Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Macrobat · Nov 16, 2006, 11:21 AM

But Murtha gets absolutely bitchslapped:

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/11/16/D8LE9LGG0.html

Her very first power play and she gets handed her buttocks!

So much for that "mandate," huh?

Dakar² · Nov 16, 2006, 11:23 AM

What mandate?

Macrobat · Nov 16, 2006, 11:39 AM

The one where the American public supposedly supports all of the uber-Liberal policies of the Pelosi-Murtha wing of the DNC.

Been asleep for a week?

BTW, Pelosi dodged a bit of a bullet herself. See, the entire House votes for Speaker. If the Republicans had voted for Hoyer (a decidedly more moderate representative), they would have only needed to persuade 15 Democrats (of those VERY moderate 41 newbies) to vote with them and they STILL could have installed any Speaker they wished.

Civics remedials in order, maybe?

Rumor · Nov 16, 2006, 11:41 AM

*I can't read*

Dakar² · Nov 16, 2006, 11:42 AM

So what does a mandate have to do with who the house democrats chose for majority leader?

Macrobat · Nov 16, 2006, 11:44 AM

Duh. The election is touted as a mandate for Liberalism against Conservatism. So the Democrats just voted in one of the most conservative members of their own party instead of Ole Cut and Run.

It signals that ole Botox Bish will have to actually work to get some of her more "moonbattish" schemes pushed even through her OWN party, instead of having the ready rubberstamp there to twist arms for her.

Dakar² · 12:50 PM

Originally Posted by Macrobat

Duh. The election is touted as a mandate for Liberalism against Conservatism. So the Democrats just voted in one of the most conservative members of their own party instead of Ole Cut and Run.

Oh, I see what you're getting at.

I was under the impression the election was a mandate on the fact that the Iraq War drags on aimlessly and this last session of congress was a lazy bunch of scum (or Change, for short).

Edit: Still, the Democrats campaigned under a flag of moderation. I applaud their selection if what you say about him is true.

Macrobat · Nov 16, 2006, 11:49 AM

Actually, you evidently have been asleep as the American public (in numerous polls since last Tuesday) didn't list Iraq among the top 10 deciding factors in the election - AT ALL.

Macrobat · Nov 16, 2006, 11:50 AM

Hoyer is someone I can respect, even when I might disagree with his position.

Murtha should have been indicted years ago. The only reason he got out of ABSCAM is because he didn't actually accept the $50,000 bribe - because it wasn't enough.

BlueSky · Nov 16, 2006, 12:25 PM

Originally Posted by Macrobat

Duh. The election is touted as a mandate for Liberalism against Conservatism. So the Democrats just voted in one of the most conservative members of their own party instead of Ole Cut and Run.

Touted by whom? I distinctly recall hearing that a lot of the new Dems elected to the House are a lot more conservative than current members such as Pelosi, Murtha, Rangel, etc. I don't recall hearing anything about a "mandate for liberalism", in fact just the opposite. But then I don't watch Faux News...is that where you heard it?

Macrobat · Nov 16, 2006, 12:34 PM

Touted by many uber-Libs right here on this forum and elsewhere - blind and deaf, as well?

BlueSky · Nov 16, 2006, 12:41 PM

Well this is fun.

"Elsewhere" where?

Are you a-skeered that someone's going to force-feed you granola or trick you into adopting a whale?

Macrobat · Nov 16, 2006, 12:44 PM

You mistake informed for "skeered" obviously.

The very first Lib who posted in this thread mentioned Iraq. Both Pelosi and Murtha favor an immediate pullback.

House Minority Whip Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) issued a statement Wednesday that was in marked contrast to Pelosi’s. “I believe that a precipitous withdrawal of American forces in Iraq could lead to disaster, spawning a civil war, fostering a haven for terrorists and damaging our nation’s security and credibility,” he said.

If you still can't see it, may I suggest an optometrist?

BlueSky · Nov 16, 2006, 12:55 PM

Originally Posted by Macrobat

If you still can't see it, may I suggest an optometrist?

I see one regularly. In any case, I don't think we're communicating here; either you have misunderstood me or vice versa. All I know is I've read and re-read and I'm confused.

In order to better extend your views, may I suggest a proctologist?

tie · Nov 16, 2006, 12:57 PM

Or, perhaps a microscope?

I don't think Murtha was a good pick. It was certainly a misstep, but not a serious one. More disturbing is that I don't know what Pelosi was thinking. Maybe she learned a small lesson.

Macrobat · Nov 16, 2006, 12:59 PM

Perhaps the two of you could get a group rate with a neurosurgeon?

BlueSky · Nov 16, 2006, 01:01 PM

I'm game if he throws in a nose job.

BlueSky · Nov 16, 2006, 01:03 PM

Originally Posted by tie

Or, perhaps a microscope?

I don't think Murtha was a good pick. It was certainly a misstep, but not a serious one. More disturbing is that I don't know what Pelosi was thinking. Maybe she learned a small lesson.

I agree, I like Murtha but he's too scrappy to be leader.

Wiskedjak · Nov 16, 2006, 01:04 PM

It's ironic that Marcobat is criticizing the Democrats for doing something he agrees with.

Macrobat · Nov 16, 2006, 01:10 PM

where do you see criticism of the Democrats? Maybe you need an appointment with that optometrist as well?

Hoyer is someone I can respect, even when I might disagree with his position.

What I am criticizing is the Pelosi/Murtha extreme Left position.

Dork. · Nov 16, 2006, 01:12 PM

As someone pointed out, the entire House votes for Speaker. Has Pelosi officially assumed the position based on the Democrats' vote, or is there still another vote ahead when the new House officially convenes in January? I would think her tenure doesn't officially start until Jan 1.

edit: CNN answered my question....

House Democrats picked Rep. Steny Hoyer to be majority leader on Thursday, spurning Rep. Nancy Pelosi's handpicked choice moments after unanimously backing her election as speaker when Congress convenes in January.

Rumor · Nov 16, 2006, 01:57 PM

Originally Posted by Macrobat

House Minority Whip Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) issued a statement Wednesday that was in marked contrast to Pelosi’s. “I believe that a precipitous withdrawal of American forces in Iraq could lead to disaster, spawning a civil war, fostering a haven for terrorists and damaging our nation’s security and credibility,” he said.

Disaster? Check

Civil War? Check

Haven for terrorists? Um, it's currently a breed ground, so Check

National security? Occupying Iraq makes us more secure? Whatever.

Nations Credibility? That's already damaged, so Check

We already have these things.

Spliffdaddy · Nov 16, 2006, 03:20 PM

Invest in popcorn-related stocks.

I must have been stupid to hope the Democrats wouldn't win the election.

As it turns out, I'm elated, Giddy like a schoolgirl.

This is gonna be the most entertaining 2 years in the history of American politics.

Give the Dems all the rope they want!

BRussell · Nov 16, 2006, 03:21 PM

Wow macrobat you're really on a fact-free roll, aren't you. The fact is, Murtha is more conservative than Hoyer on just about every count: He's a 100% pro-lifer, and a 100% NRA-er. Hoyer's not exactly a real liberal either, but to call Murtha "extreme left" is utterly laughable and, if you really think that's true, macrobat, you must be way, way, way to the extreme right-wing.

tie · Nov 16, 2006, 03:50 PM

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

Invest in popcorn-related stocks.

I must have been stupid to hope the Democrats wouldn't win the election.

As it turns out, I'm elated, Giddy like a schoolgirl.

This is gonna be the most entertaining 2 years in the history of American politics.

Give the Dems all the rope they want!

I hope so, too. Both parties look to be entertaining, with the Senate Republicans reelecting the racist Lott. Hopefully, there will be a lot of political drama with no new idiotic wars, and no major budget-draining initiatives, so our budgets can regain some needed sanity.

Nicko · Nov 16, 2006, 04:55 PM

Originally Posted by tie

I hope so, too. Both parties look to be entertaining, with the Senate Republicans reelecting the racist Lott. Hopefully, there will be a lot of political drama with no new idiotic wars, and no major budget-draining initiatives, so our budgets can regain some needed sanity.

Sadly that may be the best you can hope for.

Macrobat · 01:51 PM

Keep preaching that crap, BRussell. The fact is that Murtha had a conservative voting record, but drank the kool aid about a year and a half ago. Since then he's been within spitting distance of Pelosi on virtually every issue - hence her backing of him for Majority Leader.

He also should be in prison for his part in ABSCAM.

So, he's pro-life and pro-NRA - whoopie.

BRussell · Nov 17, 2006, 01:30 PM

The only reason he's an unhinged extreme way way far-out leftist is that he thinks the war in Iraq was a bad idea. How many of the original neo-con plotters behind the war even think it was a good idea any more?

I don't really know that much about his role in ABSCAM, except that he didn't take the bribe offered to him. The first time I even heard of him was in the past year or so. He just sounds like a typical politician to me, and I don't have any idea if it would have been a good thing or not if he had become majority leader. Hoyer doesn't impress me all that much either, though he was probably the better choice.

nonhuman · 01:52 PM

Originally Posted by Macrobat

So, he's pro-life and pro-NRA - whoopie.

Those are important issues for a lot of people...

Macrobat · Nov 17, 2006, 07:13 PM

He didn't take the bribe because he said it wasn't enough.

Avail yourself of the entire video.

And nonhuman, the point obviously flew WAAAAAAY over your head. Those two issues do NOT make him a conservative.

nonhuman · Nov 17, 2006, 07:15 PM

Originally Posted by Macrobat

He didn't take the bribe because he said it wasn't enough.

Avail yourself of the entire video.

And nonhuman, the point obviously flew WAAAAAAY over your head. Those two issues do NOT make him a conservative.

I never said it did. However those positions are important enough to some people that even if they're usually party-line Republican voters, they'd vote for him over a Republican who was anti-abortion or anti-gun. So even if he's not conservative, he will still appeal to some conservative voters.

The Left · Nov 17, 2006, 07:18 PM

the loss of Murtha bodes ill for the future of the Democratic Party, we won the election and now we get Hoyer who is no different than many Republicans.

disgusting, but at least he (Murtha) will now be chair of the Armed Services Appropriates committee where he can kill off funding for the illegal war on Iraq.

Spliffdaddy · Nov 17, 2006, 07:29 PM

no he can't.

He can only state his opinion. He has one vote, just like everyone else.

The Left · Nov 17, 2006, 07:33 PM

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

no he can't.

He can only state his opinion. He has one vote, just like everyone else.

watch and learn. sorry your side lost ... that funding WILL stop.

Spliffdaddy · Nov 17, 2006, 07:49 PM

You don't understand the basic functions of American government. Which explains why you're a liberal. You just don't know any better.

SpaceMonkey · Nov 17, 2006, 11:21 PM

Pelosi backed Murtha out of loyalty for the early position he took against the Iraq War. She wasn't seriously expecting it to go anywhere. That's why the "battle" over Murtha v. Hoyer lasted only one news cycle, and everyone moved on.

(IMO)

More disturbing is her backing of Alcee Hastings for the Intelligence Committee Chair.

itai195 · Nov 17, 2006, 11:29 PM

Originally Posted by Macrobat

The one where the American public supposedly supports all of the uber-Liberal policies of the Pelosi-Murtha wing of the DNC.

Oh, I thought you were referring to that "mandate" President Bush claimed was given to him after the 2004 election.

Hey, quote marks are fun, aren't they?

BRussell · Nov 18, 2006, 02:40 AM

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

BRussell is always right.

I wasn't going to press it if you didn't remember, but you held up your part of the bargain.

Originally Posted by Macrobat

He didn't take the bribe because he said it wasn't enough.

Avail yourself of the entire video.

Why don't you provide some quotes that support that. All I know is that he was repeatedly offered a bribe but he never took it. He passed the test. He thought the guys were legitimate businessmen so he didn't want to turn them out, but he also didn't take the money.

Macrobat · Nov 18, 2006, 12:37 PM

The American Spectator: Full video of Murtha's Abscam meeting with the FBI. - Google Video

Keep holding your hands over your ears and yelling "LALALALALALALA."

He thought NOTHING of the sort, and said he wanted to wait until later, after they had worked together for awhile, to accept any money.

Nice try, Itai, but Bush NEVER claimed any mandate - strawman anyone?

Pelosi backed Murtha to further her own uberliberal agendas, which she figured he would help her support, PLUS to attempt to stick it to Hoyer, with whom she had a BITTER battle for Majority Leader earlier.

itai195 · Nov 18, 2006, 12:53 PM

Originally Posted by Macrobat

Nice try, Itai, but Bush NEVER claimed any mandate - strawman anyone?

Please, he didn't use the word but his speeches essentially indicated that's what he thought, and all of his staff (including Cheney) did say he won a mandate.

BRussell · Nov 18, 2006, 02:02 PM

Originally Posted by Macrobat

The American Spectator: Full video of Murtha's Abscam meeting with the FBI. - Google Video

Keep holding your hands over your ears and yelling "LALALALALALALA."

He thought NOTHING of the sort, and said he wanted to wait until later, after they had worked together for awhile, to accept any money.

Linking me to an hour-long video is not good enough. If it's so obvious to spot, you provide the specific quotes. The fact is, he didn't take any bribes. You claim he wanted to take it, or wanted even more, or something. I'm not sure what you're saying. But the burden is on you to show how he did something wrong.

Nice try, Itai, but Bush NEVER claimed any mandate - strawman anyone?

Unlike the entire mainstream media and the Bush administration claiming Bush won a mandate in 2004, all the media can talk about now is how the Democrats are having terrible divisive disruptive battles before they even take office (despite Republicans having their own battles that they ignore) and how the Democrats that were elected are really conservative (which is absolutely false).

houstonmacbro · Nov 18, 2006, 02:29 PM

Originally Posted by Macrobat

But Murtha gets absolutely bitchslapped:

BREITBART.COM - House Democrats Name Hoyer to No. 2 Post

Her very first power play and she gets handed her buttocks!

So much for that "mandate," huh?

the end of mankind must be near. (does mankind include woman-kind too?)

Macrobat · Nov 20, 2006, 09:57 AM

BRussell, if you simply refuse to look at the evidence, you may now cease arguing, since you are uniformed of the subject matter. It's obvious to spot, and anyone with at least a 6th grade education will have no problem seeing it. I already showed it, and met my burden, you simply refused to review the evidence.

Here's the transcript, perhaps Your Majesty would feel better reading than watching?

The American Spectator

Sky Captain · Nov 20, 2006, 03:17 PM

In 1988 Pelosi voted to IMPEACH Hastings.

Interesting but not surprising really is it?
The D party talks out of both ends of their ass.
Funny how they branded the R party as the 'culture of corruption'.
They should know corruption if they see it, as they have written volumes on the subject.

BRussell · Nov 20, 2006, 04:23 PM

Originally Posted by Macrobat

It's obvious to spot, and anyone with at least a 6th grade education will have no problem seeing it.

You're obviously a lot smarter than me, and I can't find it. If it's so obvious then show it to me in the transcript. You also may want to take it up with the FBI who, like me, couldn't find reason to prosecute him despite indicting and convicting a dozen or so other politicians.