Who is to blame for the past 8 years?

[ishkabibble]

Matt claims that the Dems are primarily responsible for the ills of the past 8 years due to their filibustering during the first 6 years of the Bush administration, and their ineffectiveness during last 2.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/226/story/18218.html

Based on the above link, you could argue that a claim like that is both ignorant and biased.

Oh yeah, the link also appears to debunk the claim the the right wing is more willing to compromise.

[96Qowner]

You don't suppose the filibusters have anything to do with the closely divided Senate, do you?

The current Senate has two other complications: the 51-49 Democratic majority, which includes a pro-war independent and an absent Democrat recuperating from brain surgery, makes it harder to find 60 votes. And the presidency and Congress are controlled by opposing parties, which increases confrontation.

[ishkabibble]

You don't suppose the filibusters have anything to do with the closely divided Senate, do you?

All of the Congresses under Bush have been closely divided.

So, no.

[srellim234]

Let's compromise and blame it on both the Democrats AND the Republicans.

Go independents and third parties!!!

[ishkabibble]

Let's compromise and blame it on both the Democrats AND the Republicans.

No way, everything is always completely the Dems fault. Especially Bill Clinton's.

So, I'm filibustering your proposal.

[audtatious]

IT WAS THE ONE ARMED MAN!!!!!!!

[themadscientist]

I blame the democrats. I blame them for the things they did and most importantly i blame them for putting up candidates so weak in 00 and 04 Bush was actually the better choice.

[ishkabibble]

IT WAS THE ONE ARMED MAN!!!!!!!

As usual, Matt gets pwned and posts some irrelevant response.

[audtatious]

Dude, stope smoking the crack pipe. You are asking who is to blame in comparison to what I've stated or believe and you want me to further put out my viewpoints? What's the point when you are wanting others opinion?

[ishkabibble]

Just proving you wrong, that's all.

[audtatious]

That's fine. I aint seen nuthin yet....

So, just to be clear, and since you have not laid out my "claims" I will post them here:

1) For 6 years the Republicans were the majority in Congress2) The Republicans did not have a SuperMajority in that they needed support from the Democrats to pass bills3) Bills were passed in Congress during the Republicans years (which shows Democrat support)4) Democrats were able to filibuster what they did not like5) Ishk says the Democrats were spineless during those 6 years so Republicans are still to blame for everything in Congress and every failure of Congress since Bush took office.6) Congress approval rating is 9% today. Congress is run by Pelosi. If the issue with Congress was the Republicans running it then the approval ratings should be going up in stead of losing 20%+ since the Democrats took over.

Based on the above, Republicans are not 100% to blame for everything. They did not have a SuperMajority so they could NOT pass bills without Democratic support.

Thank you, have a nice day.

[ishkabibble]

5) Ishk says the Democrats were spineless during those 6 years so Republicans are still to blame for everything in Congress and every failure of Congress since Bush took office.

Nope. All I said was that the Dems were spineless. You are drawing your own conclusions and putting words into my mouth.

6) Congress approval rating is 9% today. Congress is run by Pelosi. If the issue with Congress was the Republicans running it then the approval ratings should be going up in stead of losing 20%+ since the Democrats took over.

Not the issue here. The issue is who is to blame for the failed policy for the past 8 years. Your contention was that the Dems were primarily to blame, which is laughable. I asked for your logic, you said something about the Dems filibustering. The link above shows that is not true.

Based on the above, Republicans are not 100% to blame for everything. They did not have a SuperMajority so they could NOT pass bills without Democratic support.

Thank you, have a nice day.

Yep, I never said Republicans were 100% to blame. You were the one trying to pin the blame on the Dems, which is little else than ignorant partisan hackery.

Dodge, Deflect, Deny. Thank you, have a nice day.

[audtatious]

Show me where I stated the dems were primarily to blame? If we are talking the last two years, then based upon your logic and others they ARE to blame since Congress is under their watch.

[ishkabibble]

Let's see, they are supposedly to blame for the first 6 years due to filibustering, which as, I showed you, was not true.

Then I prove to you that the Repubs are breaking the record for filibusters during the past 2 years, but, of course, the Dems are still to blame.

Nice (lack of) logic.

[audtatious]

I never said they filibustered everything.

Your lack of providing me quotes where I said such was the unequivocal problem makes your assumptions pretty empty. In fact, I have stated over and over that Congress as a whole is to blame.

[ishkabibble]

I never said they filibustered everything.

Some key quotes from this thread:

zerothread?id=362367

"Instead we had a Republican Congress which dealt with filibusters and now we have a dem controlled Congress dealing with filibusters."

"It does not matter in the least that Congress itself is broken with a 9% approval rating or not as I'm sure that is Bush's fault as well and not the failure that is Pelosi/Reed."

"You want to blame a leader today? Blame your beloved Pelosi."

"Democratic failures are _always_ blamed on the republicans."

"Congress as a whole has a good portion of the blame. Of course, you only blame those who had the majority. That's fine, I blame the Democratic party who has the majority today for the housing crisis and high gas prices."

"Your comeback is that the dems are spineless which I guess means they are not to blame because of it. I would say the exact opposite."

If you look at the thread, I actually disagree with Bob and say that the Dems deserve more blame than his calculation. And, despite your claim that you feel the blame should be spread around, your position in that thread is pretty one-sided.

My "spineless" comment is an accusation, not an excuse.

[audtatious]

"Instead we had a Republican Congress which dealt with filibusters and now we have a dem controlled Congress dealing with filibusters."

Gee, look, I'm calling BS on both sides

"It does not matter in the least that Congress itself is broken with a 9% approval rating or not as I'm sure that is Bush's fault as well and not the failure that is Pelosi/Reed."

And? Congress IS a failure and seems more so since the Dems took over as their approval rating is about the lowest in history. I'm pretty much stating that you and others will "chalk it up" to Bush and not spread the blame around to anyone who has a "D" after their name. I've been right.

"You want to blame a leader today? Blame your beloved Pelosi."

For the last two years, correct. She's the head of it all and the leader is always to blame around here.

"Democratic failures are _always_ blamed on the republicans."

That's a good and true line. Seems anytime someone is making a claim about failure the Republicans and the Bush Administration are the only ones called out.

"Congress as a whole has a good portion of the blame. Of course, you only blame those who had the majority. That's fine, I blame the Democratic party who has the majority today for the housing crisis and high gas prices."

Good quote. If you can blame everything on the Republican Congress while they have control then I should be equally allowed to blame the Democratic Congress over the last two years since they have control. It has been over these last two years that gas has doubled in price and the housing market has gone to crap. Your position is to never blame anyone but Republicans.

"Your comeback is that the dems are spineless which I guess means they are not to blame because of it. I would say the exact opposite."

Thus you are giving excuses for them. I blame them all

If you look at the thread, I actually disagree with Bob and say that the Dems deserve more blame than his calculation. And, despite your claim that you feel the blame should be spread around, your position in that thread is pretty one-sided.

My position on the thread is argumentative concerning the Republicans being 100% to blame. I'll have to look at the thread again as I thought you were following Bobs party line and blaming a crappy Congress as a whole upon one party.

My "spineless" comment is an accusation, not an excuse.

Then it seems I misunderstood your positioning and we are not so far off from each others viewpoints. With how much you like to troll me I must have missed something.

[AZhitman]

I can make this real easy for everyone.

Such a gross oversimplification makes it an impossible question to answer.

One, when you say "who is to blame for the past 8 years", you don't specify an issue.

Two, when you say "failed policies", you're assuming that they're universal failures, which isn't the case.

Three, you fail to consider that "blame" is a subjective term and is inapplicable unless some law has been broken or an aggrieved party can make a case for "injury".

So...

You were the one trying to pin the blame on the Dems, which is little else than ignorant partisan hackery.

...this becomes a circular argument, with no right or wrong.

Ish, you're a smart cookie - You should stick to individual issues of real importance, rather than trying to tackle an unwinnable, vague and nebulous argument.

[smockers83]

How can we not argue about the failures of the past 2 years when you ask about the failures of the past 8 years? Last I checked, the last 2 years are included in the last 8 years. If you want to ask the question you asked ish, you have to release yourself from party politics and think with an open and nondiscriminatory mind.

If anyone watched the RNC tonight and watched Joe Lieberman speak, he actually hit it on the button about what I have been thinking lately (and stated so in another thread). We are living in George Washington's greatest fear of our government in such that the party comes before the country. People in Washington subscribe to a party and its politics, regardless of what they may individually think and what is actually good for the country. This is why I asked earlier, why do we need to have parties? Why not just get rid of them and be done with partisan politics. If we eliminate the parties, we don't have people subscribing to a party, but free to think for themselves, for the country, without worry for the party, what the party may think of them, or party constituents. I think it was Fred Thompson that said America doesn't want to hear about party politics or something like that. Well, here's the real deal. The reason the past couple of elections have been so close is because the American people themselves have subscribed to a party. This is why we are bitterly divided nearly 50/50, this is why the country cannot unite, this is why nothing cannot get done in DC.

Oh, and for those that did watch the RNC on C-SPAN, did anyone else want to shoot the guy that was standing next to a microphone who kept yelling "Yeah," weirdly all the time they applauded? Not sure if it was heard on other coverage.