What the Republican Controlled Congress WILL (and Will NOT) Do

[b.c.]

I posted in another thread this op-ed of what the GOP will be up to, once they take control of both the House and the Senate, including repeal of the ACA, increased difficulty (for some) in voter registration, a hodgepodge of private or state driven, Food Stamp, Medicaid, Unemployment Insurance programs, relaxed environmental regulations, and stricter anti abortion laws:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richa...-only-_b_5935008.html?utm_hp_ref=barack-obama

Now comes more opinions and speculation as to how certain events will probably unfold when (as most pundits predict) that eventuality occurs, and hardly ANY of it, (even from the more conservative based sources who have plenty to say about what they HOPE the GOP will do), seems overly rosy or optimistic.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...358b00-589c-11e4-8264-deed989ae9a2_story.html

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/10/03/what-the-gop-will-do-if-it-wins-congress.html


Fact is, there's been a lot of press (AND data) on how people have been even MORE dissatisfied with Congress than the President, and with certain Republicans in PARTICULAR, yet many are prepared to "hold their noses and pull the lever" as one news source reported, in a some kind of "cutting off one's nose to spite one's face" "message sending" act of social (and possibly economic) hari kari.

In effect, they want “change”, but don't know who to change to, or even who to trust, but at least they'll get "change", and maybe some figure that at least with one party controlling Congress, something might ACTUALLY get accomplished, even if it’s all BAD.

It all pretty much amounts to a lot of bogus assed uninformed decision making, imo, much of it driven by political ads, no matter what the lie, and a lot of old fashioned appeal to baser emotions, angst at that guy in the W.H., and bigoted references of "they stand for them and not for us” –as some of the GOP ads go.

Question being, who are "them", and who are “US”.

Perhaps and examination of what and who the GOP has stood for in the past offers some CLUE.

For one, if you’re eligible or close to eligible for social security, you know that the GOP plan is for privatization and increasing the eligible age to 70. One must wonder how a party that has firmly stood to protect that wealthy 2% can develop a fair system based upon privatization for everybody else. Regardless, if you think you're just about in reach of retirement age, guess again. You’ll have to wait LONGER and for LESS.

And if you're one of those out of work and have been looking, you might in trouble too. They'll be no extension of benefits, and those you get will be cut back, as well as needed assistance for food benefits, and other assistance. They believe in austerity, for SOME at least.

Btw, they'll be another deficit battle again and the GOP will exact a hefty price in concessions from the President in exchange for what THEY want, including more tax shelters for the wealthy and corporations while cutting benefits for Romney’s so called 47%.

Meanwhile, any environmental regulation that'd protect you and your community from fracking, offshore drilling mishaps, factory runoff, and poisonous emissions will be dead in the water, along with those fish, because according to THEM, global warming is a myth anyway.

Looking for an increase in your minimum wage? Forget it. Republicans say that’ll cost JOBS. Equal pay for women? No. They don't mind that women earn 7 or every 10 dollars a man earns for the same job, $30,000.00 per year less than a 100 thousand salary, because according to THEM women earn less because they don't ASK for more, and women don't hold certain positions that men do because of "childbearing and household duties".

No surprise there from the party that has also blocked and defeated measures dealing with violence against women, and other women’s rights, while making options for family planning scarcer in places like Texas for example.

Immigration reform? According to the article below, “Nada”. Besides, why do you think Republicans in Texas, and elsewhere are making it more difficult for Latinos and other minorities to even REGISTER to vote?

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs...gration-reform-in-a-gop-senate-dont-bet-on-it

To hear the latest GOP ads tell it, they’re all for veteran’s benefits too. So why have they time and time again blocked veterans’ benefits bills designed to provide better health care, education, jobs to veterans??

Obamacare? As stated, they’ll repeal it, and my prediction is, they’ll drag their feet on any alternative plans, not that any they’d come UP with will be better, especially if each state is allowed to design its own plan, STILL with private insurers in control (a feature of Obamacare that, incidentally, was always part of the Republican plan anyway), only WITHOUT the benefit of Medicaid subsidies to offset the cost.

According to the link below, 10 million gained coverage under the ACA, and according to another study, MOST want the law fixed or remain unchanged, NOT repealed, but that won’t stop the GOP.

http://njbw.businessweek.com/articl...ed-millions-but-that-doesnt-mean-they-like-it

Gay rights? Well, don’t expect the GOP to be championing any of THOSE rights anytime soon either. They MAY however decide whether a business, a housing developer, or an organization can refuse, on the basis of their beliefs, gays and minorities.

http://news.yahoo.com/boehner-opposes-landmark-u-gays-rights-bill-dimming-221402939.html


The funny thing about it all is, polls show that a majority (of those polled) believe the GOP knows better how to handle the economy. They MIGHT, if you believe in TRICKLE DOWN, voodoo, economics. The Republican plan is to actually LOWER corporate tax rates.

http://money.cnn.com/2014/10/26/new...senate-taxes-spending-debt-ceiling/index.html



And if you’re counting on Obama to rein in their wilder antics (by power of the veto), for many reason’s he just MIGHT NOT. More on that later.

 

[YankeeJoe]

Man, I hope you're right and the Republicans do everything you say. God knows this country needs it. The loser in the White House is driving the country over a cliff....

 

[b.c.]

As I can recall, it was you who, awhile back, suggested I read a book and "stop trolling a big dick web site". So perhaps you care to enlighten US as to exactly how the so-called "loser" in the WH is driving the country over a cliff, in spite of the worst DO NOTHING CONGRESS in U.S. history.

Instead of spewing party line rhetoric, how exactly has he ALONE done this? And how exactly does the country "need" the GOP to do all of the above (short of SOME needing a swift kick up the bum, which is exactly what they'll GET from the GOP. And it might not be the ones who you'd think).

 

[YankeeJoe]

As I can recall, it was you who, awhile back, suggested I read a book and "stop trolling a big dick web site". So perhaps you care to enlighten US as to exactly how the so-called "loser" in the WH is driving the country over a cliff, in spite of the worst DO NOTHING CONGRESS in U.S. history.

Instead of spewing party line rhetoric, how exactly has he ALONE done this? And how exactly does the country "need" the GOP to do all of the above (short of SOME needing a swift kick up the bum, which is exactly what they'll GET from the GOP. And it might not be the ones who you'd think).

You're making the assumption that everyone on a big dick site is a left-wing loon. You assume wrong.
Look, if you just want to preach to the choir, be my guest; but you're wasting your time--the choir already agrees with you. Now, if you're trying to persuade others to see things your way, allow me to make a suggestion. Stop calling people "trolls" because they don't buy into your tired old talking points. And listen to what they are saying.
Now, my previous comment was designed to get under your skin, but my point is, what is the case that your are trying to make? Should we concede both houses of Congress to the Democrats? Why? What have they done to deserve that? The country is in worse shape than it was six years ago--by any measure. And our standing in the world is much lower. Maybe this doesn't matter to you, but it matters to many of us--more than you think.
And another point to consider. Many of the people you regard as racist, sexist, bigoted , homophobes are none of those things. In fact, more than a few of us--especially those of us with a lot of years under our belt--used to be on your side. We went to college and were exposed to the same ideas you espouse by a parade of left-wing profs. The pabulum you regurgitate on a regular basis in your long, tedious, bold-faced rants are nothing new;we've heard it all before. But you still might be able to persuade some people. But you won't win them over by calling them names and telling them to shut up.
Unless you want to just keep preaching to the choir....

 

[deleted213967]

The pabulum you regurgitate on a regular basis in your long, tedious, bold-faced rants are nothing new;we've heard it all before. But you still might be able to persuade some people. But you won't win them over by calling them names and telling them to shut up.
Unless you want to just keep preaching to the choir....

