Pelosi’s Majority A Total Failure
July 18th, 2008 at 05:47am Matt Margolis
George W. Bush and the Republicans in Congress successfully turn around a slumping economy, waged a war on terrorism, and passed all sorts of important legislation on education with bipartisan majorities… Since the Democrats have returned the majority, the economy has slowed down, gas prices have gone up, partisan bickering is at all all time high, and congressional approval ratings are at an all-time low… Yet, Pelosi says Bush is the failure?
Under Pelosi’s “leadership” the country has been headed in the wrong direction. The progress made by Bush and the Republican Majority has been undermined by the Democrats and their incompetence.
Entry Filed under: Democrats
43 Comments
1. OhioOrrin | July 18th, 2008 at 7:31 am
me thinks matt seriously overestimates the impact of politicans on the massive economy & petroleum sector.
pols don’t deserve most of the blame.
neither do they deserve most of the credit.
they’re only politicans after all.
2. Magnum Serpentine | July 18th, 2008 at 7:38 am
What Progress? Oh yeal, Tax Cut for the rich, laws to allow spying on Citizens of the United States, big breaks for big oil,
Ah I see.
But you know, the people will remember the Obstructionism of the republics come this November. they already have said so on numerous polls.
People will remember that the democratic party tried to get health care for children only to have the bill vetoed by greed george who then demanded 160 billion for the george war in Iraq. People will remember that the democratic party tried to get a energy bill passed only to have it blocked by republic obstructionism.
Republic Obstructionism.
People will remember how the republics demanded a bill be read in the house and how it took 5 hours to read that bill. People will remember how the republic obstructionist demanded a vote every thirty seconds on the most stupid of things. And people will remember the fits the republics threw and how the republics walked out of the house, like a bunch of children, because they did not get their way on a vote.
Gas prices.
In 2001 gas was 1.30 in 2008 it was 4 bucks a gallon. This fulfilled a promise that george made the big wig oil companies that he would have gas at 4 bucks by the time he left office.
Failure? If the republic’s had not been such obstructionist, we would have lower gas prices by now, we would have health care for children .
Next
3. Greg-O | July 18th, 2008 at 7:47 am
In 2001 gasoline was $1.30; in January 2007 gasoline was $2.16. That’s less than a dollar increase in the 6 years before Speaker Pelosi.
Still floating the “tax cut for the rich” meme? I earn less than $100,000 a year, and I received a tax cut. Please explain how I’m part of the “top 1%” and where is my Ferrari?
Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less!
4. Nietzsche-Is-Pietzsche | July 18th, 2008 at 8:12 am
Nice try at passing the blame but it’s a miss Matt. Even House Reichpublicans blame themselves for the economic troubles today because of their failure to regulate the banking industry they were the majority.
“Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less!”
That statement shows the heights of conservative naivete. Between speculation and the demand for oil coming from China even if we drilled in every available spot in the country 4$ gas is here to stay. It’s time to transition off of oil.
5. Fredrick Schwartz | July 18th, 2008 at 8:12 am
Greg-O | July 18th, 2008 at 7:47 am
How of a tax cut much per year since FY 2004? And by what percentage has your income changed over the last five filings?
6. Bull | July 18th, 2008 at 8:13 am
I’ve almost figured out who and what MS really is. He’s either:
A) a republican who likes to post inane talking points from the left. which if this is true, it’s pretty brilliant showing how the left really don’t have an original thought.
or…
B) a truly ignorant lefty troll who posts inane talking points showing how the left really don’t have an original thought.
back on topic, what has pelosi and the dems done since they took over in 06? by now our troops should be out of iraq and gas prices should be back to 1.30 a gallon. that’s what they promised, along with other things they haven’t accomplished yet. so if they can’t get their agenda passed with control and bush can get a lot of his agenda passed with and without control then who is the real failure?
Ms. Pelosi, so the american people a favor…STFU!!!!!!!!!
