posted on January 8, 2007 12:12:16 PM new
They will be 'watching' alright. LOL
And they're going to be pleased as punch at what the dems PROMISED to change...that they didn't and couldn't.
LOL LOL LOL
All talk....they always have been....but they've had NO solutions to any issue during their whole whining campaign. They still don't. That's NOT going to change very much.
DREAM ON, "waco"peepa.....dream on. lol
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on January 8, 2007 12:23:16 PM new
LOL....well, fenix did that a LONG, long time ago. Most dems can see his written nonsense and believe he does more harm than 'good'. LOL LOL
And helen will agree with anyone who supports her side....but go against her ONCE and watch out.
[as mingo has now seen]
They may not like the presidential power of VETO...but they SAY they support our Constitituion....and it's all there....to be followed. lol lol
=================
The one thing I have noticed the most about the dems/liberals is FACTS are something they either just can't comprehend....or avoid like the plague.
Even when the facts ARE given to them:
Some info on the minimum wage:
1) The vast majority of people classed as "working poor" earn more than the min. wage.
2) Less than .6% of American workers earn the minimum wage. Of that tiny percentage, the vast majority are not poor. Only 1 in 5 is below the poverty line. More than 60% work part time and have an avg household income of >$60K.
3) More than half min wage earners are under 25 and more than a quarter are 16-19. Many are students or part-timers.
4) 60% of min wage workers work in restaurants and bars and have untaxed income.
A mostly meaningless boondoggle that almost always backfires. Tell the restaurant owner to give a waitress $1, he simply charges her for her uniform rental.
Labor is a commodity like anything else.
....they don't want to believe it. Their position has always appeared to me to be one of 'throw more money at the problem'.....when in fact it rarely solves ANY problem....and sometimes makes things much worse.
But they'd NEVER acknowledge that. nope....never.
The min. wage is always supported by the labor unions...as raising the min. wage allows them to 'call' for wage increases for their supporters. Can't have min. wage earners earning more than others...so all wages generally increase. Thus, we pay more for our purchases, thus companies leave the states and go elsewhere where they find cheaper wages. A vicious circle.
One week and they've CHANGED THEIR MINDS on that issue also.
DEM VOW ALREADY BROKEN: HOUSE SETS 4-DAY WORK WEEK
Sun Jan 07 2007 15:03:38 ET
Democrats ran to expand the work week in the House to 5 days.
But guess how long that lasted? Not even one week!
"Culture Shock on Capitol Hill: House to Work 5 Days a Week" front-paged the WASHINGTON POST in December.
Majority leader Steny Hoyer said members of the House will be expected in the Capitol for votes each week by 6:30 p.m. Monday and will finish their business about 2 p.m. Friday.
Explained the POST: "Forget the minimum wage. Or outsourcing jobs overseas. The labor issue most on the minds of members of Congress yesterday was their own: They will have to work five days a week starting in January."
But on the morning after the night before, on the first full week of the new congress, Hoyer has pulled back from his vow!
A Hoyer press release obtained by the DRUDGE REPORT boldly declares:
"Monday, January 8, 2007: The House is not in session."
Hill sources claim The House is taking Monday 'off' this week, because of the championship football game between Ohio State and the University of Florida.
And, of course, the following Monday is the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday.
100 hours...starting...soon
Developing...
[ edited by Linda_K on Jan 8, 2007 12:41 PM ]
posted on January 8, 2007 12:41:44 PM new
Below is what the aged LIAR_K said about the new 110th Congress.
"And they're going to be pleased as punch at what the dems PROMISED to change...that they didn't and couldn't."
Again aged Liar_k's brain seems so confused. Not doing as promised was a long string of new-con tricks that BUSHY and his GANG of lawmakers used to trick good honest Americans into voting for them.
I could go on and on with the list of broken promises from the new-cons starting with "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED",SEALING OUR SOUTHERN BORDER OR HOW ABOUT PAYING DOWN OUR NATIONAL DEBT.
