Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, December 04, 2019

Democrats in the House have been passing bills at a rapid clip; as of November 15, the House has passed nearly 400 bills, not including resolutions. But the House Democratic Policy and Communications Committee estimates 80 percent of those bill have hit a snag in the Senate, where Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is prioritizing confirming judges over passing bills.

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

If the congressional GOnP members refuse to do their job.
Stop paying them and cut off their medical benefits.

#1 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-12-04 03:20 AM | Reply

Lamp,

"There's a pervasive sense of legislative paralysis gripping Capitol Hill."

Isn't that sort of the whole point of our government structure?

#2 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2019-12-04 09:54 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Prevent our legal system from blowing with the prevailing winds.

#3 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2019-12-04 09:55 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Isn't that sort of the whole point of our government structure?

#2 | Posted by BillJohnson

No.

Let me guess, you were home schooled?

#4 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-04 11:32 AM | Reply

Why wouldn't they use that strategy?

It's been successful as demonstrated by the brain dead societal millstones like Nulli who parrot it every chance they get despite the fact that they get corrected every single time.

#5 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-04 11:33 AM | Reply

Jpw,

No...went to public schools thru 10th grade and quit school.

Got a GED and then bachelor degree.

I checked out your profile and pegged you as a "holier than thou" independent but you're "other". Even worse.

I've known your type. I bet no body gets a word in edgewise around you.

#6 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2019-12-04 01:06 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Isn't that sort of the whole point of our government structure?

#2 | POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON

So the whole point of our government structure is to be non-functioning? What would the point of that be? What they're supposed to be doing is: "...form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare".

Legislative gridlock is not that.

#7 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2019-12-04 03:10 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Look at the list of the bills, most are far left bills that the Dems know won't get bi-partisan support but their members can say they approved come election time.

#8 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-12-04 03:46 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

390 of the bills are ot re-name post-offices and streets.

#9 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-12-04 05:32 PM | Reply

Let me guess, you were home schooled?

#4 | Posted by jpw And you never went.

#10 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-12-04 05:33 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

390 of the bills are ot re-name post-offices and streets.
#9 | POSTED BY SNIPER

Link? Should be easy.

#11 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-12-04 05:38 PM | Reply

390 of the bills are ot re-name post-offices and streets.
#9 | POSTED BY SNIPER

Link? Should be easy.

#11 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-12-04 05:38 PM | Reply

Post a comment

Do you really want to see a link to Rush Limbaugh's ass?

#12 | Posted by Nixon at 2019-12-04 06:03 PM | Reply

Isn't that sort of the whole point of our government structure?
#2 | POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON AT 2019-12-04 09:54 AM | FLAG: | NEWSWORTHY 1

So I've heard this argument before, and while the system is supposed to be slow and deliberate, it's not supposed to be paralyzed. The problem is that the Senate isn't voting down bills that it doesn't like, it's that they're not voting on or even debating the bills passed by the House. That is not gridlock - that's paralysis. If the Senate GOP leaders truly believed they had the ability to shut down these 400 bills, they'd vote on them. But that would then force their membership to vote on popular bills that the people actually want passed.

#13 | Posted by bartimus at 2019-12-04 06:03 PM | Reply

390 of the bills are ot re-name post-offices and streets.
#9 | POSTED BY SNIPER AT 2019-12-04 05:32 PM | FLAG:

What a moron, didn't even read the article.

"Ten of those 70 bills this year have been renaming federal post offices or Veterans Affairs facilities"

The Senate GOP is perfectly fine with processing and voting on those types of bills, it's the 400 substantive bills with policy and lawmaking implications that they're actively avoiding.

#14 | Posted by bartimus at 2019-12-04 06:06 PM | Reply

The question is: Just how many of those bills are worthy of being passed into law. One cannot go by the 'title/purpose', rather the contents of the bill and how it affects 'We The People'.

#15 | Posted by MSgt at 2019-12-04 06:20 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Bart,

"That is not gridlock - that's paralysis."

Well....doesn't sound like there's a national consensus then.

A strange thing occurring in America is the odd 50/50 split we're seeing on different things.

Even election results.

#16 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2019-12-04 06:29 PM | Reply

The question is: Just how many of those bills are worthy of being passed into law. One cannot go by the 'title/purpose', rather the contents of the bill and how it affects 'We The People'.

#15 | POSTED BY MSGT AT 2019-12-04 06:20 PM | FLAG:

Then let's see a debate and a vote on the bills! If they're so bad, the GOP should come out and say they're bad! Instead, they just sit there gathering dust while nothing gets done, or worse, dummies lap up the "Do Nothing Democrats" argument even though it's the Senate stonewalling.