7. neocon | July 18th, 2008 at 8:48 am
Bull,
I will choose B.
Pelosi and Reid are the two most incompetent leaders of their respective political bodies in history.
They completely over promised and under delivered. At least one of their colleagues had the cajones to say that they had lied when they campaigned on withdrawing from Iraq, knowing full well that they couldn’t have accomplished that. Anyone with integrity would have been humiliated by that, but they seem to undaunted, furthering their reputation of shameless hacks.
If the Democrats retain the majority, I think even they will unseat these ineffective leaders.
8. bagni | July 18th, 2008 at 8:48 am
Only enemies speak the truth; friends and lovers lie endlessly, caught in the web of duty. -Stephen King, novelist (b. 1947)
9. Some Assembly Required | July 18th, 2008 at 8:57 am
neocon, though I in large part agree pelosi has been somewhat of a train wreck I cannot help but be amused that you fault them for running on a ‘lie’. Even more so because you pro-life crowd vote based on the abortion stance. The GOP did not over turn Roe vs Wade with a full majority, what would you call that? How is that not running on a platform of lies and pandering to the electorate?
Anyone with the slightest bit of intelligence knew Pelosi and Reid would not get the US out of Iraq in 2 years. They were voted in to send a message to the Bush administration and anyone who seemingly didn’t/doesn’t believe what all the polls were saying. Keep druming that talking point. I always get a chuckle out of it at.
Oh, and before anyone of you go there, Obama is running on change, not purification.
10. Electro | July 18th, 2008 at 9:02 am
BBbbbbwwwhhhaaaaahhhaaa!!!!!
Margolis, stop it. My side’s hurt from laughing.
Really good stuff Matt.
Snicker.
11. neocon | July 18th, 2008 at 9:04 am
SAR,
Please show me where the 1994 GOP Congress ran on the platform of over turning Roe v Wade.
Otherwise, we’ll just chalk that rant up to another liberal lie. There’s just so many to keep track of.
And your next assertion that the left never expected them to pull out of Iraq is just another LIE!
CodePink would certainly challenge you on that.
“send a message to Bush…” - SAR
LMAO. You are a deluded one.
12. Retired Spook | July 18th, 2008 at 9:22 am
SAR,
In 1994 the Republicans ran on The Contract with America. Do a word search and tell me if you find the word “abortion”.
I know the truth hurts you Leftists, but the truth is that the Dems have been so obsessed with getting even with President Bush and the Republicans, that they haven’t accomplished squat in the last 2 years. We’ll see just how many moderates and independents reward them with their votes this fall.
It’s time to transition off of oil
The problem with that, Nietzsche, is that it’s going to take at least 10-20 years — why even bother?
13. Some Assembly Required | July 18th, 2008 at 9:22 am
Seeing as how I wasn’t old enough to vote in 1994 neocon I wouldn’t really know. But how about something a little more recent. Say, 2000 or even 2004. The message to evangelicals. Ringing any bells. McCain’s need to be pro-life to appease the ‘base’. Mark faults Obama on almost a weekly basis for being pro-choice. Who is this not a platform of a lie?
Yes, send a message to Bush, you see, I do not see him or this administration as republicans. Otherwise I would have stated “send a message to republicans”.
14. Some Assembly Required | July 18th, 2008 at 9:26 am
“The problem with that, Nietzsche, is that it’s going to take at least 10-20 years — why even bother?”
Imagine if Kennedy had said that about going to the moon.
10 years is what it will take to get Anwar up and running. Why even bother?
RS,
Can you honestly tell me that Bush did not run with pro-life as one of his underlining issues.
15. neocon | July 18th, 2008 at 9:48 am
SAR,
If you really didn’t know then why do you spout off nonsense??????
Bush is pro-life, but he never lied to anyone claiming he will overturn Roe v Wade.
And you continue the lie……even in 2000 and 2004, the GOP has never ran on a platform of overturning Roe v Wade, as they realize that is most likely unachievable, unlike the Democrats, who evidently think they walk on water.
Oops, sorry for the religious reference.
MoveOn SAR, you are exposing your ignorance.
16. neocon | July 18th, 2008 at 9:49 am
SAR,
Spooks response to Nietzsche was facetious. You are really off today so far.
17. js | July 18th, 2008 at 9:53 am
nietzsche is a facist…i new that….
18. OhioOrrin | July 18th, 2008 at 10:10 am
SAR - this current itteration of the GOP aren’t true conservatives to wit:
A) Failure to balance budgets under a GOP President & majority control of Congress to 06 (the war costs were supplementals).
B) Failure to respect States rights in many ways including intrusion into: drivers licenses, school administration, medical practices such as drug protocols, interference w state judicial actions, etc
C) Failure to enforce Constitutionally authorized tariffs on imports by negotiating international trade agreements which have resulted in defective, even toxic products, massive trade deficits, & manufacturing losses esp w durable goods. Also, failure to enforce country of origin product labeling so our citizens may buy american.
D) Failure to strengthen national security by limiting oil imports during the GOP majority from ‘94-’06…which is the same time horizon talked about now.
E) Failure to actually shrink the Fed govt & reduce it’s influence & burden on the People.
I’m glad to soon see this version of the Grand Old Party given the final death blow in November at the Fed, State, & Local levels.
Then the new GOP can execise the radical right (let ‘em form the Christian Theocracy Party), re-capture the center, & return to true conservatism: shrink the fed govt, balance the budget, respect states rights, strengthen national security, control our borders, rebuild domestic durable goods manufacturing, etc
from destruction comes construction.
19. Retired Spook | July 18th, 2008 at 10:12 am
10 years is what it will take to get Anwar up and running. Why even bother?
SAR, as neocon already pointed out, my comment was a tongue-in-cheek reference to the DEM talking point about drilling in ANWR that they’ve been using since 19-frickin’88. Seven years after it was first proposed, Slick vetoed it, and now, THIRTEEN YEARS LATER, the Donks are still saying it would be 10 years before we would get the first drop of oil out of ANWR. Sorry, that excuse just won’t wash anymore. How about we just develop a comprehensive energy policy that puts everything on the table, not just wind and solar.
20. js | July 18th, 2008 at 10:20 am
what is this…the liberal lie post…because every single liberal here is pushing lies and misrepresentations about issues instead of post on topic…as usual…
21. js | July 18th, 2008 at 10:22 am
the usa is a free market system…its not up to congress to force us to change…that being said…our economy is under attack…and conress does have an obligation to protect the economy from attacks…
and that failure to act is directly attributable to pelosi
its the equivalence of treason…
22. Rana Quijotesca | July 18th, 2008 at 10:40 am
Spook-
Though you may be averse to trying to do anything difficult (as your “It will take 10 years, so why bother?” comment implies), it will take more than 20 years for new off-shore derricks to reach full production, and ANWR will take longer than 10 years. Once more, both of those will only have a negligible effect on the price of oil. A decrease in Demand (like the one that will result from raising CAFE standards) will do more to lower prices than any insignificant increase in supply.
Now, let’s look at some Republican Majority (massive) failures.
–Failing to regulate the lending industry (by their own admission), thus directly leading us to our current economic predicament (that’s right, these things don’t happen overnight)
–Passing a “Healthy Forests” initiative that allows lumber companies to remove old growth, and not brush, to prevent forest fires (even though it is underbrush, not old-growth, that catches on fire easily).
–Passing a “Patriot Act” without reading it first…
–Spending like a spoiled teenager with daddy’s (in this case, their children’s) credit card.
–Letting PAYGO expire (because, that’s the way to control the deficit you know, by not using the most effective means ever used to decrease the deficit).
–Barely owning up on any of their campaign promises after 12 years in power.
–Allowing massive corporate mergers, particularly in the area of media and telecommunications.