What a broken down joke the old new-con Lioness Liar_k has become. The outdated aged Lioness new-con can't even get support from her own pod any longer.
LET THE CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATIONS INTO BUSHY BEGIN. "BRING THEM ON"!!!
posted on January 8, 2007 12:50:27 PM new
I think most INTELLIGENT people know why many of the issues the President would have accomplished didn't because of the dems voting against them. They were GREAT at obstructing and blocking all sorts of issues.
NOW you complain that this President might give back some of what he was given????
He has TRIED to work with the dems....but the dems haven't been the LEAST bit willing to work with him.
Now they THINK they have the 'power'....and I personally hope he stands by his positions and doesn't CAVE into their demands. The most major issue to me, being NOT withdrawing our troops...
...and doing as the liberals want to see done....giving AQ and the terrorists a VICTORY against the US.
posted on January 10, 2007 05:49:51 AM new
About BUSHY'S troop build up in the Iraq Civil War. Both Congress and the Senate will take a vote on sending more troops to Iraq. I say great Idea this way millions of people like me all across this great country can tell other Americans what lawmakers voted to send more troops and what ones that didn't. Good place to start off to elect more Democrats in 2008.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., pledged to hold a vote on the troop increase. Many Democrats are likely to oppose an increase, as are some Republicans. Pelosi spokeswoman Jennifer Crider said she said did not know when the vote would occur, or what the legislation would include.
Senate Democrats were planning a vote next week on nonbinding legislation that would urge the president not to send more troops. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said he hoped for a bipartisan measure that would declare, "We don't support this escalation of the war."
If it passes, Reid said, "The president's going to have to take note of that. I think that's the beginning of the end, as far as I'm concerned."
posted on January 10, 2007 08:19:16 AM new
LOL....they're going to vote on it????
It will be nothing but show then....as it's the CIC's decision to make...NOT THEIRS.
The only way they can stop him is to NOT FUND the war.
Other than that....they can TALK all they want, vote all they want...and he can STILL send more troops.
And I see the results of that proposed voting differently.
I see that the voters will then be able to CLEARLY see which party wants to ADMIT DEFEAT AND RUN.....and prove they are AGAINS nothing more than DEFEATISTS.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on January 10, 2007 09:23:47 AM new
QUEEN pelosi has rule:
Pelosi bans smoking near House floor
Lawmakers will still be allowed to smoke in their own offices
WASHINGTON - New House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is snuffing out one of Congress' enduring prerogatives, still cherished by some lawmakers - the right to smoke near the floor of the House.
Pelosi, D-Calif., announced Wednesday that effective immediately, House members would no longer be able to light up in the ornate Speaker's Lobby off the House floor where lawmakers mingle during votes.
The room is often hazy with smoke, as it was Tuesday night as the House voted on anti-terror legislation; Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, often has cigarette in hand, for example.
"The days of smoke-filled rooms in the United States Capitol are over," Pelosi said. "Medical science has unquestionably established the dangerous effects of secondhand smoke, including an increased risk of cancer and respiratory diseases. I am a firm believer that Congress should lead by example."
Smoke-filled rooms won't be gone entirely - lawmakers will still be allowed to smoke in their own offices.
Smoking is banned in most federal buildings, and the District of Columbia recently banned smoking in public areas, as has Pelosi's home district of San Francisco and a number of other cities.
===========
posted on January 10, 2007 09:27:41 AM new
What some don't realize is that this country is NOT a monarchy yet, it's not a Facist state, it's still a democracy. Bush is not our employer, he's our EMPLOYEE. He is not our boss, we're HIS.
Now, of course, he can choose to ignore anyone's advice and wishes but that is NOT his job. His job is to be directed by the people of America.
But our wishes have been discarded and trampled in his war on the American people.
The war in Iraq is the biggest and best example...he was told it wouldn't work and it isn't working....every thing he was warned would happen is happening and NONE of it is good.
