Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The "It's hard work!" Republicans block 9/11 bill: "It's hard to reform".

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-20-04 05:34 PM
Original message
The "It's hard work!" Republicans block 9/11 bill: "It's hard to reform".
Edited on Sat Nov-20-04 05:36 PM by Bluebear
WASHINGTON - House Republicans on Saturday blocked passage of legislation addressing the Sept. 11 Commission's terror-fighting recommendations to President Bush, but GOP leaders said they would press the effort later this year.

However, the failure to get an agreement in Congress' postelection session most likely means the legislation will die for the year.

"It's hard to reform. It's hard to make changes," Speaker Dennis Hastert said as House members left town after a rare weekend session.

Democrats immediately blamed House Republicans. "The decision to pull the 9/11 bill is a clear and unambiguous failure by House Republicans to protect our nation, who chose ideology over our nation's well being," said House Democratic Caucus chairman Bob Menendez of New Jersey.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=2&u=/ap/20041120/ap_on_go_co/congress_intelligence_12
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Dropkick Donating Member (142 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-20-04 05:37 PM
Response to Original message
1. I'm getting really sick of hearing...
..."It's HARD" from the repukes. It's fucking WORK! It's not supposed to be easy (no matter what rich daddy let you believe growing up).

:nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fla Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-20-04 05:39 PM
Response to Original message
2. Disgusting...before the election they said they would support it.
Democrats need to speak out LOUDLY on this failure of the Repugs to pass this bill and the Repugs lack of comittment to improve security of our "Homeland". I hate that term, sounds so...hmmmm.....I don't know....nazi-esque.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-20-04 05:40 PM
Response to Original message
3. Of course we don't want to stop terrorism!
What the hell's wrong with these people??? That would mean we wouldn't live in fear to facilitate the next election, the defense industry might not make such big profits, the oil industry would never see $100/bbl oil, and OBL might not get another deal with Bushco to make videos. What the hell are people thinking wanting to implement the 9/11 commission report? Welcome to Bush's Amerrika.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-20-04 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Cnn said it was conservatives who were upset by some of the provisions
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-20-04 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. seems like they have a lot to agree upon yet!!


...."Our members want us to continue, the speaker wants us to continue to negotiate and so does the Senate, so we're going to continue to negotiate and see if we can get a bill in December," said House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas.

Delay said that Reps. Duncan Hunter, R-California, and James Sensenbrenner, R-Wisconsin, had not agreed to a compromise reached earlier Saturday and he wanted their approval before the House moved forward.

Hastert said Hunter had concerns that shifting some intelligence operations from the Pentagon could hurt combat troops. Hastert said lawmakers want to "make sure that our men and women who serve this country have the real-time intelligence that they need.".......


But critics led by Hunter said the bill would interfere with the chain of military command and potentially place troops at risk in combat. Other opponents, including Sensenbrenner, were unhappy that the bill did not go further to change immigration laws.....


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-20-04 06:00 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. "Potentially place troops at risk in combat"
And as we know, they are so "safe" now. After all, Bush promised Pat Robertson there would be NO casualties.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 02:17 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC