Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kentuck

(111,095 posts)
Mon Sep 17, 2012, 07:26 AM Sep 2012

The Republican lie about "Democrats controlled Congress for two years"...

Someone on the Internet, Facebook nonetheless, gave a small history lesson that should be required reading.

https://www.facebook.com/TomJoadLives/posts/443532579019568

<snip>
Every once in awhile I find some moron in the comments section of this page that just irritates me into action. This guy successfully got me to respond to his talking point - but I swear to God, this is the *last time.*

Fredrick Edwin K said: Well then Tom, how about we blame the people responsible (for the economic crash of 2007). Democrats controlled both the House and the Senate from 2006-2010. So just who caused the 2008 economy?

I hate this, I really do. It's a tired old meme - but let's drag it out into the sunlight and beat it to death with a shoe, shall we?

Perhaps you've heard of the filibuster? Once Democrats took control, Republicans countered with their obstructionist, pro-corporate agenda, unable to compromise even on traditionally bipartisan efforts which allow for the smooth functioning of our government.

.....more

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

kentuck

(111,095 posts)
4. I would like someone to ask?
Mon Sep 17, 2012, 07:41 AM
Sep 2012

"What do you mean by 'control'?"

By "control", it would suggest that a Party not only has a majority in each branch of Congress, but has the means to use it. As the FB poster noted, that situation, without Republican "control" of the filibuster, was only 4 months - from September 4, 2009 to Feb 4, 2010. I think those dates are correct? Was it Scott Brown that broke that 4-month majority?

Skidmore

(37,364 posts)
2. I'm sick to death of people, even here, ignoring the destructive
Mon Sep 17, 2012, 07:35 AM
Sep 2012

role Congress has played in the past 4 years. I've said it repeatedly. Instead of blaming one person--the President, for all the problems of the nation, Congress needs to have some karma served to it cold. Repeated obstructionism which has contributed to economic problems. It is beyond a do nothing congress and has lapsed over into actively colluding with Wall Street and big business to engage in corporate raider activities to break the backs of the people. From the time, Congress ceded its war powers and the power of the purse over to Bush until the time the McConnell-Boehner gang started their scorched earth activities, there has been no condemnation. AND it really pisses me off to see people come to these forums and participate in giving congress a pass while they continue unjustly lay everythng at the President's feet. I generally assume that these people are supportive of the McConnell-Boehner Congress and no more.

 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
3. The period between Al Franken's seating and Ted Kennedy's death was about seven weeks....
Mon Sep 17, 2012, 07:36 AM
Sep 2012

... not four years.

 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
5. It's like moving into a house only to find Formosan termites have been there for 30 years.
Mon Sep 17, 2012, 07:47 AM
Sep 2012

The house collapses after you move in.

Suddenly everyone says you brought the termites in???

That's the GOP's logic here...

TheKentuckian

(25,026 posts)
6. A party has always been deemed to control a House of Congress when they have a majority
Mon Sep 17, 2012, 08:42 AM
Sep 2012

Why did we have to take back the Senate? Because it was under Republican control.

This is a weird thing to argue about, in my opinion. There is no possibility of getting traction on such a thing outside of highly partisan Democrats and even then you are changing a common definition to make that impact which might not move the needle even in home territory.

Hell, even the filibuster is essentially granted by the majority at the start of each session, a new majority can change those Senate rules as they see fit and have the votes to pull off.

Kentuck, if the line is a filibuster proof Senate then the Republicans have never "controlled" the Senate. Who is going to buy that?

kentuck

(111,095 posts)
7. Traditionally, that has been a good argument.
Mon Sep 17, 2012, 09:38 AM
Sep 2012

And you are right that each Senate can change the rules. However, it is a fact that this Republican - Tea Party coalition made it impossible to govern, even with a majority. The rules of our democracy have been turned on its head with the record number of filibusters. Our system no longer works in its present form.

At the same time, it is up to the President to change minds and to make policy that is best for the country. President Obama, for most of his four-year term, has not been able to do that.

It is probably not an argument that can be won politically. However, the facts are the facts.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The Republican lie about ...