The people of America do NOT want more troops sent to Iraq .....it's a disaster and ONE "man" should NOT be making the decisions.
posted on January 10, 2007 11:25:38 AM new
mingo said, in part:
"he can choose to ignore anyone's advice and wishes but that is NOT his job. His job is to be directed by the people of America."
NOPE.....you've got that wrong too. As ususal. tsk tsk tsk.
His JOB is to protect the Nation...and all presidents do what they believe is necessary to abide by what their JOB requires of them.
No one else gets to have the final decision making power...given to all presidents under our constitution. PERIOD.
Now...again...IF your congress has the GUTS to withdraw funding....then that will be a different ball games.
But the dems voted to go to war...and we're there now. No one gets to say oooops we've changed our minds...we don't want to be there anymore. The people VOTED him into office and then RE-ELECTED him.
He IS doing just as his job description gives him the POWER to do. Decide what IS necessary for our safety.
"But our wishes have been discarded and trampled in his war on the American people."
Mostly because you can't see beyond your nose to KNOW what a withdrawal in defeat would mean for the future of the US. You're too blind to see the long term results of doing that.
"The people of America do NOT want more troops sent to Iraq .....it's a disaster and ONE "man" should NOT be making the decisions."
Oh...so again you don't want to abide by our constitution, huh? Yep...it sure appears that way.
SCREAM at your congress who won't CUT THE WAR FUNDING.....
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on January 10, 2007 11:30:20 AM new
"waco"peepa...you are CONFUSED again.
I never made any such statement. He might agree with the min. wage. being raised....I never said he would veto it.
It's those 'voices' in your head, once again.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on January 10, 2007 01:01:01 PM new
Oh no!!! Their first fight....in the 1st 100 hours. tsk tsk tsk
Kennedy proposal uncovers party rift
By Jon Ward
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
January 10, 2007
Sen. Edward M. Kennedy's proposal yesterday to require congressional approval for a troop surge was generally dismissed by fellow Democrats, revealing the deep divisions within the party over how to handle the war in Iraq.
"I'm not going to rule it out, but we are trying to work out a resolution that would be broader and attract bipartisan support," said Senate Democratic Whip Richard J. Durbin of Illinois.
House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland also cast doubt on the proposal. The Constitution's Article II, he said, "probably does" give the president authority to prosecute a war.
President Bush will address the nation at 9 p.m. today with a speech that is expected to propose an increase this year of about 20,000 troops in Iraq -- at an estimated cost of $5 billion. U.S. officials said the president will also propose another $1 billion in economic aid to Iraq and lean on friendly Arab regimes to increase their assistance to Baghdad.
Many top Democrats credit their opposition to the war in Iraq for their huge victories in November.
But their party is divided between those who want to retreat as soon as possible by cutting off funding and those who want to nudge the Bush administration toward a gradual withdrawal.
Mr. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat, sought some middle ground that would at least hamper Mr. Bush's ability to increase the number of troops in Iraq by requiring that he first seek approval from Congress.
"There can be no doubt that the Constitution gives Congress the authority to decide whether to fund military action," Mr. Kennedy said during a speech at the National Press Club. "President Bush should not be permitted to escalate the war further and send an even larger number of troops into harm's way, without a clear and specific new authorization from Congress."
Jennifer Crider, a spokeswoman for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, told reporters last night that "the House will vote on the president's proposal" for a troop surge, although she provided no details.
Although Democrats on Capitol Hill have roundly criticized Mr. Bush's proposal even before it has been made, they are unlikely to go along with Mr. Kennedy's plan.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
Ann Coulter
[ edited by Linda_K on Jan 10, 2007 01:09 PM ]
posted on January 10, 2007 01:57:56 PM new
"waco"peepa
I know what I said....but you didn't and spoke about the min. wage issue.
YOUR mistake....you can apoligize later.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on January 10, 2007 02:02:58 PM new
Going to be fun watching the 'rift' between the extreme lefties and the more centralist lefites GROW over their positions on this war.
