|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
BS: Congressional Slumber Party
|
Share Thread
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Subject: BS: Congressional Slumber Party From: Bobert Date: 12 Nov 03 - 07:12 PM Oh, those wacky, Republicans... Yep, at a time when they should be passing a budget, they've called for an all-nighter, hoping to find a Dem asleep at the wheel. The issue: judges. Seems that when the Repubs were busy "doing their duty" in blocking dozens and dozens Clinton's appointments, when the Dems try to block 3 of Bush's they cry "Obstruction!"... These guys are a bunch of cry babies. They want what they want when they want it... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congressional Slumber Party From: kendall Date: 12 Nov 03 - 07:19 PM And they don't mention the 168 appointees the Dems DID support! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congressional Slumber Party From: Charlie Baum Date: 13 Nov 03 - 06:05 PM It's a wonder that such a boring kvetchathon gets news coverage. --Charlie Baum |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congressional Slumber Party From: artbrooks Date: 13 Nov 03 - 06:49 PM Congress Slumber Why do these words seem to go so well together? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congressional Slumber Party From: NicoleC Date: 13 Nov 03 - 10:04 PM Because the second usually follows the first. *wink* *wink* |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congressional Slumber Party From: Bee-dubya-ell Date: 13 Nov 03 - 10:53 PM I love it 'cause the whole thing's gotta backfire in their faces. Before the Republicans pulled this little stunt, how many folks were aware that the Dems have blocked 4 Bush nominees while the Reps blocked something like 63 Clinton nominees? Hardly anyone. I didn't know it. Guess what? I know it now and so do a lot of other people. Lotsa people gotta be askin', "63 to 4 and you're bitchin' about it?" Bruce |