Jon Stewart Jizz-ams on Cap & Trade

[blueduck37.livejournal.com]

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Jon Stewart Jizz-Ams in Front of Children - Cap'n Trade
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Joke of the Day

Comments

[merig00.livejournal.com]

I guess when you have to bribe moderates in your party to pass the bill... there's something wrong with the bill.

[weswilson]

I'm just happy we HAVE some moderates in Congress.

[merig00.livejournal.com]

Not for long... I see more and more articles with general theme "Evil and counterproductive democrats in the Congress are ruining the ratings for Dear Leader Obama"

[weswilson]

That's hyperbole.

What you are seeing is a patent lack of any kind of monolithic party unity like we have seen with the republicans. I suppose that's a benefit for the republicans, since it means that when they get the majority, they get to pass a higher percentage of their partisan initiatives than democrats do. But as someone who has watched right-wing control of the government for too long, I'm a bit frustrated by it.

[blueduck37.livejournal.com]

You're missing the point. Congress doesn't water down these bills because they want to be 'moderates'... it's a mix of them being subservient to corporate lobbyist influence, and also lacking the political courage to stand up to the former. It's a lack of principles at fault, not an overabundance of them.

[merig00.livejournal.com]

and maybe because a lot of their constituents consider the cam&trade to be complete bs?

[blueduck37.livejournal.com]

Possibly, but I really think believing that is way naive.

Let's look at how Stewart her traces the evolution of this bill... it started off as a pretty decent bill and has been watered-down by Congress to the point where it is now indeed BS. The same thing happened with the stimulus, and is happening now with healthcare. These bills start off good and efficient and are watered down in terms of effectiveness while ending up more expensive somehow.

That's not congressfolk looking out for their constituents. That's them being sellouts.

[merig00.livejournal.com]

Ok look at it from another side... what was the vote breakdown 219 - 217? Are you saying that we have 217 congressman who are complete sellout to the "Corporations" and another 200 or so who got enough benefits out of the bill for their favorite corporations to vote for it - meaning also sellouts?

[blueduck37.livejournal.com]

Well again you're really missing some obvious points. The "No" votes were mostly Republicans who, as we've seen, will vote against 95% of anything that Democrats propose at this point. Nancy Pelosi could send up a bill called "America Loves Puppy Act of 2009" that just states that America is opposed to puppies being transported across state lines for the purposes of being used for food, and Drudge would have siren-y headlines about it, and most of the Republicans would vote against it, ranting about big government all the way. Other no votes included the liberal Democratic wing who, like me (and Stewart), see this as a watered-down bill that won't actually solve anything.

The yes votes came from Democrats, some who held their tongue and voted yes just because they see this bill as better than nothing, and some who did indeed sell out and water down the bill as not to offend business interests.

[caerfrli.livejournal.com]

There must be a little box by the door of Congress where the Democrats have been dropping off their balls for the past 2 years. They seem to have stuffed Obama's in there, too.