What to do??? What to do??
The radical/wacko lefties will be screaming "you know the people want us to withdraw from iraq...and that was what we WON this election on - doing just that. Grab your backbone men and women....and VOTE to not FUND these wars."
And then the more sensable centralists putting them in their place and explaining WHY we need to continue fighting in Afghanistan, Iraq AND Africa.
Some get it...some don't.
WHO will win out in their 'rift'?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
Ann Coulter
[ edited by Linda_K on Jan 10, 2007 02:05 PM ]
posted on January 12, 2007 10:11:21 AM new
Fairness??? Equality????
Nope...doesn't look like it to me. Looks more like a 'who you know' situation, once again. tsk tsk tsk
GOP hits Pelosi's 'hypocrisy' on wage bill
By Charles Hurt
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
January 12, 2007
House Republicans yesterday declared "something fishy" about the major tuna company in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's San Francisco district being exempted from the minimum-wage increase that Democrats approved this week.
"I am shocked," said Rep. Eric Cantor, Virginia Republican and his party's chief deputy whip, noting that Mrs. Pelosi campaigned heavily on promises of honest government. "Now we find out that she is exempting hometown companies from minimum wage.
This is exactly the hypocrisy and double talk that we have come to expect from the Democrats."
On Wednesday, the House voted to raise the minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.25 per hour.
The bill also extends for the first time the federal minimum wage to the U.S. territory of the Northern Mariana Islands.
However, it exempts American Samoa, another Pacific island territory that would become the only U.S. territory not subject to federal minimum-wage laws.
One of the biggest opponents of the federal minimum wage in Samoa is StarKist Tuna, which owns one of the two packing plants that together employ more than 5,000 Samoans, or nearly 75 percent of the island's work force.
StarKist's parent company, Del Monte Corp., has headquarters in San Francisco, which is represented by Mrs. Pelosi.
The other plant belongs to California-based Chicken of the Sea.
"There's something fishy going on here," said Rep. Patrick T. McHenry, North Carolina Republican.
During the House debate yesterday on stem-cell research, Mr. McHenry raised a parliamentary inquiry as to whether an amendment could be offered that would exempt American Samoa from stem-cell research, "just as it was for the minimum-wage bill."
A clearly perturbed Rep. Barney Frank, the Massachusetts Democrat who was presiding, cut off Mr. McHenry and shouted, "No, it would not be."
"So, the chair is saying I may not offer an amendment exempting American Samoa?" Mr. McHenry pressed.
"The gentleman is making a speech and will sustain," Mr. Frank shouted as he slammed his large wooden gavel against the rostrum.
Some Republicans who voted in favor of the minimum-wage bill were particularly irritated to learn yesterday -- after their vote -- that the legislation did not include American Samoa.
"I was troubled to learn of this exemption," said Rep. Mark Steven Kirk, Illinois Republican. "My intention was to raise the minimum wage for everyone. We shouldn't permit any special favors or exemptions that are not widely discussed in Congress. This is the problem with rushing legislation through without full debate."
A spokeswoman for Mrs. Pelosi said Wednesday that the speaker has not been lobbied in any way by StarKist or Del Monte.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on January 12, 2007 10:50:28 AM new
The 110th Congress and their leader Nancy Pelosi is working hard to meet their 100 hour agenda. They are over half way there and just look at the bills they have introduced and are working to introduce for the start of a much better America below.
Updated: 9:12 a.m. ET Jan 12, 2007
WASHINGTON - The clock is ticking for House Democrats, but it's hard to tell what time it is.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., was touting a plan to push six bills through a Democratic House in 100 hours or less as early as June of last year. She's reached the halfway point - in fewer than 20 hours, according to her count.
But just as the official clock for a basketball or football game stops for time-outs and commercial breaks, Democrats aren't counting the minutes spent on business unrelated to those six designated bills.
So while the House has been in session for almost 48 hours since the 110th Congress was sworn in Jan. 4, the clock on Pelosi's Web site says only 17 hours 48 minutes have elapsed.
"We're just counting the legislative hours," Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill explained.
Halfway there?
Finished are new rules on ethics, lobbying and budgeting - part of the Democrats' 100-hour promise in November but not included on Pelosi's clock. Also completed are the passage of three bills: antiterrorism measures, a minimum-wage increase and expanding federally funded stem cell research.
With just three bills to go, and one of those scheduled for passage Friday, Democrats appear on their way to accomplishing their promise, regardless of which clock is used.
After acting on a measure to make the government negotiate directly with drug companies for lower Medicare prescription drug prices, the House turns next week to the final two bills on their 100-hour to-do list: cutting interest rates on some student loans and getting more money for the government from oil companies.
KEEP UP YOUR GOOD WORK 110TH CONGRESS KEEP GIVING AMERICA BACK TO THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS.
posted on January 12, 2007 11:01:34 AM new
LOL LOL LOL
So NOW, old pelosi's playing with changing the 'clock'.
how funny.
They've ALWAYS got EXCUSES.....
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on January 12, 2007 12:07:13 PM newSo while the House has been in session for almost 48 hours since the 110th Congress was sworn in Jan. 4, the clock on Pelosi's Web site says only 17 hours 48 minutes have elapsed.
Typical hypocrite demomorons,
"“More Iraqis think things are going well in Iraq than Americans do. I guess they don’t get the New York Times over there.”—Jay Leno".
posted on January 12, 2007 02:19:10 PM new
Bear,
Who cares what a web site clock says take a look at the bills introduced and being introduced by the Democratic lead Congress.
The 110th Congress is doing work for the average American so I guess a new-con like you would disagree with their work am I right?
New-cons, like Bear really need to take a hard look at their replies. Bear's last reply is laughable its so weak.
AGAIN BEAR ONE QUESTION DO YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THE WORK OUR CONGRESS HAS DONE SO FAR??? Tell us all if you were President what bills would you sing into law and what bills would you veto???
Like your failed leader has said several times "YOUR EITHER WITH US OR AGAINST US" tell us where you stand.
posted on January 12, 2007 02:34:00 PM new
LOL....that's right Bear.
Gotta love them thinking that they control the 'clock'.
Wouldn't we ALL love to stop the clock for our own reasons.....especially to take 'time out' - stop-the-clock so we don't miss an important athletic GAME.
I mean, SOME things are just SO important. lol lol lol
===========
Plus in the first 100 hours old BOXER (D) dem from CA has stuck her foot in her mouth ONCE AGAIN.
Bet she'd like to REVERSE the clock and take back what she said to Condi Rice...right about now.
Here we have a radical DEM....who's SUPPOSED to be a feminist....who claims Rice might not be 'bothered' by the war plans SHE supports...because she doesn't have CHILDREN to lose. Or family to lose.
Get that, will ya?
Okay...all who aren't serving our Nation right now...putting their lives on the line....CAN'T make any of the MOST important security plans to WIN this war....stabilize the situation in Iraq. NONE....if you don't have kids fighting there.
And voters really support these nut cases????
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on January 15, 2007 07:24:38 PM new
Look below what the 110th Congress is purposing. Sounds better than good to me. GET HER DONE 110TH CONGRESS.
H.CON.RES.10 : Expressing the sense of the Congress that the tax give away since 2001 to the wealthiest 5 percent of Americans should be repealed and those monies instead invested in vital programs to relieve the growing burden on the working poor and to alleviate poverty in America.
Sponsor: Rep Lee, Barbara [CA-9] (introduced 1/4/2007)
posted on January 15, 2007 08:22:29 PM new
Pelosi's 100-Hour Agenda Seen as 'Symbolic,' 'Timid'
By Monisha Bansal
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
January 15, 2007
(CNSNews.com) - Assessing the first 100 hours of the Democrat-led Congress, two policy analysts said the seven-point agenda House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is in the process of pushing through is largely symbolic and even "timid."
In the first 100 legislative hours -- as defined by Pelosi's countdown clock -- the speaker promised to enact new ethics rules and to pass legislation to implement the 9/11 Commission recommendation, increase the minimum wage, expand federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, negotiate lower prescription drug prices, cut interest rates on student loans and end oil subsidies.
The first five initiatives have passed, and the House is scheduled to vote on student loans and oil subsidies later this week.
"I don't think [Democrats] are doing what the people wanted them to do," said Brian Doherty, a columnist and senior editor with the libertarian Reason Magazine.
"It seems pretty widely agreed that the war in Iraq ... was the driving force in the Democrats winning both houses of Congress," Doherty told Cybercast News Service. "Without action on Iraq, all these other things are not very important."
Doherty said that 45 percent of Americans said Iraq should be Congress' top priority. "The next one on the list -- jobs and the economy -- was down to six percent," Doherty said. "Overwhelmingly, this is what people want acted on first."
"As long that they don't do something more than rhetoric about Iraq, they absolutely fail to meet expectations because Iraq was number one on the list of expectations," he said.
Doherty declared himself unimpressed with the Democrats' priorities.
"The ethics reforms are nice -- though that seems more to me like just covering their own behinds and just trying to create something to distinguish themselves from the Republicans. The other things are just sort of sops to their constituency," he said.
On the stem cell research funding bill, which passed on Thursday, Doherty said the Democrats knew Bush would veto it again, as he did last year with a previous, identical bill.
"The only thing Bush has ever vetoed was a stem cell research bill," he recalled. "So it's really a bit of political grandstanding, [an effort] to show that 'we're not in the pocket of the radical religious right the way [President] Bush is.'
"School loans -- again, that's a sop to their middle class constituency, it's not an issue of vital importance to most Americans, particularly the least well-off Americans," Doherty added.
Doherty said the Pelosi agenda was "not particularly significant to the American people."
He compared the reforms to the Republicans' agenda for their first 100 days in power in 1995, led by then-Speaker Newt Gingrich.
"What the Republicans were trying to do -- and didn't necessarily succeed -- was far more radical," Doherty said. "They really did come in with a big new vision of how they thought government should behave."
Doherty called the Republican agenda "far more consistent," while "what the Democrats have done is far more timid."
John Sides, a professor of political science at the George Washington University, disagreed that the 100-hour agenda was a distraction "or an abdication of the Democrats' responsibility to talk about Iraq."
"I think the Democrats have made a very concerted effort to engage the issue and to respond to the president's proposal," Sides argued. "There is no question that [Iraq] is the dominant issue and that both parties are engaging on it.
"They picked the [seven] issues deliberately so that they would not begin their majority rule for the first time in 12 years with a lot of in-fighting and intra-party strife," Sides added.
"The House is taking votes that are largely symbolic," he said. "For the most part, they have picked things that are fairly easy for most Democratic members."
"When I talk to liberals, I don't expect them to understand my positions on various issues. I spend most of my time trying to help them understand their own." —Mike Adams
posted on January 15, 2007 08:26:33 PM new
RANGEL RANKLED BY FELLOW DEM PELOSI
By GEOFF EARLE Post Correspondent
January 12, 2007 -- WASHINGTON - Powerhouse New York Rep. Charles Rangel is butting heads with fellow Democrat Nancy Pelosi just a week into the new Congress controlled by their party, The Post has learned.
Rangel yesterday swatted down a tax hike that Pelosi has floated, and he made an end run around her decision to bypass House committees in a rush to bring bills to a vote.
"There's a lot of tension there," one Democratic lawmaker said of the relationship between Rangel and Pelosi.
Rangel, who took over the powerful Ways and Means Committee after 36 years in Congress, smacked down the idea Pelosi raised on Sunday of repealing tax cuts for those earning more than $500,000 per year.
