If Pelosi Was Still Speaker Would We Be Better

[privateinvestor]

The Liberal Media is blaming Boehner and Cantor for being opposed to a balanced budget agreement. So for the sake of argument would we be better off if Liberals were still in control of both houses of congress and the White House..... Would Pelosi and Reid have been able to prevent this mess our country is in now??

Your thoughts........

[floridayankee]

Jul 15, 2011 14:57:03 GMT -5 @privateinvestor said:

The Liberal Media is blaming Boehner and Cantor for being opposed to a balanced budget agreement. So for the sake of argument would we be better off if Liberals were still in control of both houses of congress and the White House.....

Your thoughts........

My thought is actually a question. How does 10 more years of deficit spending equal a "balanced budget" agreement?

Would Pelosi and Reid have been able to prevent this mess our country is in now??

as in pre 2010 election, of course. It's much easier to reach an agreement (buy enough votes) when the majority doesn't need one single vote from the opposition party to push their agenda.

[privateinvestor]

Pelosi wanted to increase taxes if she had not been shown the door because of the country's move to the right...

But if Liberals were in control of our government in Washington DC would we be better off?? They are blaming republicans for this mess so could they have done a better job and have prevented this impasse and threat of a default??

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Jul 15, 2011 14:57:03 GMT -5 @privateinvestor said:

The Liberal Media is blaming Boehner and Cantor for being opposed to a balanced budget agreement. So for the sake of argument would we be better off if Liberals were still in control of both houses of congress and the White House..... Would Pelosi and Reid have been able to prevent this mess our country is in now??

Your thoughts........

What do you want the propaganda wing of the Democratic Party to say? That Obama has spent far too much, has scarcely a thing to show for it, and Republicans are correct to stand firm to stop this wreckless spending streak?

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Jul 15, 2011 15:14:38 GMT -5 @privateinvestor said:

Pelosi wanted to increase taxes if she had not been shown the door because of the country's move to the right...

But if Liberals were in control of our government in Washington DC would we be better off?? They are blaming republicans for this mess so could they have done a better job and have prevented this impasse and threat of a default??

The Democrats held the White House, the House, and the Senate and they were required by law to pass a budget and they failed to do so. Only the second time in history (Dems did it the last time, too-- in the 1970's) Congress has failed to pass a budget.

Democrats refused to pass a budget because they would have had to do it in September / October of 2010 and they read the handwriting on the wall: They were gonna get clobbered in the 2010 election by an electorat that was SICK of SPENDING-- so they punted.

This is really the complete and total failure of leadership by Democrats and the Obama regime

[privateinvestor]

The Liberal Media is going completely nuts blaming the republicans for this financial showdown that is hanging over our country...OK that is their right I guess but if Pelosi was still the Speaker and spending our tax money on her pet liberal projects and raised out taxes would we be better off?? Pelosi blames Cantor for being an obstacle to a compromise because he insists on NO new taxes.. But Pelosi also said Social Security and Medicare are off the table because she doesn't want to balance the budget on the backs of seniors or the middle class... just saying

Congressman Chris Van Hollen who is Pelosi's right hand man thinks that the republican speaker Boehner is the problems and that Obama wants to get a deal...

[djAdvocate]

Jul 15, 2011 14:57:03 GMT -5 @privateinvestor said:

The Liberal Media is blaming Boehner and Cantor for being opposed to a balanced budget agreement.

good. so do i.

they are complete morons to walk away from a $4T deficit reduction deal. and that is precisely what they are going to do.

i have zero sympathy for them getting eviscerated for it.

[privateinvestor]

Yea but don't forget the Dems are not in lock step with Obama on Social Security or Medicare especially Obama's ideas about Means Test for Medicare....Van Hollen said today on MSNBC that he opposes that idea because we already have Means Testing for Medicare so he doesn't know what the president is talking about but he has to see the details before voting for or against it.

[djAdvocate]

Jul 15, 2011 16:08:20 GMT -5 @privateinvestor said:

Yea but don't forget the Dems are not in lock step with Obama on Social Security or Medicare especially Obama's ideas about Means Test for Medicare....Van Hollen said today on MSNBC that he opposes that idea because we already have Means Testing for Medicare so he doesn't know what the president is talking about but he has to see the details before voting for or against it.

point conceded. but until they call his bluff, it is their problem. to simply walk away from a deal of historic proportions is insane, imo.

ok, it is not insane. it is a strategic move designed to fuck up Obama, probably. but it is insane if your goal is to fix things sooner than later.

[cereb]

Jul 15, 2011 16:02:49 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Jul 15, 2011 14:57:03 GMT -5 @privateinvestor said:

The Liberal Media is blaming Boehner and Cantor for being opposed to a balanced budget agreement.

good. so do i.

they are complete morons to walk away from a $4T deficit reduction deal. and that is precisely what they are going to do.

i have zero sympathy for them getting eviscerated for it.

Agreed

[cereb]

Jul 15, 2011 16:24:59 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Jul 15, 2011 16:08:20 GMT -5 @privateinvestor said:

Yea but don't forget the Dems are not in lock step with Obama on Social Security or Medicare especially Obama's ideas about Means Test for Medicare....Van Hollen said today on MSNBC that he opposes that idea because we already have Means Testing for Medicare so he doesn't know what the president is talking about but he has to see the details before voting for or against it.

point conceded. but until they call his bluff, it is their problem. to simply walk away from a deal of historic proportions is insane, imo.

ok, it is not insane. it is a strategic move designed to fuck up Obama, probably. but it is insane if your goal is to fix things sooner than later.

Also agreed

[djAdvocate]

Jul 15, 2011 16:30:16 GMT -5 cereb said:

Jul 15, 2011 16:24:59 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

point conceded. but until they call his bluff, it is their problem. to simply walk away from a deal of historic proportions is insane, imo.

ok, it is not insane. it is a strategic move designed to fuck up Obama, probably. but it is insane if your goal is to fix things sooner than later.

Also agreed

somebody recently called Obama's budget proposal the opportunity of a lifetime for the GOP. that is not far off the mark.

[privateinvestor]

Bias knows no bounds, especially when it comes to MSNBC’s Chris Matthews. The Hardball host, who seems to drop a new jaw-dropping bombshell near daily, now asserts that there hasn’t been a “stronger” House Speaker in the last 50 years than Nancy Pelosi.

NewsBusters points out that Pelosi was House Speaker during one of the nation’s worst recessions in decades, causing unemployment rates to double and the debt to increase by 61 percent.

Matthews stated: “There’s never been a stronger speaker, I think, since Sam Rayburn than the speaker — just recently was speaker. That’s Nancy Pelosi.”

NewsBusters continues:

Consider that the unemployment rate was 4.4 percent when Pelosi was sworn in back in January 2007. When she gave up the gavel four years later, the rate was a staggering 9.4 percent with over 8.5 million more people out of work.

Let’s understand that the economy was booming when the Democrats and Pelosi took over Congress in 2007. By the end of their first year in charge, a recession began that many claim to be the worst since the Great Depression.

www.westernjournalism.com/chris-matthews-pelosi-was-%e2%80%98strongest-house-speaker%e2%80%99-in-50-years/

[cereb]

Jul 15, 2011 19:05:37 GMT -5 @privateinvestor said:

Bias knows no bounds, especially when it comes to MSNBC’s Chris Matthews. The Hardball host, who seems to drop a new jaw-dropping bombshell near daily, now asserts that there hasn’t been a “stronger” House Speaker in the last 50 years than Nancy Pelosi.

NewsBusters points out that Pelosi was House Speaker during one of the nation’s worst recessions in decades, causing unemployment rates to double and the debt to increase by 61 percent.

Matthews stated: “There’s never been a stronger speaker, I think, since Sam Rayburn than the speaker — just recently was speaker. That’s Nancy Pelosi.”

NewsBusters continues:

Consider that the unemployment rate was 4.4 percent when Pelosi was sworn in back in January 2007. When she gave up the gavel four years later, the rate was a staggering 9.4 percent with over 8.5 million more people out of work.

Let’s understand that the economy was booming when the Democrats and Pelosi took over Congress in 2007. By the end of their first year in charge, a recession began that many claim to be the worst since the Great Depression.

www.westernjournalism.com/chris-matthews-pelosi-was-%e2%80%98strongest-house-speaker%e2%80%99-in-50-years/

It took many many years to get the country to the position it's in now. It didn't happen overnight.

[djAdvocate]

Jul 15, 2011 19:05:37 GMT -5 @privateinvestor said:

Bias knows no bounds, especially when it comes to MSNBC’s Chris Matthews. The Hardball host, who seems to drop a new jaw-dropping bombshell near daily, now asserts that there hasn’t been a “stronger” House Speaker in the last 50 years than Nancy Pelosi.

NewsBusters points out that Pelosi was House Speaker during one of the nation’s worst recessions in decades, causing unemployment rates to double and the debt to increase by 61 percent.

Matthews stated: “There’s never been a stronger speaker, I think, since Sam Rayburn than the speaker — just recently was speaker. That’s Nancy Pelosi.”

NewsBusters continues:

Consider that the unemployment rate was 4.4 percent when Pelosi was sworn in back in January 2007. When she gave up the gavel four years later, the rate was a staggering 9.4 percent with over 8.5 million more people out of work.

Let’s understand that the economy was booming when the Democrats and Pelosi took over Congress in 2007. By the end of their first year in charge, a recession began that many claim to be the worst since the Great Depression.

www.westernjournalism.com/chris-matthews-pelosi-was-%e2%80%98strongest-house-speaker%e2%80%99-in-50-years/

wth is NewsBusters talking about here? unemployment has about as much to do with the strength of a speaker as a Waldorf salad has to do with a VW carburetor.

so, from this non-existent relationship they are supposedly proving that the media is liberally biased because Chris Matthews is a moron?

this is like showing that water is a procuring cause in auto accidents because most people have drunk it within (2) hours of driving. or that urinating causes cancer because every single cancer patient goes pee.

NewsBusters are a bunch of nutsacks. they have far more bias than anyone they criticize.

[handyman2]

Would we be better off if Palosi was still speaker? NO The national debt would be much bigger by now. There would be no leverage for the Republicans to force them to cut the budget.

[robbase]

if pelosi were still speaker and dmes still had a supermajority, this would be a non-story. The debt ceiling would be quietly lifted & we would continue our drunken sailor ways and be worse off as a country...I mean look at the budget Pres Obama submitted

[privateinvestor]

Obama, Reid and Pelosi have to be held responsible for the spending that created the debt problem that could cause the government's debt to become junk because they never dealt with it in 2009 and 2010....and now these three are blaming the republicans for causing the current impasse to deal with this debt...

The impasse will never be resolved as long as we have these three democratic leaders in Washington DC...

[Mad Dawg Wiccan]

I would say Mathews is correct, as Pelosi wielded more power than any other speaker I can think of. "Strong" doesn't mean she did a good job.

[privateinvestor]

Jul 18, 2011 14:59:27 GMT -5 Mad Dawg Wiccan said:

I would say Mathews is correct, as Pelosi wielded more power than any other speaker I can think of. "Strong" doesn't mean she did a good job.

.Pelosi was indeed a strong partisan progressive dem from San Francisco but the strength in the dem caucus or leadership really comes from her two aids Chris Van Hollen and Steny Hoyer...IMHO