#16: Again, then let's debate and vote. If there's not a consensus, then our elected leaders should vote and show that there's not a consensus. Here's the great secret though; then We The People would have a record for how our leaders really felt about these issues, and might reward or punish them for actually having to grow a pair and vote.

I don't care in all 400 bills were voted down in the Senate (well, I do,but not for this argument). If the House passes a bill, the Senate should debate and vote on it; if it sucks it should be voted down. Period.

#17 | Posted by bartimus at 2019-12-04 06:34 PM | Reply

-- One cannot go by the 'title/purpose', rather the contents of the bill and how it affects 'We The People'.

All you need to do is call it the "Save The Children Act" and anyone who votes against it will have face campaign ads claiming they hate children. That's how it works.

#18 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-12-04 06:34 PM | Reply

Bart,

Frankly, at this point we're still hammering out the direction of this country.

More free stuff or personal accountability or a healthy combination of the 2 with emphasis on which?

Is Congress supposed to decide for us and inform us what we're getting?

Well...maybe so...maybe not.

#19 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2019-12-04 06:38 PM | Reply

Passed into Law? No. They have done nothing and will be judged by voters for it.

#20 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-12-04 06:49 PM | Reply

Criminal Justice Reform including the First Step Act - benefitting many minorities not only to get out of prison but helping after incarceration

Farm Bill legalizing hemp

VA Mission Act - giving veterans choices in the private sector for medical care

Stopping Bad Robocalls Act

21st Century Cures Act

These were all passed with overwhelming bipartisan support.

At least a FEW things have gotten through and become law.

#21 | Posted by Idependant97 at 2019-12-04 08:57 PM | Reply

77 enacted into law " that is the number that matters. Dems putting forth bills that either they know will fail and/or never put the effort into getting bipartisan support are meaningless.

But, the numbers showing their futility gets even worse as a VAST majority of the bills are either simply re-authorizing spending already occurring or pure virtue signaling. Keep in mind, of the 77, they include:

2 commemorative coins bills
10 to rename government buildings (usually post offices)
2 meaningless HK bills
1 to allow the FAA admin to continue to serve
1 authorizing the 4th of July decorations on the national mall
1 to make Bob Dole and honorary colonel in the Army
1 POW/MIA display act (Lyin' Liz Warren sponsored)

The reality is that this Congress only passed 2 bills that were actually new " some additional funds for the southern border and the farmer relief act. They have ZERO actions that are meaningful and new to the American people. I will also note that Liz Warren and Kamala Harris' records of getting ANYTHING done remains abysmal. This is the record upon which they will run. Good luck with that.

#22 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-12-04 09:07 PM | Reply

When the GOP took the House in '10 they passed a boatload of bills that Harry Reid never brought to the floor, including 35 that were co-sponsored by Democrats.

It was OK then and this is OK now.

Democrats want to get these bills passed into law? Win the Senate and win the WH. "Elections matter" until they don't. Quit yer fricking crying.

#23 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-05 09:23 AM | Reply

Here we go again. Back in 2011ish time frame there was an uproar from Reps that whined about Dems not presenting the Bills they passed. Wtf is it that causes this type of memory loss in partisan haters where they just become complete hypocrites?

#24 | Posted by humtake at 2019-12-05 12:27 PM | Reply

I've known your type. I bet no body gets a word in edgewise around you.
#6 | POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON

LOL you may know that type but that's not me.

I listen far more than I speak IRL.

#25 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-05 01:07 PM | Reply

It was OK then and this is OK now.

No, it's not.

We shouldn't have to have unilateral control of the process for things to get done. That you think that that is OK suggests how desensitized you've become to the hyper partisan environment.

#26 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-05 01:09 PM | Reply

2 commemorative coins bills
10 to rename government buildings (usually post offices)
2 meaningless HK bills
1 to allow the FAA admin to continue to serve
1 authorizing the 4th of July decorations on the national mall
1 to make Bob Dole and honorary colonel in the Army
1 POW/MIA display act (Lyin' Liz Warren sponsored)
The reality is that this Congress only passed 2 bills that were actually new " some additional funds for the southern border and the farmer relief act. They have ZERO actions that are meaningful and new to the American people. I will also note that Liz Warren and Kamala Harris' records of getting ANYTHING done remains abysmal. This is the record upon which they will run. Good luck with that.

#22 | POSTED BY IRAGOLDBERG AT 2019-12-04 09:07 PM

H.R. 1: For the People Act
H.R. 5: The Equality Act
H.R. 6: The American Dream and Promise Act
H.R. 7: The Paycheck Fairness Act
H.R. 8: The Bipartisan Background Checks Act
H.R. 9: The Climate Action Now Act
H.R. 582 Raise the Wage Act
H.R. 987: The Strengthening Health Care and Lowering Prescription Drug Costs Act
H.R. 1585: The Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act
H.R. 1644: The Save the Internet Act

Do you care to revise your BS statement Ira?

#27 | Posted by hatter5183 at 2019-12-05 01:35 PM | Reply

lol

Hey you left out...

HR xx: Save the Children Act
Total Justice Now Act
Free Stuff Today Act
Rainbows and Unicorns Act
Make Love Not War Act
Power to the People Act

#28 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-12-05 01:52 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

ey you left out...
HR xx: Save the Children Act
Total Justice Now Act
Free Stuff Today Act
Rainbows and Unicorns Act
Make Love Not War Act
Power to the People Act

#28 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN AT 2019-12-05 01:52 PM | REPLY |

So you have nothing but fantasy. Got it.

#29 | Posted by hatter5183 at 2019-12-05 02:00 PM | Reply

Over 300 different versions of "Orange Man Bad Act"

#30 | Posted by visitor_ at 2019-12-05 02:04 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

--fantasy.

Good description of these trivial bills with pompous, pretentious titles.

#31 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-12-05 02:04 PM | Reply

"There's a pervasive sense of legislative paralysis gripping Capitol Hill."

Isn't that sort of the whole point of our government structure?

#2 | Posted by BillJohnson

It's the whole point of the plutocrats capturing the government. When you're on top of a rigged game, and change can only be bad for you.

#32 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-12-05 02:27 PM | Reply

*ANY change

#33 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-12-05 02:27 PM | Reply

Good description of these trivial bills with pompous, pretentious titles.

#31 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

So you've read them but still parrot the "do nothing Congress" nonsense?

#34 | Posted by jpw at 2019-12-05 04:46 PM | Reply

Speak,

"When you're on top of a rigged game, and change can only be bad for you."

Rigged for who?

Are you under the impression the only people who vote republican are the rich and white extremists?

Maybe if Democrats weren't turning into anti-Christian zealots and making fun of rural America they'd get more support.

Just for starters.

#35 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2019-12-05 04:55 PM | Reply

"Are you under the impression the only people who vote republican are the rich and white extremists?"

The rich ones are the rich Republicans.
The white extremists are the poor Republicans.

Middle class Republicans sort of have a foot in both ponds.
People like JeffJ and MadBomber, who will tell you to your face that white nationalism is just an idea, and if it can't be successfully argued against in the arena of ideas, then it's not wrong.

#36 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-05 04:58 PM | Reply

"Maybe if Democrats weren't turning into anti-Christian zealots and making fun of rural America they'd get more support."

Just say "I don't trust the Jew Sanders" next time, okay?

#37 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-12-05 05:01 PM | Reply

I'd feel safer if Congress started repealing laws.

#38 | Posted by Ray at 2019-12-05 05:15 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

We shouldn't have to have unilateral control of the process for things to get done. That you think that that is OK suggests how desensitized you've become to the hyper partisan environment.

#26 | POSTED BY JPW

I think gridlock is a good thing. If it's truly important and/or enjoys bipartisan support, bills will end up on the president's desk.

When it comes to government, oftentimes doing nothing is better than doing something. Like Ray said, I'd like to see congress start repealing some laws.

#39 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-12-05 05:59 PM | Reply

Speak,

"When you're on top of a rigged game, and change can only be bad for you."

Rigged for who?

Are you under the impression the only people who vote republican are the rich and white extremists?

Maybe if Democrats weren't turning into anti-Christian zealots and making fun of rural America they'd get more support.

Just for starters.

#35 | Posted by BillJohnson

Rigged for those rich enough to buy the government. That is who the republican party serves. They simply con votes out of gullible bible thumpers and racists with policies to impress them in order to get enough votes to keep their billionaire puppets in power.

Your complaint about dems being anti christian zealots proves youre one of the suckers dumb enough to buy the billionaires propaganda about repubs being the christian party.

Yeah, taking healthcare from the poor to give tax cuts to the rich. Just like jesus was always preaching. You're such a good christian for supporting that agenda. I'm sure st peter will let you right into heaven.