"We haven't gotten that far to be talking about tax increases," Rangel told The Post. "She hasn't discussed it with me . . . We haven't gotten into tax policy."
Pelosi had said nixing tax cuts for half-million-dollar earners "might be more important to the American people than ignoring the educational and health needs of America's children."
But Rangel, whose committee handles tax policy, dismissed Pelosi's idea as unlikely to happen, since the speaker didn't bother to vet it with him in advance.
"Saying it to me in private is far more important than whatever she says nationally," he huffed, referring to her weekend TV appearance.
By calling out Pelosi, Rangel, a liberal firebrand himself, has emerged as the first old-school committee "baron" with the political juice to spar with the ascendant speaker.
In another swat at Pelosi, Rangel sided with Republican lawmakers by opposing his leadership's high-profile push to jam through legislation in the first 100 hours of Democratic rule.
Pelosi decreed that none of the early legislation would go through the normal committee process, hoping to keep her party in lockstep to enact key agenda items and boost her own and the party's national image.
"I don't think the chairman [Rangel] likes the idea that there were no hearings on a lot of the bills that were coming up in the 100 hours," said the Democratic lawmaker.
Sources say Rangel went to Pelosi urging that his committee be allowed to review legislation allowing the feds to negotiate with drug companies over prices and taking away tax breaks for big oil companies - but she refused.
Rangel got around her by setting up closed-door committee forums that were essentially hearings anyway.
Yesterday, the Republican and Democratic committee members met with health experts on the drug bill, and an energy meeting is set for next week.
"He said he was disturbed also," said Rep. Jim McCrery (R-La.), the top Republican on Ways and Means.
"When I talk to liberals, I don't expect them to understand my positions on various issues. I spend most of my time trying to help them understand their own." —Mike Adams
posted on January 16, 2007 10:13:04 AM newCONGRESS THE FIRST 100 HOURS
Let's see what they have done.
1) Powerhouse New York Rep. Charles Rangel is butting heads with fellow Democrat Nancy Pelosi just a week into the new Congress controlled by their party.
2) In another swat at Pelosi, Rangel sided with Republican lawmakers by opposing his leadership's high-profile push to jam through legislation in the first 100 hours of Democratic rule.
3) Sources say Rangel went to Pelosi urging that his committee be allowed to review legislation allowing the feds to negotiate with drug companies over prices and taking away tax breaks for big oil companies - but she refused.
4) Completely lied to the American public that they would get something done in the first 100 hours of service. So far, they haven't gotten a damm thing done. Great Demomoron leadership we have. NOT.
.
.
.
"Unfortunately there are levels of Stupid that just can't be cured!!" The current Demomoron motto.
posted on January 17, 2007 12:47:02 AM new
I don't see anything "done" as of yet.
The Democrats came in on the shirt tail of disenchantment with Iraq and nothing more. They have no policy to speak of and won't when 2008 comes around.
The majority of American's are still (and growing) middle of the road politically. That they are frustrated with the Iraq situation was and is no surprise.
It was called a war and wars should only take so long or so they thought.
Bush made the mistake of saying the war was won, the war on terrorism will never be won by anyone. That war will be fought by all nations sooner or later for all times.
He made the mistake of putting all his effort into Iraq and the middle east. He let the ball drop here at home. Oil prices rose as did most all other commodities. Saying inflation is not rising is #*!@. I see it every day and I’m sure most of you do too.
If he had of taken care of this minor #*!@ at home no one would have said squat about the war.
You would have had the few leftist mental midgets here on these boards, Cindy (my dead son made me famous) and a few others bitching and moaning about how bad we are treating the Iraqi insurgents and prisoners but things would have been silent.
The point is this. No matter how bad George W. Bush may be perceived. There’s no one from the Democratic party that could hold his jacket let alone do the job better.
Are YOU a Bunghole?