Why progressives should just give up on bipartisanship

[xadam2dudex]

who was stupid enough to think the republicans would ever do anything to hurt the their masters the rich..so many dems are just republicans with democrat on their business cards...there are too few real progressives in congress nothing can get done

[AmishRakeFight85]

One of the greatest myths of modern politics is that there is too little bipartisanship in DC. There is far, far too much bipartisanship. For example, there is bipartisan consensus on: Endless war Militaristic imperialism Corporate welfare A bloated and wasteful defense budget Cutting the deficit at the expense of the poor and middle class Stripping our Constitutional rights Shielding banks from criminal charges The drug war Kissing Israel's ass I could go on, but I think I've made my point.

[inademv]

thumbs up for tina. yay tina.

[wulfgarpl]

bipartisanship = one party = no choice

[petelovesrat]

stop saying bold solutions.. sounds like .."lets roll the dice"

[SirGomez81]

Ummm ummm umm.. Lol

[Jallandhara]

No surprise at all, Cenk. Fuck you and your bullshit division agenda.

[Derpalon]

Bipartisanship only works when the Democrats and Republicans agree to collectively screw the American people over. NO MORE BIPARTISANSHIP.

[Terastas]

It's not a question of whether or not Obama recognizes that bipartisanship is dead. I think he knew the day after the election and saw the Tea-bagger rallies already blaming him for the financial meltdown that there would be no bipartisanship.

The real question is whether Dumbass America knows that bipartisanship is dead, and by extension, whether it's finally time for the Democrats to declare it dead.

[Terastas]

Keep in mind that, in spite of Obama's constant cavings and compromises, the tea-baggers still put that freakin' Hitler mustache on him on all of their picket signs. The G.O.P. has always wanted him to declare bipartisanship dead so they could accuse HIM of being the "party before country" bully scumbag. What Obama has done is removed any doubt as to who the guilty party truly is.

[julykid28]

@Terastas bless you

[Twostones00]

Tina is hot.

[calimar28]

Liberalsim is unAmerican and unpatriotic. Socialism is not what the founders had in mind. The constitution outlines a VERY LIMITED federal goverment...and what we have had for the last 99 years aint limited.

[calimar28]

@calimar28 So, the teaparty isnt interested in bipartisanship...why should we be? So we can wreck the constitution even more by making goverment even bigger? Forget it, we will fight socialism until it is gone from this country.

[FSFchannel]

@calimar28 there aren't many socialists in the US, progressives yes. You've probably already won with your childish demagoguery for the last 50 years. Europe is doing just fine with their socialism, they're bailing out the capitalist countries which is dragging everyone down.

[calimar28]

@FSFchannel Read the constitution (I know you havent yet). Is there anything in it about a dept of education? How about dept of energy? Dept of commerce? HUD? Dept of the interior? Dept of HLS? Obamacare? Medicare? Medicaid? Tax brackets? Fed reserve? All that stuff is progresive socialist bullshit that helped us be in 17 trillion of debt. Thanks liberals...thanks a bunch.

-Time to reverse the damage

[damnhatesyou]

@calimar28 im so glad your kinda are next to non existent in Australia.

[calimar28]

@damnhatesyou Me too. You Aussies keep importing the negros and muslims, and luck to ya! Your going to need it.

[ohbuddyiliketowatch]

@calimar28 stupied AND racist i think that study was right...

[damnhatesyou]

@calimar28 your either a good troll or a fucking stupid cunt.

[FSFchannel]

@calimar28 The general welfare clause would arguably allow it. You can't call something unconstitutional unless it is explicitly forbidden. I forget who said that, I'm paraphrasing but it is of someone of importance. If you want to argue we don't need it, fine, have that debate, but unconstitutional it is not.

[calimar28]

@FSFchannel Oh come on. What the federal govt can do is explicit in artical nine. Do you think that they would wipe all of that out by saying "general welfare", if it was to mean actual welfare? In that case it could also mean govt is to buy our clothes, our food, everything, in which case most of the constitution would be irrelevant. Im tired of you liberals claiming the general welfare clause means actual welfare.

[FSFchannel]

@calimar28 Nobody said the general welfare clause means actual welfare either. Welfare is a simple program that has nothing to do with healthcare, etc.

As for article 9, what in particular do you refer to? there are many provisions.

As for the founders - i don't care much for what they say. They are not infallible, they are certainly not "gods". The constitution is not perfect either, that's why we have added amendments over the years.

[calimar28]

@FSFchannel Welfare is managed by the federal govt, instead of the states. But liberals point to the general welfare clause. On top of that, they viel education, healthcare, energy, anything they want under the general welfare clause. If your honest, you know that is not what it meant.

[FSFchannel]

@calimar28 I don't care if welfare is managed by the federal goverment or the state. It carries no weight. Yes, to keep lead out of water is for the general welfare of the people. I'd like to keep that. The DOE doesn't do a good job and that's something you can dispute.

You're arguing over your interpretation vs mine in a childlike manner (not intended as an insult), and I'd like you to show me your case instead.

[calimar28]

@FSFchannel If you knew anything about the founders, you would know that the last thing they would do is allow for actual welfare.

[calimar28]

@FSFchannel Do you think the term "promote the general welfare" actually means that people should get welfare? REALLY? Be honest. The founders meant that the STATES do all that stuff, IF THEY WISHED. It was set up for the states to make almost all decisions (the great experiment), and that the federal govt was to make sure the states play by a few rules while they are doing their expiermenting.

[seamoremonster]

@FSFchannel You're right. Many who argue about being Constitutional or Un-Constitutional wouldn't know. The Constitution was never intended to be static...it was working document...that's why we have amendments so we cant adapt to change. The Constitution was written more than 200 years ago, before cars, before mass production, before our teeming population.These Constitutional Fundamentalist are as unrealistic as religious fundamentalists. Things Change. We adapt or perish.

[calimar28]

@FSFchannel THen go live in Europe, if its doing so fine. Its not fine. Its on the verge of collapse. Have a look at Greece, Spain, Portigal, Ireland, look at the Euro. It's all going down because of too many entitlements, and too much immigration from the mid east. It's going TERRIBLE in Europe. Go live there and try it out!

[FSFchannel]

@calimar28 No sir I was raised in this country, I will fight for my country, and I will die for it. I'd rather change my own country then move to another.

Greece, Spain, Portugal, and Ireland are all the result of capitalism, Ireland being a particularly good example from their banking crisis. I'm talking about France and the UK. They're not doing that bad and they have a massive "entitlement system". I'm not an ideologue, I see those countries work, and I want mine to emulate.

[calimar28]

@FSFchannel Oh, France has serious problems, and England is next. Germany is strong only because it is the great producer nation, but Germany cant carry Europe on its back. I say stop the entitlement systems, it is breaking Europe. And stop immigration from the mid east...it is useless.

[biggydx]

If there's bipartisanship in Washington:

1) One of your rights is about to be taken away.

2) Corporations are about to get more money or screw the country over even further

3) The less fortunate have to give up more of their earnings and benefits

4) A new war is on the way

5) All of the above.

[capucchan8]

@biggydx so true 

[mahatmacoatmahandbag]

10rd

[TheEnneagram]

1rd

[carlo88moe]

@TheEnneagram seconst