So the first term of the Democrat Congress is almost over.

[UtahDan]

For those who are Democrats, what do you see as their main accomplishments during the last two years? Its not a trap, I really haven't paid much attention to congress.

[exUte]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

For those who are Democrats, what do you see as their main accomplishments during the last two years? Its not a trap, I really haven't paid much attention to congress.

attention.

They did send everyone a check. And appear close to sending another check to everyone.

For those wanting a handout.......job well done.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by exUte

attention.

They did send everyone a check. And appear close to sending another check to everyone.

For those wanting a handout.......job well done.

Bush is suggesting the 2nd check and he may have suggested the first too.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

For those who are Democrats, what do you see as their main accomplishments during the last two years? Its not a trap, I really haven't paid much attention to congress.

I don't know that anyone could be impressed with this Congress. They have done nothing extraordinary. Much of that is attributable to 3 political realities:

1. Bush is the president, and would veto significant legislative proposals;

2. Attempts to craft exciting legislative proposals expose the drafting party to more attention and to more criticism, forcing the Dems to be more defensive in the 2008 election (which they have been building up for) rather than offensive on policy matters; and

3. The House and Senate leadership is poor.

This isn't meant to excuse the House and Senate. They have been far from impressive, and on areas where they should have at least acted as obstacles to Bush, they failed as well (FISA being a good example, a vote on which I sharply disagree with Obama). At the end of the day, the political calculations appear to have been successful, however, as the Dems will control a larger majority in the House and have a realistic chance at 60 seats in the Senate. If they don't do anything with that, they would deserve the same treatment the Republicans have received of late.

[All-American]

The democratic congress did exactly what it aimed to do: let the blame fall upon the Republicans and their president. They maneuvered what will turn out to be a huge windfall come election day, and the democratic party will control the house, senate, AND presidency. What they plan to do from there . . . who knows.

[exUte]

Originally Posted by All-American

The democratic congress did exactly what it aimed to do: let the blame fall upon the Republicans and their president. They maneuvered what will turn out to be a huge windfall come election day, and the democratic party will control the house, senate, AND presidency. What they plan to do from there . . . who knows.

.....that's what they will do.

Unemployment will go down. Everyone will be able to afford a house. Everyone will have healthcare. Everyone can have an abortion at taxpayer expense. 95% of American's taxes will go down. Those who don't pay taxes will get a check. The 'righteous wind' behind Ohbama will only increase. We won't rely on foreign oil any longer. The current college age crowd will be guaranteed Social Security. No more homeless. Did I miss anything?

I'd say that sounds pretty good, don't you?

[exUte]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

I don't know that anyone could be impressed with this Congress. They have done nothing extraordinary. Much of that is attributable to 3 political realities:

1. Bush is the president, and would veto significant legislative proposals;

2. Attempts to craft exciting legislative proposals expose the drafting party to more attention and to more criticism, forcing the Dems to be more defensive in the 2008 election (which they have been building up for) rather than offensive on policy matters; and

3. The House and Senate leadership is poor.

This isn't meant to excuse the House and Senate. They have been far from impressive, and on areas where they should have at least acted as obstacles to Bush, they failed as well (FISA being a good example, a vote on which I sharply disagree with Obama). At the end of the day, the political calculations appear to have been successful, however, as the Dems will control a larger majority in the House and have a realistic chance at 60 seats in the Senate. If they don't do anything with that, they would deserve the same treatment the Republicans have received of late.

be treated or heard by the 60 member majority. will they acquiese (sp?)?

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by exUte

be treated or heard by the 60 member majority. will they acquiese (sp?)?

If the Dems get 60 in the Senate, it won't be without the help of the blue dogs. If anything, getting 60 seats makes them more powerful and relevant. Sadly, it also makes Lieberman once again relevant.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

If the Dems get 60 in the Senate, it won't be without the help of the blue dogs. If anything, getting 60 seats makes them more powerful and relevant. Sadly, it also makes Lieberman once again relevant.

"Once again"? Meaning, you think in a 51-49 Senate he's irrelevant now?

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

"Once again"? Meaning, you think in a 51-49 Senate he's irrelevant now?

"Again" would refer to the next time he is relevant. He is relevant now, he would be relevant again. If the Senate has less than 60 Dems, Lieberman is almost irrelevant, and the Dems can afford to treat him as such.