This Toon should run in every "Blue dog's" home newspaper

And just for the record, my pit bulls never wore lipstick. At least not when I was around.

K&R

Sometimes a cartoon gets the idea across better than a thousand words.

:evilgrin:




:kick:

What you said was mostly not true. Most of the Democrats voting for the Iraq war and the Bush tax cuts were Blue Dogs. You do know that a majority of House Democrats, lead by Dennis Kucinich, voted against the Iraq war. Most of the Democrats on the other side? - Blue Dogs. You do know that the Bush tax cuts of 2003 passed the Senate by a vote of 51-50. The number of Democratic Senators voting for it = 0.

Those two things are facts. You can look them up. What you posted was Naderesque anti-Democratic-Party spin.

And DU is a real no spin zone.

was mostly not true" regarding my statement "other Dems voted for Military Spending, Bush Tax Cuts, & Iraq War, not just Blue Dogs".

So you don't waste too much time, 82 House Democrats and 29 Senate Democrats voted for the bill giving Bush authority to launch his unilateral war on Iraq.

ON EDIT ADD: link to cited stats http://www.wrmea.com/archives/december02/0212022.html

first of all, most House Democrats voted against the Iraq war.

Here's the vote

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2002/roll455.xml

82 voted for it and there are 50 some members of the blue dog coalition (some of them might have been elected in 2006 and thus not be part of the vote in 2002)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Dog_Coalition

See the over-lap there Berry, Bishop, Boswell, Boyd, Carson, Davis, Cramer, Ford, Gordon, Sandlin, Harman, Hill, Holden, Matheson, McIntyre, Moore, Peterson, Pomeroy, Ross, Schiff, Tanner, Taylor, Hall, Lampson, Lucas, Stenholm, and Turner all voted for the war.

What about Blue Dogs voting against the war

Condit, Baca, Davis, Sanchez, Scott, Thompson, Lipinski,

So 126 against, 119 of them non Blue Dogs. 82 for, 55 of them non Blue Dogs.

Blue Dogs voted for the war 27-7, and other Democrats voted against the war 119-55. What you said was true for only 31.6% of house Democrats and it was untrue for 68.3% of House Democrats. I call something that is 68.3% untrue, MOSTLY untrue. Blue Dogs made up 16% of all Democrats but they made up 33% of Democrats voting for the war.

Shall we look at the Bush tax cuts of 2001?

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2001/roll149.xml 153 Democrats voted against it and only 28 for it.

The names of the 28 look kinda familiar, I see Moore, Schiff, Sandlin, Carson, Cramer, Condit, Hall, Gordon, Turner. In the Senate I see 31 voting against it and only 12 Democrats voting for it. With 5 Democrats not present and 2 not voting it would appear that only 76% of Democrats voted against it - a vast majority.

See link below that easily disproves your assertion.

http://www.lorettasanchez.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=26&Itemid=23

:kick:

Loving it. Need the same cartoon for "Fiscally conservative Republicans"

:thumbsup:

Thanks, n2doc.

:patriot: You wield TOONs as a weapon almost as surely as the formidable Mr. Fish! :hide:

:kick: and rec

:rofl:

Can't wait for that POS to be voted out.

would love to see what the amounts are in each of these cases...
to add clarity of how much $$$ is being allocated for each.

the Obama plan for Health Care?

Enabler RepubliDems need to get to STEPPIN.

...to the federal government.

The original House bill said that doctors would be paid at Medicare rates + 5 percent in the public option.

The Blue Dogs insisted that the public option negotiate prices separately, meaning that prices will be much higher.

If it is more expensive, it strengthens their justification for opposing it.

:kick:

good stuff.

it out and send it to my Rep.

single payer is really the most fiscally conservative plan out there, and the public option is more fiscally conservative than not having a public option.

:thumbsup:

With them hauling off the dogs, and Obama dumping a set of dog tags in the waste basket...

Hopefully ultimately that is the symbolism that will really get played out!

We have no need for these pain in the asses!

was humping the leg of a health care lobbyist, who is offering a doggie biscuit with a $ sign on it. The dog is panting "yes, yes, yes!!" That about sums it up.

This one is good too.

Someone will have it.

K & R

won't like this, he's threatening Democrats for going after these numbnutz.

arne duncan too.

KNR!

cartoon lays them bare.

that we get unvarnished, albeit, painfully amusing, truth?

Totally factual.

Where the hell have they been before - sleeping on the job. Now all of a sudden they're concerned about the costs - after 8 years of Bush regime raiding the treasury. Bad dogs, bad blue dogs!

:grr:

Sonia

also, remember, it wasn't just blue dogs who went along with all of these items.

Things that make ya go hmm...

Love it!

Why are they called "blue dogs" anyway? I've always wondered about that.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Imagine my embarrassment when I discovered it was a cartoon.

PERFECT!:thumbsup: :dem: :kick: :headbang:

their corporations won't allow them to run such ads, they'll be considered "incendiary", a bunch of numbnutz.