Disqus - Latest Comments for PhiladelphiaSteve

Re: Ex-Forbes reporter says Trump lied to embellish wealth

PhiladelphiaSteve — Fri, 20 Apr 2018 13:13:20 -0000

Anyone who believes anything said by Trump is a fool.

Re: GOP-Obama Compromise Would Mean a Scary Win for Big Business

PhiladelphiaSteve — Sun, 09 Nov 2014 11:33:30 -0000

Well that pretty much guarantees that President Obama will agree to it.

Re: Rotten to the Core - Michelle Malkin - National Review Online

PhiladelphiaSteve — Sun, 03 Mar 2013 14:54:30 -0000

And Ms. Melkin forgot to tell us that Sahria Law has been passed as the law of the land, the Muslim from Kenya in the White House is taking everyone's guns and the UN Black Helicopters are hovering over your house as we speak.

Re: The Myth of the Obama Cave-In

PhiladelphiaSteve — Tue, 27 Nov 2012 07:16:33 -0000

Perhaps failing to fight on appointments is "noise" to you, but Citizens United tells us the consequences of a Judiciary that is moving to 75% Republican can mean. And, if Republicans stall everything for President Obama’s last four years, as they did to President Clinton, then we face a possible future with 90% Republican judges controlling everything that Congress and the White House does for generations.

Re: Blocked Obama Nominee Confirmed in California

PhiladelphiaSteve — Sat, 03 Sep 2011 10:36:03 -0000

And what did Democrats do after that? Did they go to the airways the way Republicans have in the past? No. they cowered in the corner and gave up.

Re: Rule No. 1: Hide the iPhone from Ballmer at the Microsoft meeting

PhiladelphiaSteve — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 15:28:05 -0000

I was once in the room when someone mentioned researching an item by "Google-ing" it.
The room suddenly became VERY quiet and Steve asked him to repeat his comment and reminded him he was giving a "career statement" when he did.
The REST of us thought it was quite funny...

Re: Democrats Lose One Again, This Time On FISA

PhiladelphiaSteve — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 15:09:01 -0000

The Democratic leadership of the House and Senate have compensated for thein inability to overcome lockstep Republican unity with the White House, expressed through record-breaking numbers of fillibusters by displaying one of the most breathtaking examples of political weakness that I have seen in my lifetime.

Beinrg right, as I believe they are, means nothing when they cannot muster sufficient testicular fortitude to actually confront Republicans for their stances. When he was running the House, Tom DeLay instituted a policy of "a majority of a majority", meaning that unless a majority of Republicans voted for a bill, he would not put it forward: That way Democrats could not claim any credit whatsoever for any bills that did pass.

Apparently, in order not be be outdone, Harry Ried has instituted a policy that he will not put any bill to a vote that does not have a guaranteed sixty votes, giving the Republicans an automatic veto on any bill, without even having to make the effort of a fillibuster.

It appears to be way too late for Senator Ried to receive a spinal transplant. Should the current disrepute that Republicans have visited upon Congress continue, Democrats will deserve to lose control in 2008. Speaking as a partisian Democrat I certainly will not be happy, but I also certainly cannot say we will not deserve it.

Re: The NYT’s Endorses The Fake Republican, John McCain

PhiladelphiaSteve — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 12:36:50 -0000

Ronald Reagan used the tactic in 1976 of naming a vice presidential running mate during the primaries, rather than at the convention. It was meant to put incumbent president Ford under pressure for his vice president (Nelson Rockefeller).

It had one effect in that VP Rockefeller announced that he would not stand on the re-election ticket. it did not get Ronald Reagan the 1976 nomination though.

Re: Don't Expect An EO

PhiladelphiaSteve — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 10:30:34 -0000

George W. Bush never particularly cared about earmarks or runaway spending before. Why shold he care now?

Oh yeah! I remember!

This is a DEMOCRATIC Congress and it is an election year.

Re: The Power Of Pork

PhiladelphiaSteve — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 11:03:26 -0000

Republicans have proven themselves to be completely corrupt and incompetent and obstructionist, far beyond anything the Democrats did in their time as minority party over the last decade.

You would have to go back to Wilbur Mills (and Fanny Foxx, read up on it!) to find Democrats as corrupt as Republicans have been while in control.

However that does not make it ok. And, while I still beleive the Republicans who have run our country over the last decade to be among the most damaging group to have ever been in power since Warren Harding, I can't excuse Democrats who have been corrupt because of it.

Re: The Power Of Pork

PhiladelphiaSteve — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 10:59:34 -0000

No. Rep Murtha is not as bad as Rep Stevens.

However I have been the first in the past ot castigate Conservatives who tolerate corruption and incompetence among Republicans on the basis that they are "not as bad" as others (for example in Guantanamo, we don't torture our prisoiners as badly as al Qaeda torturs their prisoners, so Conservatives believe it is OK for America to officially sanction torture of prisoners).

I belive that we in America, if we claim a higer status in the world, should live to higher standards.

If that means I have to want to see him become Ex-Representative Murtha becasuue of his uncontrolled spending, then that is the price I have to be willing to pay.

Re: The Power Of Pork

PhiladelphiaSteve — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 10:55:38 -0000

You have made a valid point.

I allowed my agreement with Rep Murtha on his assesment of President Bush's occupation of Iraq to cloud my evaluation of him as part of the uncontrolled Congressional spending.

I do have to agree with you that, despite my other opinions, I hope that he becomes ex-representative Murtha, even if that means his Republican replacement will be part of what I view to be an obstructionist, Loyal-to-Bush-to-the-death blockin the House.

But that is a different issue and I should not allow that opinion to tolerate corruption. I do not live in his district, so I can only agree with you and hope he is out of office.

Re: The Power Of Pork

PhiladelphiaSteve — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 11:46:13 -0000

For the record. My answer is "no", it is not ok, even if a Democrat does it.

However.

Until I see that Conservatives actually hold Republicans to the standards they set, instead of an occasional token complaining, I will not be the "only" one who holds his party to your standards.

Too bad Conservatives. You set the standard, you be the ones to live by them, for a change.

Re: The Power Of Pork

PhiladelphiaSteve — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 11:43:40 -0000

Re: "REPUBLICANS DO IT, TOO! (TM)
And so that makes anything Murtha does OK, eh?"

That's the alibi that Republicans use all the time, isn't it?

Re: The Power Of Pork

PhiladelphiaSteve — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 11:42:10 -0000

Yup. Murtha certainly is a guilty candidate when it comes to pork barrels pending.

How Conservatives must long for the days when Republicans ran Congress. There was NO pork barrel spending then, was there?

The outrage I'm seeing all over the place now was only an occasional, muted complaint back then.

Let me predict: Should Republicans take back control of Congress in 2008, pork barrel spending will not drop one bit. The only thing that WILL drop is Conservative complaints. They will return to their once-a-year, token complaint of spending that is the limit on Conservative complaining when Republicans do it.