Allow me to dissent on one point:

Those long, tedious, bold-faced, utterly-predictable rants have indeed persuaded me that my prior allegiance to the Asinine Party was misguided...at best.

 

[h0neymustard]

"Instead of spewing party line rhetoric..."
Posts link to huffpo, lol.

 

[b.c.]

You're making the assumption that everyone on a big dick site is a left-wing loon. You assume wrong.
Look, if you just want to preach to the choir, be my guest; but you're wasting your time--the choir already agrees with you. Now, if you're trying to persuade others to see things your way, allow me to make a suggestion. Stop calling people "trolls" because they don't buy into your tired old talking points. And listen to what they are saying.

And we can start by YOUR listening to what is being said. I never assumed everyone on this site is a left-wing loon. I happen to BE a left winger (or left of center). Nor have I called you a troll. On the contrary, I was reminding YOU, that YOU had said that of ME. See:

http://www.lpsg.com/400341-dog-whistle-politics-2.html#post5352676

Now, my previous comment was designed to get under your skin, but my point is, what is the case that your are trying to make? Should we concede both houses of Congress to the Democrats? Why? What have they done to deserve that? The country is in worse shape than it was six years ago--by any measure. And our standing in the world is much lower. Maybe this doesn't matter to you, but it matters to many of us--more than you think.

To answer your first question, what has the GOP done, to concede both houses of Congress to THEM?

Aside from block, obstruct, impede, filibuster, and say NO to everything without much by way of proposals of their own??

And by whose measure is the country in worse shape than six years ago. MANY would beg to differ. And IF it were, is that "loser" in the White House (as you called him) SOLELY to blame??

And what in particular, would you (or the GOP, for that matter) have done regarding our "standing in the world" (again, based upon misinformation from the right - by many estimates, it's BETTER than it was under Bush)?

Would the GOP have troops in Iraq by now? the Ukraine?? WILL they? We'll see, I guess.

And another point to consider. Many of the people you regard as racist, sexist, bigoted , homophobes are none of those things. In fact, more than a few of us--especially those of us with a lot of years under our belt--used to be on your side.

How I regard people is based upon what they say, what they defend, and what they dismiss. In due time, all becomes quite apparent, disguise it though they may. Doubtful, though, many of them EVER used to be on "my side" whatever you think THAT is.

We went to college and were exposed to the same ideas you espouse by a parade of left-wing profs. The pabulum you regurgitate on a regular basis in your long, tedious, bold-faced rants are nothing new;we've heard it all before.

Well, there you have it. I was exposed to various ideas by a parade of professors as well, and have never concluded them to be left or right winged, nor concluded all I was told was "pabulum" [sic]. And if everything contrary to your beliefs amounts to that, then, no, you were NEVER on "my side".

But you still might be able to persuade some people. But you won't win them over by calling them names and telling them to shut up.
Unless you want to just keep preaching to the choir....

Again, reread my reply to YOU. I didn't tell you to "shut up". One the CONTRARY, I asked you to EXPLAIN why you think all of the above possible actions by the GOP would be good for the country.

But, if this is your way of ducking out on the answer, be my guest.

 

[b.c.]

Allow me to dissent on one point:

Those long, tedious, bold-faced, utterly-predictable rants have indeed persuaded me that my prior allegiance to the Asinine Party was misguided...at best.

I'll entertain you for a moment to make one point. Way back (thousand posts or so) I once wrote that if my personal situation were any basis, I probably SHOULD be about as conservative as they come.

Unfortunately I just happen to hate evil s*** and I just happen to believe ideology based upon hate, bigotry, and selfishness is indeed evil s****. My op, mind you.

In truth, I sometimes find myself wondering what does it feel like to know you're on the wrong side... i.e. the side who WON'T "do the right thing"?

I guess the answer to that question lies somewhere between not knowing and not particularly caring.

Be that as it may, I say all that to say this: Between you or me, who do you think stands most to lose under conservative ideology?

(Hint: it won't be who you'd think.)

 

[Bama15]

I posted in another thread this op-ed of what the GOP will be up to, once they take control of both the House and the Senate, including repeal of the ACA, increased difficulty (for some) in voter registration, a hodgepodge of private or state driven, Food Stamp, Medicaid, Unemployment Insurance programs, relaxed environmental regulations, and stricter anti abortion laws:

A GOP Senate - Obama's Only Path To Greatness | Richard Greener

Now comes more opinions and speculation as to how certain events will probably unfold when (as most pundits predict) that eventuality occurs, and hardly ANY of it, (even from the more conservative based sources who have plenty to say about what they HOPE the GOP will do), seems overly rosy or optimistic.

The catastrophes that a GOP-controlled Congress would bring - The Washington Post

What the GOP Will Do If It Wins Congress - The Daily Beast


Fact is, there's been a lot of press (AND data) on how people have been even MORE dissatisfied with Congress than the President, and with certain Republicans in PARTICULAR, yet many are prepared to "hold their noses and pull the lever" as one news source reported, in a some kind of "cutting off one's nose to spite one's face" "message sending" act of social (and possibly economic) hari kari.

In effect, they want “change”, but don't know who to change to, or even who to trust, but at least they'll get "change", and maybe some figure that at least with one party controlling Congress, something might ACTUALLY get accomplished, even if it’s all BAD.

It all pretty much amounts to a lot of bogus assed uninformed decision making, imo, much of it driven by political ads, no matter what the lie, and a lot of old fashioned appeal to baser emotions, angst at that guy in the W.H., and bigoted references of "they stand for them and not for us” –as some of the GOP ads go.

Question being, who are "them", and who are “US”.

Perhaps and examination of what and who the GOP has stood for in the past offers some CLUE.

For one, if you’re eligible or close to eligible for social security, you know that the GOP plan is for privatization and increasing the eligible age to 70. One must wonder how a party that has firmly stood to protect that wealthy 2% can develop a fair system based upon privatization for everybody else. Regardless, if you think you're just about in reach of retirement age, guess again. You’ll have to wait LONGER and for LESS.

And if you're one of those out of work and have been looking, you might in trouble too. They'll be no extension of benefits, and those you get will be cut back, as well as needed assistance for food benefits, and other assistance. They believe in austerity, for SOME at least.

Btw, they'll be another deficit battle again and the GOP will exact a hefty price in concessions from the President in exchange for what THEY want, including more tax shelters for the wealthy and corporations while cutting benefits for Romney’s so called 47%.

Meanwhile, any environmental regulation that'd protect you and your community from fracking, offshore drilling mishaps, factory runoff, and poisonous emissions will be dead in the water, along with those fish, because according to THEM, global warming is a myth anyway.

Looking for an increase in your minimum wage? Forget it. Republicans say that’ll cost JOBS. Equal pay for women? No. They don't mind that women earn 7 or every 10 dollars a man earns for the same job, $30,000.00 per year less than a 100 thousand salary, because according to THEM women earn less because they don't ASK for more, and women don't hold certain positions that men do because of "childbearing and household duties".

No surprise there from the party that has also blocked and defeated measures dealing with violence against women, and other women’s rights, while making options for family planning scarcer in places like Texas for example.

Immigration reform? According to the article below, “Nada”. Besides, why do you think Republicans in Texas, and elsewhere are making it more difficult for Latinos and other minorities to even REGISTER to vote?

Immigration Reform in a GOP Senate? Don't Bet on it. - US News

To hear the latest GOP ads tell it, they’re all for veteran’s benefits too. So why have they time and time again blocked veterans’ benefits bills designed to provide better health care, education, jobs to veterans??

Obamacare? As stated, they’ll repeal it, and my prediction is, they’ll drag their feet on any alternative plans, not that any they’d come UP with will be better, especially if each state is allowed to design its own plan, STILL with private insurers in control (a feature of Obamacare that, incidentally, was always part of the Republican plan anyway), only WITHOUT the benefit of Medicaid subsidies to offset the cost.

