Contrary To McConnell’s Election Promises, GOP Senate Majority Proves To Be Dysfunctional

mcconnell busted

Just over six months after winning back control of the U.S. Senate in the 2014 midterm elections, Mitch McConnell’s GOP majority is proving to be more dysfunctional than ever. During the 2014 election season, Kentucky GOP Senator Mitch McConnell promised that if his party were given control of the U.S. Senate, he would instill more discipline, and allow bills to undergo a “strong and robust” bipartisan amendment process. However, the Senate fell into disarray over the Memorial Day weekend, with Senators rushing off to catch flights while much critical Senate business remained unfinished.

McConnell has been perplexed by his inability to control members of his own party. The Senate Majority Leader has not even been able to reign in fellow Kentucky Senator Rand Paul. The junior Senator from Kentucky refused to grant an extension to the government’s phone data collection program for even a single day. Unable to outmaneuver the junior Senator from his own state, McConnell had to settle for requesting that the Senate vote next Sunday, in order to prevent the phone data collection provisions from expiring.

Jennifer Steinhauer and Jonathan Weisman at The New York Times noted the irony of McConnell’s conundrum. They observed:

As senators raced for the airport on Saturday after a six-week session that ended in disarray, they left behind a wreck of promises made by Mr. McConnell on how a renewed Senate would operate. Mr. McConnell has found himself vexed by Democratic delaying tactics he honed in the minority, five presidential aspirants with their own agendas and a new crop of conservative firebrands demanding their say.

It was easy on the campaign trail for McConnell to argue that a Republican majority could govern better than Harry Reid and the Democrats. However, McConnell has been unable to demonstrate that the Republicans can govern in practice. Talk is cheap, but when it comes to action, McConnell has been confounded by the personal agendas of grandstanding members of his own party. He has also been thwarted by Democrats turning the tactics he used while he was Minority Leader against him, now that he is in the majority.

Voters are learning that Mitch McConnell is unable to successfully lead the U.S. Senate as Majority Leader. In 2016, they will have the opportunity to remove him from the Majority Leader position, by voting Democrats back into the Senate majority. Given McConnell’s poor performance as Senate Majority Leader, voters should capitalize on the chance to oust him from that position, and to put the Democrats back in charge.

 

If you’re ready to read more from the unbossed and unbought Politicus team, sign up for our newsletter here!

66 Replies to “Contrary To McConnell’s Election Promises, GOP Senate Majority Proves To Be Dysfunctional”

  1. Everything that’s happening to McConnell, he deserves. He’s nasty old b*st*rd who was riding high when he was mucking things up in the Senate for the last five years and wasting our money, but now that he’s Senate Majority Leader, he seems to think that democrats should vote to approve anything he wants to pass. Being SML isn’t working out the way he thought it would, and he’s looking like the ineffective politician that he’s always been.

  2. “McConnell has been perplexed by his inability to control members of his own party”.

    It’s very simple, Mitch – you’re just ineffectual. The fact that you are universally disrespected doesn’t help, either.

  3. True conservatives don’t like McConnell and Boehner any more than you progressives do. So once again we have bipartisan agreement!

  4. I remember Romney commenting after the 2014 elections that we’ll really see how well a Republican controlled Congress will work and all the paralysis of the past will be gone, all the bills languishing on Harry Reid’s desk will finally get passed, and America will just start humming along. We’re still waiting, Mittster.

    Kind of ironic that he recently lost to a black man (again) — this time in the ring.

  5. Government is dysfunctional if your definition of dysfunctional is not passing laws that control the sheeple. There are lots of people who think if no laws are passed it’s a good thing! Enough laws, regulations, taxes, and meddling. Leave us alone, go catch your jets to your island fortresses. For the next 10 days or so, the American people can relax for a little while.

  6. thats what i told one of my rw nutjob crew members, who was screaming about the ‘illegals’. i said, you have the gop running the show now, and not one bill to provide funding for mass deportation. these rw types think you can just snap your finger and there will be 15 million marching to mexico. meanwhile the gop is at war with itself, and worse taking us down with them…

  7. OMG! I read the salon piece. Here’s the quote:

    “…passed a resolution banning welfare recipients from swimming pools, movie theatres, casinos, tattoo parlors and strip clubs.”

    Well DUH! People on welfare are spending MY MONEY! I’m as charitable as the next guy but if you are on welfare you better be focused on food, shelter, and heat for you and your children. Swimming pools? Go outside and play with the garden hose. Movie theatres? Buy milk and diapers instead. Casinos? Are you effing kidding me? Tattoo parlors? WTF? Strip Clubs? That’s beyond the pale. NO! You don’t get those ridiculous perks with my money.

    Reminds me of the TV news story I watched about a women in brand new public housing complaining about her life. Behind her mounted on the wall was a flat screen TV. At the time I could not afford a flat screen TV, and I consider myself a member of the middle class.

  8. I was over at Thomas.gov looking at some of these Senator candidate guys and what they are up to is pretty bad. They are trying recently just to put their names on lots of legislations. A dozen amendments in the last few months alone and bills. All of them go nowhere, no co-signers even, they are just doing them so they can list it on their credentials and TV ads to voters.

    They can say Senator Big Shot produced legislation to allow… or I am in favor of women’s rights and sponsored an amendment to abolish…

    Look at the flurry of activity. The whole lot of them are not producing anything but letters with their names on it.

    Not impressed. WE know they lie.

  9. Sorry, Rob; it’s not your money. You pay taxes, you don’t pay the poor. Elected representatives decide how the taxes you pay should be distributed; you do not get to decide how welfare recipients spend it, any more than you get to decide how AIG spends the $182 BILLION the Reserve Bank gave them. Deal with it. And the majority of those on welfare are either veterans or those working, sometimes doing multiple jobs to keep a roof over their heads, that is they are focused upon food and shelter. To disallow them from enjoying any luxuries is not only inhumane and cruel, it is demeaning to their basic human dignity. At what point do veterans who have given their all for their country, or underpaid workers trying to get by, at what point do you class them as being human? You decry the “nanny state” as you called it, and yet feel comfortable with dictating how the poor can spend the money they are extended as part of the welfare system..? How does that constitute small government or…

  10. We might as well say that there is no depth to which the GOP will not stoop. They are the bottom of the barrel.

  11. Yes, it is too my money! I don’t get to say how it’s spent; more the pity. I don’t believe most welfare recipients are veterans. Prove that to me.
    And most of all, when you are depending on the government for your very existence, you don’t get to spend your time in tattoo parlors, casinos, and strip clubs! “Basic human dignity” my *ss.

  12. And even if by some bizarre suspension of freedom, of liberty or of democratic process, you or I were able to dictate how the poor spent what lousy welfare they are doled out, what about basic humanity? What about demonstrating compassion for those who suffer? You cite an example of someone receiving welfare as somehow committing a crime by owning a flatscreen TV; do you know what she may have sacrificed to afford it? Has she, like my mother (who worked three jobs to support her sons after my deadbeat father walked out when I was eight), sacrificed meals so her kids can eat or enjoy that TV? Has she worked extra shifts at slave wages for Walmart to be able to buy it? Rob, you may be a nice guy, and I pray you are, but you may need to move past these assumptions and Republican-influenced value judgements and realise there are people out there who do their best daily only to be trodden under by fiscal choices that favour those who need the least help whilst demonising those in need…

  13. Most of what you wrote I can agree with. But you lose me when you talk about “basic humanity.” Do people really suffer if I say to them, “This is government money. It’s here so you can feed clothe and house your family. It isn’t right for you to use this taxpayer money on casinos, tattoo parlors and strip clubs.”

    Does that make me such a heartless bastard?

  14. In the NY Times piece referenced above in Keith’s column, there is one line that stands out to me.

    Talking about McConell:

    “failing to appreciate Mr. Paul’s zeal for — and fund-raising efforts from — the privacy issue”

    Grandstand, write bills and amendments that are just for show and fundraise on the dog and pony show.

    Rand Paul and his dad are all for show.

  15. According to the US Dept. of Agriculture, in 2012, over 47% of food stamp recipients were working; according to a study done by the Unversity of California in Berkeley, over half of all welfare dollars go to working homes. http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2015/04/13/get-a-job-most-welfare-recipients-already-have-one/

    According to the Washington Post, nearly a million veterans were reliant upon welfare beyonf veterans’ benefits (which our friends on the Right love to see cut at any opportunity); much like right to life, the Right seems to love children up until they’re born and love veterans up until they cease to fight…

    So, please feel free to tell us how, in this land of opportunity, of democracy, of freedom, why on God’s green Earth you get to pass judgement on poor people?

    You say more’s the pity that you don’t get to distribute tax dollars; what would you put them toward?

  16. I don’t think it makes you a heartless bastard; what I question is the right we have to determine what people are already struggling are permitted to spend their money on. With the cost of tatoo parlours et. al., I’d be surprised if the majority of welfare recipients could afford to partake, but for us to say they aren’t allowed to is worse than any nany state the Right would have us believe Liberals desire. It is not even treating them as adults. It is treating them like handicapped children who somehoe need the oh-so-wise government to think for them, to protect them from themselves. Much like the drug testing fiasco engaged in by several states, where they discovered drug use among those receiving welfare was a quarter of the general population (2% vs. 8%), putting in place patronising measures for them to not be allowed to spend money in places where they would be unlikely to be able to afford it any bespeaks an arrogance and a despicable contempt for the poor.

  17. Jimmy: I’m not “passing judgment” on poor people!

    I’m saying that, as of last year, there are 109 MILLION PEOPLE on welfare benefits of one kind or another. That’s 35.4% of the population.
    Your 1 million veterans are a part of that but they are a tiny minority. I’m just saying that they should not spend taxpayers money on tattoo parlors, casinos, and strip clubs. This does not strip these people of their “basic human dignity.” Keeping your human dignity while watching a woman hump a pole is a pretty good trick as it is.

  18. McConnell is getting what he’s been serving up for for six and a half years. As far as reigning in Paul, good luck with that. I don’t think he has a prayer of that happening. He has an agenda, and the people of Kentucky and possibly the rest of the country will all be collateral damage. McConnell has been a good teacher for each and of these idiots, and he can’t control the monsters hes created.

  19. folks remember we have had over seven years of preplanned and unprecedented GOP and conservative obstruction, sabotage, corruption, and blatant treason. i am fairly old man and I have seen a lot in my life, but I have never, ever seen an elected president hated, disrespected, and bashed as much as the rightwing collective has unleashed on Obama for no reason whatsoever other than skin color… truly despicable. karma is coming and has already seen a few of the rightwing crazies. is it 2016 yet?

  20. I agree wholeheartedly about dignity vs. strip clubs, tattoo parlours (though my wife has a few and loves them)etc. but it is not our call nor our right as taxpayers to tell those on benefits how they can spend their money. Do we place the same level of expectation on politicians with the salaries we pay them out of our tax dollars? Policemen? Firemen? The companies our tax dollars bail out?

    My question to you is, would you take such umbrage if Boehner or McConnell were spending money at strip clubs or getting tattoos of Ronnie across their backs? If not, why not? It’s our taxpayers dollars being used in ways we may not agree with… Or is it the issue that it’s poor people using the money. Gun rights advocates expect us to ‘trust’ them to be safe whilst carrying equipment which can and has killed many and say that limiting their right to carry is tyranny. Yet, we can’t trust those who need assistance, because they’re poor..?

  21. To the guy that wants to kill Rush by placing he and Rachel Maddow in the same studio. You’re stupid Robert. You need a hobby other than carving statues of Newt Gingrinch from sun dried dog dookey.[wink]

  22. Jimmy,
    The difference is that politicians, police and firemen are being paid to do a job for the country or community (well maybe not politicians lol) That money is what they earn.

    Welfare recipients are being paid to do nothing. They are living off of the state. They do nothing to earn it. It is just given to them, and quite frivolously, I might add. I think they should be responsible with it.

    For example, let’s say your newlywed nephew and his wife asked you for a loan to get by for six months until they get on their feet. Before paying you back anything, they purchase a new tv, each get a new tattoo, they’re in the local bar a few times a week, they go to the casino on the weekends…. I think you’d be a little upset as to how they’re spending that money.

  23. If there is any one aspect of this discrimination (and that’s what it really is) that this directive that really gets my goat, it is banning the unemployed from spending “our” money on going to the movies or on alcohol; this is offensive for a couple of reasons. Firstly, effectively banning the poor from going to the movies is as bad as saying blacks aren’t allowed on the bus. I could see a logic, though I despise it, in banning access to casinos due to potential jeopardy to children if the rent money was gambled away (though again, I despise the nanny state mentality and assumption of untrustworthiness it would imply), but to say you can’t take the kids to the movies because… well, you’re poor and we don’t serve your kind here. Secondly, to ban those on welfare having access to buying a bottle of wine or a beer on occasion is again discriminatory. What if a mother of two has a birthday? Well, then she better make sure she enjoys soda, because no booze for you – you can’t be….

  24. Well @robert , it seem @Djchefron has decided to keep YOU as POLITICUS “COURT JESTER” so I’ll give you the respect you so richly deserve! I hereby dub YOU “LADY MICHELLE BACHMANN” with a penis, BTW MICHELLE, if you think the GOP hates women, wait till I start BIOTCH slamming you, you wanted attention MICHELLE ?! YOU got it! BTW you asked the question, “does that make you a heartless bastard? NO MICHELLE, you’re a IGNORANT, bastards too!

  25. But notice that the sale of flat screen TVs is up by one unit, thanks to welfare. Welfare is in fact a very efficient way of increasing sales of appliances and such, in that it increases the amount of dollars in circulation, and thus boosts DEMAND.

  26. Republicans are 100% useless, also I feel for the folks in Texas because of the flooding, but how long do you think it will take the two faced gov. of Texas to scream for FEMA help after he has tried to cut off all ties to the federal gov.

  27. Ah Robert where to begin. There are good regulations and bad regulations.

    Good regulations are done to protect the people, the citizenry from shady business practices, to make sure our water is clean and food is eatable.

    Bad regulations are put forth on the people to control their daily lives. I.E. Anti-Gay legislation, Anti-reproductive rights (more concerned about lady parts than actually caring about the economy and jobs).

    Basically one type of regulation legislation is to make sure businesses act ethically and treat all customers fairly & equally – that is good regulation. The other regulation legislation is written by business lobbyists to take advantage of the citizenry and enrich themselves only while make laws that punish people & create fear, bigotry & hate on those who do not follow their idea of righteousness.

  28. Analog – if it were actual $$s – you would be correct. But, people on welfare do not get $$s directly. Here is how it works:
    *TANF grant requires all recipients of welfare aid must find work within two years of receiving aid, including single parents who are required to work at least 30 hours per week opposed to 35 or 55 required by two parent families. Failure to comply with work requirements could result in loss of benefits. (TANF is run by individual States).
    *Most states offer basic aid such as health care (paid directly to the provider), food stamps – independence card (food purchases taken off the card), child care assistance (paid directly to provider), unemployment (must be registered & looking for work), cash aid (this is cash to buy necessities only in emergencies), and housing assistance (paid directly to provider). People on welfare seldom get money directly.

  29. FYI – the Federal Government has not run the welfare program since 1996 when Bill Clinton signed Welfare Reform giving the Welfare management to the States.

    You also need to apply and show real need to get onto welfare. No one is accepted on their word alone.

  30. You are a liar which figures since you pulled that bullshit out of a conservative site. CSN. I guess that’s why your dumbass didn’t link to it

    While the claim is based on real numbers, it’s a fundamentally flawed, apples-and-oranges comparison. The number of “welfare” recipients — unlike the number of workers — is enlarged by the inclusion of children and senior citizens. The comparison also ignores that many “welfare” recipients actually work, so trying to separate the two categories creates a false dichotomy. We rate the claim False.
    http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/jan/28/terry-jeffrey/are-there-more-welfare-recipients-us-full-time-wor/

  31. the turtle and the boner…will try to look bipartisan in july or august 2016….they pass some weak jobs bill or something…just to say they care about working people before the election

  32. Those welfare queens are at it again. They want more and more freebies.
    My wife takes a lady who does not live in the better parts of our town to the food pantry to get additional food because her SNAP is not enough.
    Reason I mention that is because when I was at UNM (the Lobos), one of my econ Profs wrote a letter to the editor explaining that decent people take poor people to the food pantry which is why there are newer cars at the food pantry. The same RWNJ who had written the original letter to the editor, wrote another one granting the Prof the RIGHT to be a communist. The Prof was so mad, he was going to sue for slander but he couldn’t because the RWNJ didn’t call him a communist, he just granted him the right to be a communist.
    Talk about weasel wording. [WINK]

  33. McConnell, quite frankly is a buffoon. He was ineffectual as an a lawyer, in private practice, losing more than he ever won. All he ever wanted was an easy income and of course, that he has. Never mind the country is slowing entering into the vortex of that sucking sound, we as Americans all can hear.

  34. mdag, you nailed it. They’ll never, EVER admit to being racists, but that’s what it all boils down to. When you ask an Obama-hater the “why” of their hatred, they can never come back with a response that makes any sense at all. They just know that they hate him.

    In remembering the words Mitch McConnell spoke shortly after President Obama was inaugurated: “Our number one goal is to make Obama a one-term President” .. . . let’s all get our asses to the polls in November 2016 to make McConnell a “one-term (of 2 years) Senate Majority Leader.”

  35. Yes, Republicans are still flailing on that Obamacare replacement plan

    Things are getting just slightly urgent for Republicans faced with the possibility that the Supreme Court will rule at the end of June to take health insurance subsidies away from millions of Obamacare customers—million who are largely clustered in red states, and in states where Republican incumbent senators have to fight for re-election in 2016. One of them, Wisconsin’s Sen. Ron Johnson has a plan to extend subsidies—if the Supreme Court strikes them down—until he’s safely re-elected and then to get the law, but even that isn’t flying with House Republicans.
    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/05/26/1387820/-Yes-Republicans-are-still-flailing-on-that-Obamacare-replacement-plan

  36. Again, what we are seeing here is an implicit indication that if you are on welfare, you cannot be trusted; that, if you have been injured and need government assistance, you will take any opportunity to throw away any help offered. How is this consistent with the fact that those on welfare have a quarter the drug use of those not on welfare, without any restriction being placed upon the access they have? Now, whether one agrees with them going to strip clubs etc., unless one disagrees with freedom, the imposition of dictates as to how welfare is just wrong. It is a step away from a class system, where the peasant must follow the dictates of their betters. If you hate democracy, fine, but don’t claim a love of freedom whilst feeling justified in imposing your “moral” choices on how others spend the money the government – not you – give them…

  37. Eliner, you’re missing the point. My point is that those on assistance (government or private) have a responsibility to those providing for them to use discretion and not spend money on new tattoos or sit at the local bar every night.

    You say that it isn’t real $$, but it is. The assistance is paid directly to the provider or the service with real $$ right? If I helped out my nephew and his wife by paying their mortgage directly to the bank for two months (as a gift without payback)to help them out that is real $$ in their pockets.

    Even with the restrictions you cited, my point is still valid.

  38. You have no point other than a holier than thou attitude against people who are poor. The minute you rant against corporate welfare then you would have a point but since you are an analog asshole living in a digital age that day will never come

  39. Jimmy, no I’m not saying that at all. I’m saying that one who is receiving welfare but getting new tattoos, or going to strip clubs, or buying a golf club membership is abusing the system and might not need assistance if he’d manage his money better.

    I’m not accusing every welfare recipient of this. I know there are people who do need it.

    You said that what I believe is a step away from a class system. Welfare itself has created a class system. Those receiving it generally vote for those offering it, keeping them dependent and securing their votes.

    One more thing, the government’s money IS my money. And everyone else’s money who pays taxes.

  40. Again your assumptions are idiotic. You accuse people of voting for people who offer the meager benefits but then your dumbass turn around and vote for people who receive the most welfare. Your corporate overlords
    Government Spends More on Corporate Welfare Subsidies than Social Welfare Programs
    About $59 billion is spent on traditional social welfare programs. $92 billion is spent on corporate subsidies. So, the government spent 50% more on corporate welfare than it did on food stamps and housing assistance in 2006.
    http://thinkbynumbers.org/government-spending/corporate-welfare/corporate-welfare-statistics-vs-social-welfare-statistics/

    Where Is The Outrage Over Corporate Welfare?
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/taxanalysts/2014/03/14/where-is-the-outrage-over-corporate-welfare/

  41. So, by that same logic, any company that receives any form of assistance from the government, they are then effectively beholden to the taxpayer to only spend money in a way the taxpayer would agree with? If so, do corporations who receive tax incentives or R&D funds from government agencies also fall under this umbrella? If, for example, a pharmaceutical company uses government assistance to research a birth control drug, then if you personally do not agree with this, you have the right to say no to them reseraching it? If not, why not? When AIG was bailed out to the tune of $182 Billion dollars (the poor could buy a lot of flatscreens for that), which was approximately 54 time their share value, does that give the government the right to micromanage their expenditures? Or is it only those who don’t get billions in handouts that deserve our unique attention..?

  42. Paid to do nothing? Interesting, since half of welfare benefits are paid to homes in which there is at least one worker… They are working but, due to the minimum wage being lower than poverty, are forced to seek additional assistance. Hell, Walmart trains their staff in how to claim welfare.

    Now, if you want to rail against injustice, or unfair distribution of ‘your’ money, how about protesting that staff who put in a full working week still need to get aid from the government just to meet their day-to-day needs? Why should our tax dollars be used to supplement Walmart’s profits by part-paying their employees?

    But, even beyond this inconsistency, this double standard of accountability, how would you feel, if like nearly a million Veterans, you were told what you could or could not spend your money on? If you’ve served your country and been injured so you can’t work, being told you aren’t allowed to attend the movies…? Is that what America is about?

  43. dj, if Robert or I called you the names that you have called us, we’d be banned wouldn’t we?

    When did I ever say I favored corporate welfare? AIG, GM, Chrysler, Solyndra, the Stimulus Package. I was against all of that. To be clear: I AM AGAINST CORPORATE WELFARE!

    I will check out the Forbes article when time allows.

  44. Jimmy, welfare recipients are paid to do nothing. What you’re saying is that George works for Peter but gets an extra handout from Paul. He’s doing nothing for Paul. I’m not suggesting abolishing welfare because some do indeed need help.

    No I don’t think anyone who’s on assistance should be banned from buying what they want because it comes down to personal responsibility. That is something that can’t be controlled or regulated. I am a staunch supporter of freedom and liberty and always against big brother looking over our shoulders on how we live our lives.

    Speaking of other peoples’ money and responsibility, the government is run on other peoples’ money. It wasn’t earned, it was just creatively acquired through taxes. Since it is our money, the government has a moral obligation to be responsible with it. I’m sure you’d agree that certainly isn’t the case the last 50 years. Just think how much could be saved by cutting some wasteful programs.

  45. Mdag, You mentioned seeing a lot in your life. Have you noticed how much your party has changed in the last 30 years? I can clearly see how the republican party has abandoned me in just the last decade. Not supporting small business, they are no more fiscally responsible than the democrats, they will flip flop in a heart beat if it will win them an election. Neither party is what they were a generation ago. FDR, HHH, R Reagan would all be ashamed of what their parties have become.

    Please stop the race baiting. It makes you appear uninformed and it’s very offensive to us conservatives. It has nothing to do with his skin color..it’s his liberal and socialist like policies and disrespect for the constitution.

    Continued………

  46. Mdag, it is also his inability to recognize his policies were rejected by the American people last election. This is where he and Bill Clinton differ greatly. When the dems lost in 1994 Clinton started working with the republicans and there were a lot of bipartisan agreements. Even Newt Gingrich has given Clinton credit for working with the other party. He also stated that he believed Reagan and Clinton to be the best of the last several presidents at working with the other party. Quite a compliment.

    And yes, the republicans have been trying to stop the president’s policies but there has certainly not been the effort from our current president that Reagan and Clinton put forth.

  47. AnalogKid,

    It’s hard to work with someone who is virtually committed to NOT working with you. Even compromise is a dirty word to many in the GOP (especially to the Tea Party wing). But your comment that his policies were rejected by the American people in the last election (almost a direct quote from Boehner) just isn’t true. Only 19% of the electorate voted. Hardly representative of the total country. Historically, people sit out the midterms.

  48. FF, I’ll concede that the republicans don’t want to work with Obama. But bipartisan means give and take on both sides and I don’t see Obama extending the olive branch either. He certainly hasn’t moved back to the center like Clinton did in the 90s.

    Point taken on voters who sit out on mid term elections. However the majority of the voters in 2014 did indeed reject Obama’s policies.

  49. You are an idiot. I remind you of the Stimulus when the President offered the thugs tax cuts that did not do anything for the economy and not one republican voted for it in the house and 2 and 1/2 voted for it in the Senate

  50. Another epic fail by the turtle
    The Senate did something remarkable in the early hours of Saturday morning; they defeated the politics of fear and defeated Mitch McConnell by refusing to go along with his plan to renew the Patriot Act’s dragnet surveillance and to put the program in serious jeopardy of expiring at the end of this week. McConnell announced he’ll call the Senate back a day early, on Sunday, to try once again to pass an extension of some sort before the law expires at midnight. At this point, however, his options are limited and the House holds almost all the cards.
    http://www.nationaljournal.com/tech/NSA-Patriot-Act-Rand-Paul-20150522

  51. AnalogKid, we’ll have to agree to disagree. I won’t change your mind and you won’t change mine, but I can’t accept that the last election was a rejection of the policies by the American people. Simply, more Republicans got off their duff and voted so naturally, they’re not going to support Obama. You can only call it a true rejection if vast numbers of BOTH Democrats and Republicans voted against his policies. That was not the case.

    By the way, I stand corrected. It was 36% of the electorate, not 19%. Regardless, it was the lowest turnout in over 70 years. Pretty sad.

  52. Also, Obama put forth a bill to put armed guards in schools (the COPS program, based upon a Republican/NRA suggestion that this would bring a safer environment for the kids), along with paid school counsellors, again suggested by the Right, based upon the belief that America does not have a gun problem, but a mental health problem. So, the President has decided to run with the Right’s ideas and see if they have any legs – sounds pretty bipartisan to me. The response? Cries of “tyrant!” and “brainwashing our youth!”; so, when Obama puts forward a bill to give the Right EXACTLY what they ask for, they oppose it… So, please tell us how Obama fails to extend the olive branch and how amenable the Right is to working with this “Socialist Kenyan Muslim”? And as for socialism, please don’t mistake an economic model based upon distribution of wealth to benefit society as a political model. It is neccessary for us all, unless you want a privatised police force that is…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.