 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
kate
Admin
Joined: 14 May 2004
Posts: 1891
Location: Upstate, New York
|
 Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 5:05 am Post subject: Mitch McConnell: You Get What You Give |
 |
|
some snips from an interview with Hugh Hewitt
Incoming Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell: You Get What You Give.
| Quote: |
I really don't know, but I will remind your listeners and your readers that it takes 60 votes to do just about everything in the Senate. 49 is the most robust minority. Nothing will leave the Senate that doesn't have our imprint. We'll either stop it if we think it's bad for America, or shape it, hopefully right of center. So the minority leader's job is actually a lot easier. When you're the minority leader, you're looking for 41 votes. When you're the majority leader, you're looking for 60. So Senator Reid can expect all of the cooperation that he extended us in similar circumstances. I think that, coupled with the potential for presidential vetoes, should reassure everyone that we're certainly not going to be run over.
<>
We expect from them the same level of cooperation we extended to President Clinton. We decided he'd been elected president, and we were not entitled to deny him all of his judges. Elections do have consequences, and in the last two years of the Clinton administration, when we had 55 Republicans in the Senate, we still confirmed over 70 of his judicial nominees, including 15 circuit court nominees. Now a lot of conservatives would say why did you do that. Well, the reason we did it, he won the election. And President Bush won the election, and we expect the same level of cooperation from them, as we gave them under similar circumstances.
<>
Well, we're certainly going to follow the President's lead on this. We're all interested to see what the Iraq Study Group of Baker and Hamilton come up with. But I think the best solution to this problem is to succeed. And I'm going to stick with the policy that I think gives us the maximum chance of success. And remember, in closing, it's no accident we haven't been attacked again at home for the last five years. We haven't been attacked because we've been on offense, going after these guys where they are in places like Afghanistan and Iraq.
|
full transcript at the link
This is going to be interesting to watch play out. Breathing a bit better with these and other statements from new repub leaders. The libs certainly don't have anything close to a 'mandate', and they surely know that
_________________
.
one of..... We The People |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
LewWaters
Admin
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 4042
Location: Washington State
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 5:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Little doubt that McPain will step in when necessary and strong arm some to be peaceful and agreeable, to show how cooperative Republicans are.  
_________________
Clark County Conservative |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ocsparky101
PO1
Joined: 03 Sep 2004
Posts: 479
Location: Allen Park. Michigan
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 8:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Trent Lott asWhgip should put a bit of pressure on McConnell. It wouldn't take muchfor them to put Lott back into the leadership position. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
baldeagle
PO2
Joined: 27 Oct 2004
Posts: 362
Location: Grand Saline, Texas
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 1:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ocsparky101 wrote: | | Trent Lott asWhgip should put a bit of pressure on McConnell. It wouldn't take muchfor them to put Lott back into the leadership position. |
IMHO, Trent Lott is a wuss who rolled over and played dead every time Tom Daschle frowned. He had a majority (as did Frist) but both refused to take advantage of it.
They could have done something about Social Security reform, the illegal immigration situation, Bolton at the UN, Tax reform, more Judicial appointments, and a host of other government reduction measures, but instead they frittered away the opportunity the voters gave them. Instead, they grew the size of the government at a rate the Democrats never even dreamed of, and in the process created more entitlement programs which, togather with all the previous obligations, will eventually sink the economy.
I am encouraged by McConnells remarks, but skeptical of their resolve.
I'm afraid the Republicans have become as fond of "Big Government" and the "Power " of political position as the Democrats.
_________________
"In a word, I want an American character, that the powers of Europe may be convinced we act for ourselves and not for others; this, in my judgment, is the only way to be respected abroad and happy at home." --George Washington |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tony54
PO2
Joined: 01 Sep 2004
Posts: 369
Location: cleveland, ohio
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 1:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
They can say whatever they want, the minority is composed of the same reps that were the majority.
So nothing will change for the better.
The party of "National Security" lost the majority.
Not because of Iraq!
Not because of the economy!
They lost out because they refused to shut down the borders,
the biggest threat to our "National Security"
And we will loose the presidency in '08 for the same reason.
All the laws needed are already on the books.
All Bush had to do was to put about ten thousand troops along the whole border. Armed Army, Marines, Navy and Air force.
It wouldn’t have cost that much, they need to practice and do maneuvers daily, just send them there for a one month rotation.
We have enough troop in our bases where the same troops wouldn't have to be there but once every two years.
The The "Posse Comitatus Act " forbids the use of the military on our soil
against Americans, but it does not forbid the use of military force to repel an invasion.
We are being invaded as we speak and all Congress and the President
want to do about it is pass more "laws" that won't be enforced.
More "feel good laws".
More "laws" so attorneys will decide who comes and who don't.
“Some attorneys wear black robes but their still attorneys.”
I for one won't "feel good" till the borders are secured, airtight.
Only our military can accomplish that.
And a Commander in Chief with the willpower (gonads) to do it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
baldeagle
PO2
Joined: 27 Oct 2004
Posts: 362
Location: Grand Saline, Texas
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tony54 wrote: | They can say whatever they want, the minority is composed of the same reps that were the majority.
So nothing will change for the better.
The party of "National Security" lost the majority.
Not because of Iraq!
Not because of the economy!
They lost out because they refused to shut down the borders,
the biggest threat to our "National Security"
And we will loose the presidency in '08 for the same reason.
All the laws needed are already on the books.
All Bush had to do was to put about ten thousand troops along the whole border. Armed Army, Marines, Navy and Air force.
It wouldn’t have cost that much, they need to practice and do maneuvers daily, just send them there for a one month rotation.
We have enough troop in our bases where the same troops wouldn't have to be there but once every two years.
The The "Posse Comitatus Act " forbids the use of the military on our soil
against Americans, but it does not forbid the use of military force to repel an invasion.
We are being invaded as we speak and all Congress and the President
want to do about it is pass more "laws" that won't be enforced.
More "feel good laws".
More "laws" so attorneys will decide who comes and who don't.
“Some attorneys wear black robes but their still attorneys.”
I for one won't "feel good" till the borders are secured, airtight.
Only our military can accomplish that.
And a Commander in Chief with the willpower (gonads) to do it. |
Looks like I am the designated "Devil's Advocate" this morning.........
Tony, you are right as for all the laws needed already being on the books, but I believe that as long as Mexico has the economy they do and folks down there want to get ahead, they will find a way to cross the border. They have always been succesful in bring the drugs across. All that is not to say, though, that I think there should not be more enforcement.
The laws that really need enforcing,though, are the ones that go after the folks here in our country who are providing the incentive for them to come. If we made it prohibitively expensive (in the form of meaningful penalties and fines, hammer them hard) for companies like Tyson Foods, and the construction industry, and the big farmers, and the hotel/motel industry, and the rich folks wanting gardeners and maids to employ them, you would not only see the inflow at the border drying up, but also a migration southward of those already here.
It simple..........no work.......no incentive to sneak in.
_________________
"In a word, I want an American character, that the powers of Europe may be convinced we act for ourselves and not for others; this, in my judgment, is the only way to be respected abroad and happy at home." --George Washington |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
