-GA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)

Kyl (R-AZ)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)

Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McCaskill (D-MO)
McConnell (R-KY)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)

Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-NE)
Obama (D-IL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)

Salazar (D-CO)
Schumer (D-NY)

Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Thune (R-SD)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)


NAYs ---25
Allard (R-CO)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cochran (R-MS)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Dole (R-NC)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feingold (D-WI)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Johnson (D-SD)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sanders (I-VT)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Vitter (R-LA)
Wicker (R-MS)
Wyden (D-OR)

Not Voting - 1
Kennedy (D-MA)

So I ask you again Oldtimer if the Dems INCLUDING OBAMA didn't like the spending why did 40 of them vote for it while 15 Republicans voted NO? :?

Vote Number: 213 Vote Date: October 1, 2008, 09:22 PM

By that date it was quite evident that GW had led us into the Bush Bust- and most Dems- and some Repubs believe the Keynesian economic theory and that nonpassage of that bill and/or any spending cuts would have brought the economy/country down within weeks.....
 

hopalong

Well-known member
oldtimer if you believe what you just said I have a golden gate to sell you.
Take off your dark highway patrol glasses and see the light
 

Tam

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Vote Number: 213 Vote Date: October 1, 2008, 09:22 PM

By that date it was quite evident that GW had led us into the Bush Bust- and most Dems- and some Repubs believe the Keynesian economic theory and that nonpassage of that bill and/or any spending cuts would have brought the economy/country down within weeks.....

By that date the Dems had had total control of the Senate for two years and before that they had the deciding votes to stop any spending bills as we all know Oldtimer it takes a vote of 60 to pass a spending bill in the Senate so why did the Dems let it get to this point? :?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Tam said:
Oldtimer said:
Vote Number: 213 Vote Date: October 1, 2008, 09:22 PM

By that date it was quite evident that GW had led us into the Bush Bust- and most Dems- and some Repubs believe the Keynesian economic theory and that nonpassage of that bill and/or any spending cuts would have brought the economy/country down within weeks.....

By that date the Dems had had total control of the Senate for two years and before that they had the deciding votes to stop any spending bills as we all know Oldtimer it takes a vote of 60 to pass a spending bill in the Senate so why did the Dems let it get to this point? :?

Congress for the 8 years leading up to that time has a responsibility for doing no oversight- and not putting forth more effort to require the administration to do oversight/enforcement-- and follow the laws that existed...I blame them for trusting GW too much(altho as was shown with the Mexican trucking law- twice when Congress overwhelmingly told Bush he couldn't do something- he did it anyway)... And just like Napolitano said- he should have been criminally charged for some of those things....

But as you remember- Administration (GW, Paulson, Cox) were echoing the same thing to Congress as they were the people--"The Fundamentals of the Economy are Strong"....And apparently some in Congress bought it so much so that even McBush was echoing it the day the Big Financials were closing their doors.... :roll:
 

hopalong

Well-known member
So you are saying that the BUSH bust is really not BUSH"S fault, but those that BLINDLY followed him?
HUMMMM reminds me of those that blindly follow the idiot in the WH now

Cant have it both ways oldtimer, either it is GW"S fault or it isn't?

EH??????
 

Tam

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Tam said:
Oldtimer said:
By that date it was quite evident that GW had led us into the Bush Bust- and most Dems- and some Repubs believe the Keynesian economic theory and that nonpassage of that bill and/or any spending cuts would have brought the economy/country down within weeks.....

By that date the Dems had had total control of the Senate for two years and before that they had the deciding votes to stop any spending bills as we all know Oldtimer it takes a vote of 60 to pass a spending bill in the Senate so why did the Dems let it get to this point? :?

Congress for the 8 years leading up to that time has a responsibility for doing no oversight- and not putting forth more effort to require the administration to do oversight/enforcement-- and follow the laws that existed...I blame them for trusting GW too much(altho as was shown with the Mexican trucking law- twice when Congress overwhelmingly told Bush he couldn't do something- he did it anyway)... And just like Napolitano said- he should have been criminally charged for some of those things....

But as you remember- Administration (GW, Paulson, Cox) were echoing the same thing to Congress as they were the people--"The Fundamentals of the Economy are Strong"....And apparently some in Congress bought it so much so that even McBush was echoing it the day the Big Financials were closing their doors.... :roll:

Oldtimer you seem to beable to find a lot of excuses to why the Dems in the Congress did nothing to stop what was going on. Yet you have no problem blaming Bush for their lazy azz attitude towards their sworn duty to uphold the Constitution. Face it the Dems could have stopped it AND THEY DID NOTHING. AND now that they have total total control they have kicked the spending into triple time to repay all their campaign donors before they are kicked to the curb. :wink:
 

Texan

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
But as you remember- Administration (GW, Paulson, Cox) were echoing the same thing to Congress as they were the people--"The Fundamentals of the Economy are Strong"....And apparently some in Congress bought it so much so that even McBush was echoing it the day the Big Financials were closing their doors.... :roll:
Who was echoing the same thing in March of 2009? Do you remember, Oldtimer?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kntE8gZyZZ4
 
Top