According to the link below, 10 million gained coverage under the ACA, and according to another study, MOST want the law fixed or remain unchanged, NOT repealed, but that won’t stop the GOP.

Obamacare Insured Millions, but That Doesn't Mean They Like It - Businessweek

Gay rights? Well, don’t expect the GOP to be championing any of THOSE rights anytime soon either. They MAY however decide whether a business, a housing developer, or an organization can refuse, on the basis of their beliefs, gays and minorities.

Boehner opposes landmark U.S. gay-rights bill, dimming its chances


The funny thing about it all is, polls show that a majority (of those polled) believe the GOP knows better how to handle the economy. They MIGHT, if you believe in TRICKLE DOWN, voodoo, economics. The Republican plan is to actually LOWER corporate tax rates.

Taxes and spending: What happens if Republicans win the Senate - Oct. 26, 2014



And if you’re counting on Obama to rein in their wilder antics (by power of the veto), for many reason’s he just MIGHT NOT. More on that later.

You forgot to quote the dailykos, or mediamatters in your rant against the GOP.

 

[vince]

Pardon, but I'm still dusting myself off from rolling around on the floor laughing...The country is worse off than it was six years ago? Who in their right mind would think that? You have to be eating the Kool-Aid raw, right out of the packet.

Six years ago would have been autumn 2008. Remember? American banks were in meltdown and GWBush signed a 700 billion dollar bailout. AIG lost 95% of it's value and was removed from the DJIA. The Dow crashed and lost 20% of it's value in one week in October.

I could go on and on. Jobs- 500,000 per month LOST. Unemployment rate increased from 6.8 to 7.2 in the month of November alone. In 2008, 3.5 million workers were added to the jobless rolls. Job losses peaked out in March 2009 and that rate declined every month for a year until the US economy started to slowly generate some jobs.

I am no fan of Obama. But I hate liars even more and that what any revisionist is. Or self-deluded.

Selfishly, I know that the Republicans will be good for my finances. If they get control of the American economy again, I will sell my investments and wait for the inevitable buying opportunity (that one will be a gift Klingsor :wink. That last Republican recession was really profitable for those with the cash and nerve to get in. I mean FoMoCo at $2.18?? That was a no brainer! Cat went from 27.60 to 95.13 when I sold it. Last year my brothers and I unloaded the three houses we bought down in the Ponzi State in Tampa for a 70% profit.

Get ready for a rocky ride America! I hope ya'll have something under the mattress.

 

[b.c.]

You forgot to quote the dailykos, or mediamatters in your rant against the GOP.

Really??? With all the issues noted above, THAT'S the best you can muster? Some sad-a&&ed snark about the DailyKos??

I haven't mentioned them, but y'all keep bringing them up. They must've touched some right winged nerve BIG TIME.

 

[Klingsor]

I'm confused. Other than YankeeJoe's sweeping, "I hope the Republicans do everything you say," none of the dissenters here have addressed the content of b.c.'s post.

Do you believe the Republicans will do (or try to do) all these things?
Do you support such efforts?

That seems like the more pertinent conversation.

 

[ConanTheBarber]

^^^^^
This.

 

[deleted213967]

I'm confused. Other than YankeeJoe's sweeping, "I hope the Republicans do everything you say," none of the dissenters here have addressed the content of b.c.'s post.

Do you believe the Republicans will do (or try to do) all these things?
Do you support such efforts?

That seems like the more pertinent conversation.

1. Conservatives have not yet won the US Senate. I have entertained a scenario wherein the chamber is split 50-50 and BidenTheClown finally becomes a useful idiot to the regime.

Come to think of it, Biden makes Obama look good, which is probably why O picked him...but that's only a personal impression.



2. If and only if conservatives indeed control the Legislative branch, the narrative will switch from GOP = Party of "No" to POTUS = President of "No".

Incidentally, I never understood why being the Party of No was a problem.

Saying "No" is the job of the opposition. Its definition even...

The GOP will likely push the least controversial measures to Obama's desk, such as the Keystone Pipeline, which is a no-brainer, except for the eco-terrorist wing of the Left.

They know that Obama will veto a great deal of the measures (some cited by the OP), but it is their job to try and sell the electorate on their merit still, because 2016 is around the corner.

As for the retirement age push to 70, although it is long overdue and should not even be a political issue (is is only an accounting issue, but then again...finance is not the left's forte), I don't believe any one on the right will have the cajones to advance it.

 

[YankeeJoe]

1. Conservatives have not yet won the US Senate. I have entertained a scenario wherein the chamber is split 50-50 and BidenTheClown finally becomes a useful idiot to the regime.

Come to think of it, Biden makes Obama look good, which is probably why O picked him...but that's only a personal impression.



2. If and only if conservatives indeed control the Legislative branch, the narrative will switch from GOP = Party of "No" to POTUS = President of "No".

Incidentally, I never understood why being the Party of No was a problem.

Saying "No" is the job of the opposition. Its definition even...

The GOP will likely push the least controversial measures to Obama's desk, such as the Keystone Pipeline, which is a no-brainer, except for the eco-terrorist wing of the Left.

They know that Obama will veto a great deal of the measures (some cited by the OP), but it is their job to try and sell the electorate on their merit still, because 2016 is around the corner.

As for the retirement age push to 70, although it is long overdue and should not even be a political issue (is is only an accounting issue, but then again...finance is not the left's forte), I don't believe any one on the right will have the cajones to advance it.

This is true, and frankly, on many issues--amnesty being just one--the Republicans (or at least the leadership, if not the rank and file) are in lockstep with Obama. Plenty of Chamber of Commerce -type Republicans want a vast pool of cheap Mexican labor and are willing to make a Faustian bargain with the Democrats ( " We get the cheap labor--the Dems get the votes") and the GOP is gun shy about appearing racist or xenophobic (which they are accused of being anyway.)
The GOP is far from perfect and they are barely better than the Democrats on this and many other issues. Nonetheless, I believe that they are more competent than Democrats--and their feet are always held to the fire by the media--which lets Obama skate on EVERYTHING.
And call me deluded ( I know b.c. will), but I believe things would be much better with Mitt Romney at the helm than Obama. The man actually has experience RUNNING things and would no doubt fill his cabinet with competent people, not political hacks and flacks....

 

[deleted15807]

Pardon, but I'm still dusting myself off from rolling around on the floor laughing...The country is worse off than it was six years ago? Who in their right mind would think that? You have to be eating the Kool-Aid raw, right out of the packet.

Welcome to the United States of Amnesia.

The GOP has become an insurgent outlier in American politics. It is ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition.

 

[ConanTheBarber]

The GOP has become an insurgent outlier in American politics. It is ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition.

And yet, as backward and regressive as it is, it may well take over the senate -- only to implement policies that will have them sweetly booted out of office in 2016.
Your American politics are strange indeed.

 

[ConanTheBarber]

The GOP will likely push the least controversial measures to Obama's desk, such as the Keystone Pipeline, which is a no-brainer, except for the eco-terrorist wing of the Left.

I don't understand why conservatives are sooooo deaf to the dangers of climate change.
And with the US's current surging oil production, is the pipeline even needed, from an American perspective?

As for the retirement age push to 70, although it is long overdue and should not even be a political issue (it is only an accounting issue, but then again...finance is not the left's forte), I don't believe any one on the right will have the cajones to advance it.

If it takes cajones to advance it, it is vastly more than an accounting issue.

 

[deleted213967]

I don't understand why conservatives are sooooo deaf to the dangers of climate change.
And with the US's current surging oil production, is the pipeline even needed, from an American perspective?


If it takes cajones to advance it, it is vastly more than an accounting issue.

Wouldn't the Keystone Pipeline benefit you gringos north of the border?

Many Democrats and certainly a large portion of the electorate, regardless of political inclination, support the pipeline project.

I am not sure how it suddenly became a conservative-only idea.

Certainly the shrillest opponents are the eco-terrorists on the far left, but other traditionally leftist constituents (unions) have largely supported the initiative.

 

[b.c.]

This is true, and frankly, on many issues--amnesty being just one--the Republicans (or at least the leadership, if not the rank and file) are in lockstep with Obama. Plenty of Chamber of Commerce -type Republicans want a vast pool of cheap Mexican labor and are willing to make a Faustian bargain with the Democrats ( " We get the cheap labor--the Dems get the votes") and the GOP is gun shy about appearing racist or xenophobic (which they are accused of being anyway.)

The GOP is far from perfect and they are barely better than the Democrats on this and many other issues. Nonetheless, I believe that they are more competent than Democrats--and their feet are always held to the fire by the media--which lets Obama skate on EVERYTHING.

And call me deluded ( I know b.c. will), but I believe things would be much better with Mitt Romney at the helm than Obama. The man actually has experience RUNNING things and would no doubt fill his cabinet with competent people, not political hacks and flacks....

Funny thing is, Obama reached "across the aisle" and appointed people from both the business sector and those not exactly "liberal".

As for how well Romney would've better run things, that too is speculation. Some among us (so-called liberals) have in fact been at times (less and more) critical of Obama, but more so because of his rather naive approaches at compromise and cooperation, with opponents (at home and abroad) who were obviously interested in NEITHER. Some among us, for example, believe the ACA didn't go far enough, in that it incorporated elements from Romney's/the GOP's own plan.

Fact is, any assessment of what Romney may have done is WHOLLY undermined by the party ideology and platform upon which his candidacy (and presidency) would've been based, which is and was a trickle down economics concept by which the needs of the FEW (corporate America and the wealthiest among us) outweigh the needs of most everyone ELSE; the theory being that abundance of wealth and prosperity for the "upper crust" will somehow trickle down to the benefit of the middle class and poorest among us.

Statistics show that it never has, and never WILL.

So when someone says that a complete GOP takeover of Congress would be good for the country, and they hope all fears (and speculation) come to pass, one HAS to wonder why and what good can they possibly see coming of it??

Lest we forget, let us review what the GOP has OPPOSED (courtesy of Sargon's thread "Blocked" and subsequent comments therein):

Blocked


Recovery and Reinvestment Act, blocked

Small Business Job Act, blocked

Veterans Jobs Bill, blocked

American Jobs Act, blocked

Extension to Unemployment Benefits, blocked

Wall Street Reform Bill, blocked

Immigration Reform, blocked

Emergency Funding Border Bill, blocked

Political Ad Disclosure, blocked

Affordable Care Act – GOP voted 50 PLUS times to repeal it

Tax On Companies Shipping Jobs Overseas, blocked

Repeal of Don't Act Don't Tell — Blocked MULTIPLE times

Healthcare for 9/11 First Responders, blocked

Benefits for Homeless Veterans, blocked

Oil Spill Liability, blocked

Dream Act, blocked

Minimum Wage Increase, blocked

Unemployment Insurance Extension – Blocked

Bill Aimed at Curbing Wage Theft – Blocked

Student Loan Refinancing Bill – Blocked

Veterans Education, Jobs, and Health Benefits Bill, blocked

Employment Non Discrimination Act (which would have made it illegal to discriminate in the hiring of gays), blocked

Anti—Rape Amendment – GOP blocked that, and cast some 55 anti women votes for policies that threaten to undermine women's health and defund institutions that provide support for women.

Paycheck Fairness Act (that provided for equal pay for women), blocked FOUR TIMES

Buffet Rule (which would have required that wealthy 1% to pay the same percentage of their income in taxes that those of the middle class do), blocked

GOP obstruction of presidential appointments and judicial nominees, resulting in long term vacancies in judgeships

GOP Government Shut Down – in efforts to defund the ACA