–Getting rid of the Office of Technological Assessment (OTA), a non-partisan congressional science advisement office–enabling the further bastardization of science by members of both parties.
Also, a lot of the Democrat failures as a majority involve the massive spike in roll-call votes and filibusters by the Republican Minority (I believe that this Congress has seen the most in history). Then again, the Republicans are just sore losers and obstructionists.
23. Treeline | July 18th, 2008 at 10:49 am
18. OhioOrrin | July 18th, 2008 at 10:10 am
Well said. We actually need the Repugs for a sense of balance. But Matt’s post continues the unrealistic view of the current Republican party. Therefore there is no need for them to look within. Democrats looked within and took back the Congress and many State Houses in 2006, taken several long held Republican seats in special elections and are in position to take back the Presidency.
Matt there was nothing bipartisn about the Republican Congress. They had a rule Dennis Hastert would not even bring up legislation for a vote unless it was guranteed to pass. Americans saw what was happening; the sex scandals, the incompetence, lack of oversight, fill positions not with the best and the brightest but with good Bushies, Bush not vetoing one piece of legislation, the beholding to far right special interest groups lead by Falwell, Robertson and their ilk.
24. Jay Gaultieri | July 18th, 2008 at 10:53 am
Democrats aren’t as organized or as disciplined as Republicans are. The Dems won a majority in both houses in 2006 because voters were upset with Bush. I got a flyer on Election Day 2006 with a picture of Pres Bush with the caption “If you stay home today, he wins.” After the 2006 elections Republicans ran an obstructionist agenda and Bush pulled out the veto pen. It worked. Politicians, particularly in DC, are perpetually behind the American people when it comes to the cultural zeitgeist. Combine that with ordinary Dem disorganization and the Dems caved to Bush constantly. That’s why Congress’s approval rating is so low.
None of this, however, means a vindication for President Bush by the American people. The “Energize Your Base” strategy of Karl Rove has turned the Republican Party into the Party of the South. The President can only speak in front of prescreened groups of supporters and can’t get his name attached to GOP nominee McCain, a man this very blog was crucifying not six months ago. Evangelicals are disgruntled, young people HATE Bush, and the whole national sentiment is that something has gone horribly wrong the last several years.
From this blog you’d think that President Bush is the most wildly popular President in American history and is followed by cheering crowds wherever he goes. It’s not true.
25. Retired Spook | July 18th, 2008 at 11:32 am
Though you may be averse to trying to do anything difficult (as your “It will take 10 years, so why bother?” comment implies)
Haven’t had your coffee yet this morning, eh, Rana? Reread my comment @ 10:12AM.
it will take more than 20 years for new off-shore derricks to reach full production
Not sure where you get that figure. In the last week I’ve seen estimates of as little as 1-2 years.
and ANWR will take longer than 10 years.
I’ll bet with a little incentive, that could be trimmed by close to half, but the point is that the Dems have been using that talking point for 20 years.
As I said before — we need to go on an all-out energy independence offensive — everything on the table.
26. Rana Quijotesca | July 18th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
Spook:
-Here
27. Some Assembly Required | July 18th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
Retired Spook | July 18th, 2008 at 10:12 am
Spook, duelly noted. I kind of figured there was more of a sarcastic undertone to it. Anyway, I agree 100% we should put all viable options on the table. Personally, I do not see Anwar as viable considering the time, resources, and technology required. I think if America is to survive to be a super power we need to lead the way towards renewable and alternative forms of energy as we have paved the way with some many other things in the past.
“And you continue the lie……even in 2000 and 2004, the GOP has never ran on a platform of overturning Roe v Wade, as they realize that is most likely unachievable, unlike the Democrats, who evidently think they walk on water”
Neocon, Bush kept spouting his pro-life beliefs and he’d appoint judges with the same beliefs. The fact that you say that the GOP realize Roe vs. Wade will not be overturned is laughable. It begs the question, if they know this why make such a big issue over whether a candidate is pro-life or pro-choice? It’s not pandering right, thats just a notion into the judgment and character of the candidate. Someone who stands for choice is morally obtuse. That about sum it up?
18. OhioOrrin | July 18th, 2008 at 10:10 am
Very well said indeed. Personally, after looking at what has happened under Bush the past 7 years I would deem his administration as socialist if not borderline fascist. His administration created an entirely new intelligence agency ‘Homeland Security’ for starters. I could go on but you pretty much summed it up without emotions.
28. Mark Noonan | July 18th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
Rana,
Nice try - but you should check the source for the source:
In other words, if we wait for four years, we’ll have oil flowing in 9 years…but if we start tomorrow, that means we can have oil in 5 years, or by 2013.
Additionally, these are the cautious estimates of government officials who never want to put their neck out…while the source of your source puts the total OCS oil available at 59 billion barrels, other studies indicate recoverable oil may be as high as 85 billion barrels, and 429 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.
Given one thing with another, lets say that in the off-limits areas of OCS we can tap into an additional million barrels a day…that is 20% of our daily imports from OPEC…even at $50 a barrel, that is giving them $50 million less a day while provide jobs and economic growth for Americans and helping us bridge the gap between an oil-based economy to an alternative-fuels based economy.
Only one thing can explain an unwillingness to explore in the OCS - blind, anti-GOP partisanship…
29. Richard W. Lambert | July 18th, 2008 at 1:55 pm
Mark the MMS website (www.mms.gov/offshore/) explains the delay in leasing: The OCS Lands Act requires the Department of the Interior (DOI) to prepare a 5-year program that specifies the size, timing and location of areas to be assessed for Federal offshore natural gas and oil leasing. It is the role of DOI to ensure that the U.S. government receives fair market value for acreage made available for leasing and that any oil and gas activities conserve resources, operate safely, and take maximum steps to protect the environment.
Makes sense to me.
30. Rana Quijotesca | July 18th, 2008 at 2:01 pm
Oh Mr. Noonan…
Even if we were to start tomorrow, there would be no real effect on prices until 2026 (subtracting four is really easy), or in 18 years. Also, that would only increase US production by 3%, a drop in the bucket of world oil production, not really affecting price that much anyways (that is, unless you want to restrict who the oil companies can sell to, which would be pretty… fascistic…). Now, if we were to drastically reduce domestic demand, say, by raising CAFE standards, that would cause a pretty decent drop in prices in a lesser amount of time (I’d say, the typical life-span of a consumer vehicle). Also, work in a new “green” sector of the economy (such as the building of wind, solar, geothermal (etc) plants) also provide jobs.
Supply is only one half of the equation, and, given the sheer vastness of global oil production, the harder one to change meaningfully…
31. OhioOrrin | July 18th, 2008 at 2:57 pm
rana - have no fear, the free market (the most efficient market mechanism) is relentlessly driving down consumption thru increased pricing.
in doing so, alternatives become profitable so, yet again, the free market will drive renewable resources.
my fear is that the oil cartel will eventually react by massively increasing output to quash alternative competition and, in doing so, degrade our national security.
this is a scenario wherein tariffs make sense.
32. js | July 18th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
“It is the role of DOI to ensure that the U.S. government receives fair market value for acreage made available for leasing ”
so whats the fair market value of the US Economy while some burocratic AHole takes 5 years to figure out what a market is….
that had to have been written by a DNC stooge for the oil industry
33. Ricorun | July 18th, 2008 at 5:52 pm
js, see here for a brief history of the OCS Land Act:
http://www.mms.gov/aboutmms/OCSLA/ocslahistory.htm
34. js | July 18th, 2008 at 5:58 pm
ricodude….they are the same corrupt burocrats that screw the indians over…
you cant take a pile of poo and call it a diamond…just doesnt work that way…
35. js | July 18th, 2008 at 6:08 pm
31. OhioOrrin | July 18th, 2008 at 2:57 pm
“rana - have no fear, the free market (the most efficient market mechanism) is relentlessly driving down consumption thru increased pricing.”
actually…the free market has been screwed by our government and left our shores for others because of egregious taxation and other abuses that are both unjust and corrupt..
we are the free market…and our elected rep’s have been involved in corrupt activities for that have damaged us for the last 60+ years by making quite little deals with corporations that do not have out best interest in mind…profit is not the only goal of a free market…because it demands that all things are equal…and they arent…because of idiots like pelosi and reid…and the failure of the federal body to keep all things equal…by taxing the shxt out of industry and catering to lobby efforts for nothing more than money and popularity constests…instead of the interest of the people who are the free market….screw the corporations that screwed us…last time i checked…the price of foreign goods are not any better than US made product….but the quality sucks…tell that to your congress….when they propose taxing our corporations out of business and when they take money from chinese stooges to manipulate legislation that destroys our economy….
36. Ricorun | July 18th, 2008 at 6:08 pm
You’re a real gem, js. Lol!
37. Treeline | July 18th, 2008 at 6:56 pm
35. js | July 18th, 2008 at 6:08 pm
Is there some Timothy McVeigh doctrine you are following? You are out there; not sure where.
38. Mark Noonan | July 18th, 2008 at 7:27 pm
Rana,
The main thing to remember right now - there is no shortage of oil. I don’t know if you remember gas rationing in the 70’s, but I do…there was, due to Arab embargoes, actually not enough oil to power the United States. Today, we are paying more (even adjusted for inflation) than we were back then, but there is no shortage…in other words, there’s no actual economic reason for the high oil prices, but when the US imports most of its oil and most of the oil is in the most instable area of the world, the psychological factors take over. Any reduction in US demand on the world oil market will go far towards stabilising the world oil market…even just the thought of it has dropped oil to less than $130 a barrel, down from a high of $147.
And, also, we do want to switch over to something other than oil as our primary energy source for electricity and personal transportation - but this will take time, even under optimum circumstances. There is an element of truth in the “we can’t drill our way out of this” meme…though those who use it are being foolhardy in that they use it as a reason to not drill at all…we cannot, from domestic reserves, provide enough oil at current levels of consumption…so we must switch over. While we’re switching, however, it is in our best interest to exploit our oil reserves to the fullest - with no thought of conservation as our goal is to hardly use any oil at some date in the future.
39. Ricorun | July 18th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
I smell compromise in the air. Or maybe it’s hydrogen disulfide.
Anyway, I don’t see much downside to opening up drilling — as long as it’s done responsibly and as long as the people in the affected states are provided final approval. I just hope it becomes part of a comprehensive energy bill that includes sensible, reliable support for renewables and energy efficiency, streamlining regulation and siting concerns, and rebuilding the grid infrastructure that has been neglected for too long. We can do this. And if we manage to find common ground we can do it pretty inexpensively too — at least relative to doing nothing. Doing nothing is getting way too expensive.
40. Mark Noonan | July 18th, 2008 at 8:29 pm
Ricorun,
Responsible, yes - but no veto power for the States effected…the OCS is outside any conceivable area of State authority, though I’m open to the idea of revenue sharing between the States and Uncle Sam (DC should never keep it all - this, of course, from the guy who wants to use Yucca Mountain to hold the rest of the country up for ransom…we need $3 billion a year from the rest of the nation to store the nuke waste…we get that, and we can end all State and local taxation in Nevada, and watch our economy boom!).
41. FmrMarine | July 18th, 2008 at 8:46 pm
JS
You know you are dead on when the marxist, sodomite, nutroots who post here start the name calling!
42. Count Istvan | July 18th, 2008 at 9:58 pm
I see Never A Marine knows irony.
43. Andrew Wang | September 27th, 2008 at 8:12 pm
Deleted - paranoid conspiracy theories, slander.