#40 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-12-05 06:43 PM | Reply

I'd feel safer if Congress started repealing laws.

#38 | Posted by Ray

Because you're dumb. They could repeal enough laws so that a coal company could dump sludge into your living room and you'd be celebrating deregulation and the shrinking of government.

#41 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-12-05 06:44 PM | Reply

Last time Dems led deregulation, it went pretty well.

#42 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2019-12-06 10:28 AM | Reply

Speak,

"Rigged for those rich"

I can agree with that.

But you haven't been seeing rich democrats doing anything about it, have you.

#43 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2019-12-06 12:55 PM | Reply

Speak,

Talk talk talk.

You can be sure neither the republicans nor the democrats will do a damn thing for the working struggling middle class.

We grease the wheels.

Lazy democrats see the middle class as not really deserving of their hard earned money and the rich see the middle class as uppity poor who are fodder for their consumption.

Neither give the middle class the least bit of respect.

Hillary was no less beholden and supportive of the rich than anyone else. Open your eyes.

It's takes deep pockets to get elected.

#44 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2019-12-06 01:09 PM | Reply

"But you haven't been seeing rich democrats doing anything about it, have you."

Sure you have: They voted against slashing tax rates for corporations and the wealthiest. Did you miss that?

#45 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-06 01:09 PM | Reply

"Hillary was no less beholden and supportive of the rich than anyone else."

Nonsense; she wouldn't have borrowed an extra $2.3 Trillion to give away over 80% to the world's wealthiest 1%.

I'd call that LESS supportive; so would anyone using actual math.

#46 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-06 01:11 PM | Reply

Dan,

Consumer debt is on the rise as well as the rich's percentage of global wealth.

Do the math.

#47 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2019-12-06 01:20 PM | Reply

Dan,

I agree government spending is crazy.

You don't know what Hillary would have done.

#48 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2019-12-06 01:27 PM | Reply

"Consumer debt is on the rise as well as the rich's percentage of global wealth."

Which invalidates nothing of what I've stated, and in fact, underscores it: both those aspects have roots in tax codes that funnel money upward.

"Do the math."

I've done the math. Read the tax code.

#49 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-06 01:29 PM | Reply

"You don't know what Hillary would have done."

I know she wouldn't have borrowed an additional 10% of all the debt rung up since 1776 to give away to the world's wealthiest. You do too, whether you're willing to admit it or not.

#50 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-06 01:30 PM | Reply

I'm not a republican apologist.

I just don't see democrats being able to do what needs to be done.

And more free stuff isn't it.

#51 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2019-12-06 01:35 PM | Reply

more free stuff isn't it.
#51 | POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON

Both parties give away free stuff.

The Republicans give subsidies, tax refunds and tax breaks to the rich. As well as welfare to farmers caught up in Trump's trade war.

#52 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-12-06 01:51 PM | Reply

"I just don't see democrats being able to do what needs to be done."

But you see Republicans doing exactly the opposite of what needs to be done.

So to keep your head in the sand, you have to pretend HRC would've done the same or worse.

"more free stuff"

You've clearly fallen for the rich man's lie: if he gets 11 cookies out of the dozen, the other guy is coming for YOUR ONE. Do you ever notice "how we'll pay for it" is never brought up by Republicans when the issue is war or tax cuts? Dubya even cut taxes DURING war. And Trump is borrowing $2.3 Trillion as a tax giveaway; no pretense needed about what terrible thing they MICHT do, not when they've already doing it.

#53 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-06 01:53 PM | Reply

Dan,

I agree the tax code is rigged too.

Don't hold your breath waiting for an overhaul.

I don't believe either party is totally at fault or capable of solving things.

What is needed is the one thing we can't have.

Bipartisan agreement to address problems without concern who gets the credit.

It's not the nature of the beast.

I'm afraid nothing short of a complete collapse and rising from the ashes doing it better next time will result in a fairer system (at least for awhile).

Yes...republicans have contributed tremendously and has a lot to do with my not voting for them after Reagan until Trump.

At this point we're using debt to postpone the inevitable.

Just my opinion.

#54 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2019-12-06 01:55 PM | Reply

"I agree the tax code is rigged too."

By whom? Authors of the last three have been Trump, Dubya, and Dubya; before that, Reagan.

So...by whom?

#55 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-06 02:01 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Speak,

"Rigged for those rich"

I can agree with that.

But you haven't been seeing rich democrats doing anything about it, have you.

#43 | Posted by BillJohnson

Actually yes. Rich Dems vote to RAISE their own taxes to help the less fortunate. Repubs vote to harm the less fortunate to cut taxes for the rich. Dems created the consumer financial protection bureau to fight back against wall street crooks. Repubs are trying to destroy that agency.

Your false equivalency crumbles under the facts in reality.

#56 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-12-06 02:09 PM | Reply

Dan,

"By whom? Authors of the last three have been Trump, Dubya, and Dubya; before that, Reagan."

And the democrats are acquiescent.

Talk...talk...talk...

#57 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2019-12-06 08:27 PM | Reply

Dan,

If I've seen one commonality among all politicians, it's this.

Everything is someone else's fault

#58 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2019-12-06 08:31 PM | Reply

"Everything is someone else's fault'

Enough deflections: who had their hands on the dials, and changed the tax code to funnel money upward?

" the democrats are acquiescent."

They voted against, en masse. What kind of Humpty Dumpty game are you playing with the word "acquiescent"?!?

#59 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-06 10:01 PM | Reply

Dan,

Look back at the big news stories involving economic scandals and failures (that came to light) since the 80's.

Nothing short of mass collusion among high stack players (both republican and democrat) and agencies responsible for oversight (run by both republicans and democrats) and benefactors who played dumb (again both republican and democrat) were required for things to reach such critical stages.

#60 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2019-12-07 12:58 PM | Reply

"Look back at the big news stories involving economic scandals and failures (that came to light) since the 80's."

Peanuts in the the equation compared to the tax code. One is billions, the other trillions.

And nothing comes close to Dubya and Cheney resetting the fiscal sights of America from Surplusville to Debtsylvania. They were handed true surplus budgets and full employment, and handed off a melting down economy, job losses of more than 15,000 a day, red ink as far as the eye could see, and the largest deficits known to man since the dawn of time.

Pretending the blame is equal all around is an ostrich move.

#61 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-07 01:07 PM | Reply

Dan,

"They voted against, en masse."

I'm talking about leaders, not voters.

I'm talking about the people who actually have the power to make changes that might benefit all American citizens.

Talk...talk...talk...

My whole point is both republican and democrat leaders are at fault and only working together do they stand a chance of doing anything without someone else deliberately sabotaging their efforts using passive aggressive techniques and downright attacks.

Both republicans and democrats have good ideas and blind spots.

Frankly....as voters we're sort of dumb...really.

I mean...every 4 years we still think our candidate will stem the tide of resistance.

At least Trump has sustained the economy and the stock market.

Do you think things would be going as well with Hillary at the helm?

Trump has inspired public confidence in our economy.

Would Hillary have been able?

Well...my wife wants me getting Christmas boxes out of the attic.

Time to do some work.

#62 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2019-12-07 01:24 PM | Reply

Dan,

Bill Clinton's surplus was due to the dot.com boom.

#63 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2019-12-07 01:31 PM | Reply

"I'm talking about leaders, not voters."

So am I. The Democrats voted against tax bills by Dubya, Dubya, and Trump. 100% of the fiscal sight reset is on Cheney, Dubya, and the Republicans. 100%

"Bill Clinton's surplus was due to the dot.com boom."

And working with the Republican Congress to balance the budget. The dotcom boom was part, but not THE DRIVING part; for proof, look at the deficits that followed as the dot-com boom continued.

"At least Trump has sustained the economy and the stock market. "

With apologies to Lloyd Bentsen, If you let me write a trillion dollars worth of hot checks every year, I can give you the illusion of prosperity, too.

#64 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-07 01:42 PM | Reply

Dan,

"Pretending the blame is equal all around is an ostrich move."

Did I exactly say equal or did I say both sides contributed in their owns ways, direct and indirect?

I like the word acquiescent (it's fun to say).

#65 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2019-12-07 01:44 PM | Reply

"Do you think things would be going as well with Hillary at the helm?"

Well, we'd be headed toward 10% less debt, and your family would've have borrowed $11,000 per person to give away to the world's wealthiest 1%. What would YOU call that?

#66 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-07 01:44 PM | Reply

^
would've have borrowed = WOULDN'T have borrowed

#67 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-07 01:44 PM | Reply

"Did I exactly say equal or did I say both sides contributed in their owns ways, direct and indirect?"

Fiscal sight reset, by ONE party, was one of the two main driving forces. Tax code changes, led by ONE party, is the other.

Suggesting the VAST MAJORITY isn't on ONE party's shoulders is either willfully disingenuous, or woefully ignorant.

#68 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-12-07 01:47 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort