Does the GOP think BI-partisanship means BI-sexual?

So.. I guess the Obama health plan is bipartisan and does include GOP ideas..

“It’s clear that the American people want health insurance reform.  They aren’t interested in Democratic ideas or Republican ideas.  They’re interested in the best ideas to reduce costs, guarantee choices and ensure the highest quality care.

They’re interested in ideas that will put them back in control of their own health care.

Throughout the debate on health insurance reform, Republican concepts and proposals have been included in legislation.  In fact, hundreds of Republican amendments were adopted during the committee mark-up process.  As a result, both the Senate and the House passed key Republican proposals that are incorporated into the President’s Proposal.”

A lot of GOP ideas… and that’s just Obama’s plan.. hell the Senate plan had 160 GOP amendments..

“Of the 788 amendments filed,67 came from Democrats and 721 from Republicans. (That disparity drew jeers that Republicans were trying to slow things down. Another explanation may be that they offered so many so they could later claim—as they are now, in fact, claiming—that most of their suggestions went unheeded.) Only 197 amendments were passed in the end—36 from Democrats and 161 from Republicans. And of those 161 GOP amendments, Senate Republicans classify 29 as substantive and 132 as technical.”

of course they still voted no..

Why is the only way to bipartisan cooperation is if the Democrats fully embrace the GOP plan?  Shouldn’t the losing party be happy to get a seat at the table.. a seat that gives them almost half of everything they want? Is a bill with 49% (R) input and 51%(D) input not bipartisan enough when the country elected the (D) to decide the majority?

I simply don’t get how the GOP can get away with lying that there’s been no effort to include them. But,even more than that, I can’t understand this demand that  they should have their way in total  if the country is to see any bipartisanship come out of congress.  Is it the prefix ‘Bi’ that throws them? Do they think if they do anything ‘Bi” then they are supporting the homo’s? (disclosure, I love the ‘mo’s.. and this one will back me up on that).


Can you come up with a better reason why the GOP is so anti ‘BI-partisanship” even going so far as to deny it exists when  the bipartisan components are so flamboyantly displayed?


Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

7 responses to “Does the GOP think BI-partisanship means BI-sexual?

  • uselesslegs

    Let’s be honest. Flip Flopping and politics go together like peanut butter and jelly. Neither side can claim they’re flip or flop free. But this shit is turning into the friggin flying Wallendas. Back flips, front hand springs, cartwheels. Even the most proficient gymnast’s are taking notes, jesus christ.

    Now Boehner is saying the Health Care Bill and Obama’s 11 page version isn’t long enough? Wasn’t he using it as a wal-cracking-nut just last year…as he smirked and slammed that sucker down on the podium to illustrate just how needlessly bulked up it was???

  • Howey

    “Now Boehner is saying the Health Care Bill and Obama’s 11 page version isn’t long enough?”

    I read that today and had to chuckle, Chuck. If TanMan had actually read the President’s 11 pages he would have found it’s not the actual bill. In all fairness, though, he knows that.

    From the Republican leadership today:

    “We fundamentally disagree with a comprehensive proposal to reform health care.” ‘Nuff said!

    As far as ekg’s theory…Kelly, I think you’re on to something! Didn’t Larry Craig once say:

    “Hey!Don’t call me Bi! As long as my wife and kids can’t see me in that stall I’m as straight as they come!”

  • lil mike

    Reviewing your links, it looks like none of the amendments actually effected the structure of the bill. Do you really regard this as bipartisan legislation? Which one of those amendments was important enough to tip the scales for someone to vote for the bill?

    Would you have voted for the war in Iraq if you could sneak in amendment that all deploying soldiers recieve a card with the website? It wouldn’t change if we were going to war or not.

    First of all, we don’t know what, if any of these amendments survived since as Chuck points out above, we no longer have actual legislation anymore. Only the 11 page summary that the President provided. The legislation has not even been drafted yet. I doubt the President will be much interested in keeping Republican amendments in at this point.

    Bipartisanship would have been a bill with major components that both sides could agree on, but the President made clear before the summit that he was not going down that road.

    Of course I never thought the summit was about any sort of bipartisanship. It was about having a show to say, “Hey, we tried! Now on to reconciliation!”

    And thats just what’s happening.

  • Howey

    ” we no longer have actual legislation anymore”

    “The legislation has not even been drafted yet”

    au contraire…

    There is a bill. It was passed by the House in November:

    and then passed by the Senate Christmas Eve:

    What comes next is a fix that to make the two bills one.

    This can be done with the support of the Republicans (and without filibuster) or it can be done by an up and down vote of 51 Senators.

    But…the fact is the bill has passed both chambers. The Republicans were given the opportunity to participate in the fix and declined.

    So the bill will now be sent to the President, with changes worked out by both chambers of the house, for signature.

    So your cry of ignorance as to what’s in the bill is moot. Your Party of No made the decision to jump off the bus. Now be prepared for that bus to run them over on the way to the station.

  • ekg

    thanks Howie.. 🙂 that is what I was going to explain…

    and I’ll ask this.. why can’t the GOP tell the truth? The senate bill has been passed, the house bill has been passed.. what is going on now with reconciliation is the exact part reconciliation was made for and used by the GOP already. So why this outright lying?

    The plan is to get the House to pass the Senate bill, trusting that the Senate will remove the part of the bill they(the house) don’t like, such as the Landreau money..

    I just wish Mike would address the lying…

    as for not liking what the GOP offered… Look, I can’t help that, be mad at them for the 10 things they offered.. but don’t be mad at the (D) for accepting 9 of them. and yes, when one side offers 10 points and 9 of them are accepted, that’s bipartisan.. if you wanted more to be offered, again.. blame your party. This wasn’t 9 out of 1000 things that were offered.. this was 10 ideas and 9 were mad at your own party for not coming up with more than “NO”.

    the amendments.. we all know that sometimes all it will take to get someone to vote is a giving them what they ask for.. well, that was done 147 times..

    there were 300 amendments on the table.. 147 (R) amendments were added.. that’s so to close half that it’s fucking insane to say it the losing party isn’t represented in the bill..

    this doesn’t count the hours and weeks spent in bipartsian talks..the Senate finance Com spent 53 days in meetings and 8 days in mark-up, mark-ups haven’t taken that long in 22 years

    the senate HELP Com had 47 bipart meetings..

    all told the Senate spent 25 consecutive days in session on this.. that’s the 2nd longest session in history..

    so please.. stop with this “rushed through” bullshit.. stop pretending that you weren’t at the table and your ideas weren’t adopted into the final bills..

  • Howey

    “thanks Howie.. that is what I was going to explain…”

    No problemo…Know what’s funny? In my absence from the muche I find it amusing (looking in) that while I was banned for my criticism of the republicans in my absence the whining and wild accusations of lilMike, Sam, and lesser beings such as Iceman and Dick has multiplied to levels far exceeding my greater moments of McCain/Palin criticism.

    Of course, back then there was an election pending.

    Now there isn’t (yet). Perhaps these guys could show a little respect for our President and the difficult tasks he’s facing as opposed to posting outrageous claims and lies spread by spurrious sources such as The Times,Fox News, et al.

    When we have these Rupert Murdoch (and Saudi royal family owned) “news organizations” stating categorically that they are “The Voice of the Opposition” one has to sit back and wonder how they can be legitimate news sources.

  • lil mike

    Wow, I was actually fooled. Obama’s bill was just a smokescreen. Damnit, I should have figured that out too. I knew the summit was a sham, so I should have put two and two together and figured out that the Obama proposal was a sham too.

    Shame on me I guess.

    Howey? Banned for his criticism of the Republicans? If that was a bannable offense, there would only be like 5 people there now.

add to the dis-order

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: