Hey Dave, Peter Pan is looking for you

He wants to sniff some more Glue

Not sure how the Republicans can help out when it's a closed-door, Democrat-only, meeting....

After getting burnt several times by the Republican's I suspect Harry does not see any support from them so why bother. They will only pretend to be on board to change their mind later. They have done this several times so why should we now at this date in time believe they would behave any other way.

Part of the problem is also (I am sorry to say) is the lack of backbones in the DEM's. They need to learn to play the same game that the republican's are so good at. They (the DEM'S) have a meeting today an what happens? They schedule another meeting. We can't even agree among ourselves. Neither the Republican's nor the DEM's are winning here. The American people are the losers. You and me both.

I have to ask, partly because I'm a Republican, but also because I'm looking for someone to give me a reasonable explanation. Why would Republicans help, if they are excluded right from the beginning? I don't like the idea that 60 is a majority, but those are the rules of the Senate apparently, but more importantly, why does Senator Reid see the need to call his targets "Brave Republicans"? Why not invite the Republicans to the table, have open and frank discussion of issues, and potential resolutions, and work in a bi-partisan fashion? Inviting only his own caucus isn't a confidence building measure for 41 Republican Senators, and his efforts to pick off one or two Republicans in HCR, and now with Energy/climate change is a travesty in terms of bi-partisan cooperation. Start fresh, it's new legislation, and maybe just maybe, he'll get enough support from the Republicans to actually call it a piece of bi-partisan legislation.

No vitriol please, no talking points, tell me why we need to start off in such a negative fashion.

My humble opinion: Why invite them. They are not going to be of any help. Since President Obamba was elected, that party has done everything to obstruct any forward movement on behalf of any and all but themselves. They'd rather shoot themselves in the foot that allow that Black President to win any concession.

The Republican Party has staunchly opposed everything that would benefit other than Wall Street, Big Business or the Oil Companies.

Only a crazy person repeats the same action over and over again with the same result and each time expect another reaction. Only a fool would invite them to sit in on anything. Look at today!

Hi Living, Actually, it is not a matter of 'starting out' this way, the Repubs have consistently, and loudly, proclaimed that they will NOT help the Dems. They were given every chance to help craft the HCR and other legislation, only to have the Repubs block, delay and try to bury any and all of it. It is no longer a matter of trying to work with an opposition loyal to the US, it is a matter of dealing with a group that is so bent on their political power plays that they have NO interest in advancing ANY of Obama/Dem's programs, even if they are exactly the same laws and/or bills that the repubs have put forth in the past. From all I have seen the repubs are not at all interested in frank, open discussions about ANYTHING that can advance the Dem's in any way shape or form. This is very different than how the Repubs treated them during the Bush years, the Repubs did not allow the Dems to affect bills, bring up bills, would not allow them to add amendments...there was no bi-partisanship from them whatsoever, remember: They were the Deciders and rubberstamped everything that the Decider In Chief wanted, whether the Dems agreed or not didn't matter one whit, they were overridden, often by bending the rules of the House and Senate to the breaking point to do so. After losing control of Congress the Repubs all but declared war on Obama and have steadfastly refused to come on board with hardly ANYTHING unless it was absolutely vital for them and their re-election chances or for their buddies in the Oil and Banking Industries. I would like to see the Repubs and Dems working together too, but at this point, with the repubs threatening to filibuster everything, with their evoking twisted and convoluted ways of hanging up the proceedings of even vanilla-level bills and appointments just shows that the Repubs have no intention of 'coming onboard' and so the Dems are going to Have to 'go it alone'. Revamping the way that we produce and use energy in this nation is vitally important for our Economy, Ecology, National Security and general wellbeing of this Nation and can be put off no longer.

Bi-partisanship is great, and Obama and the Dems have tried that, to no avail, and so, since the Repubs have decided to sit on their hands, the Dems have no choice but to get this legislation done without them. It is sad, but the Repubs have painted themselves into this corner, but the legislation and actual running of this Nation must go on.

I thank both of you (BHonest and LDBean), for the opinions/explanations, and I'll pose this question:

If/when the Republicans are in the majority, what do you think they will do, if this is the way the Democrats treat them now? I've been having this conversation with several others on various threads here, and my point is actually, that someone has to break the cycle, or as inevitably as the sun rising, the Republicans will most likely do the same thing to the Democrats. "Getting even" for poor treatment previously is the human reaction, however immature. We the people don't need that from our elected officials, we need adults that are able to rise above the tit for tat playground mentality, and actually work together for the common good.

I've said several times that the primary lesson the Republicans should learn from being in the minority, is how it feels to be excluded, and to make every effort to include the Democrats, if and when the Republicans are back in the majority. Decisions such as these by Senator Reid don't build any sense of a shared role in shaping legislation, nor do they give Republicans any ownership of, or responsibility for, whatever legislation is passed. I don't honestly agree with the assumption above, that the Republicans are out to torpedo the Democrats, that's more of a talking point to me, but that's an opinion, and not stated as a fact.

LD, I think far too much is made of the "Black President", and the assumption that the opposition to his policies is because he's black. I grew up in the border states (just south of the Mason Dixon line), and to be honest, I couldn't care less that he's black, and I would hope that the vast majority of Americans feel the same. I voted for him, and black didn't have anything to do with it, anymore than my vote for McCain would have been because he's white. You didn't do it, and I appreciate that, but many on this site will immediately throw "racist" into the wind, as soon as someone expresses opposition to a policy proposal by the President. It's not racist to object to a policy, and that comment is no more honest than calling someone a "socialist", or a "marxist" because you don't like the policy.

Whether you believe in the HCR legislation or not, I can't believe that anyone thinks the process that was followed in either the House or the Senate was an example of "best practices" by our political leaders. It may have been what was necessary to pass legislation, but speaking simply as an American, not a Republican, I was amazed at the deceit coming from both parties. Do I think that the end result justified the means? Not on a bet. I believe, and time will tell whether it's true or not, that virtually all private employers will drop their coverage in a relatively short time frame, and we'll all be in the private market. I'm a financial analyst for a firm of roughly 600 people, guess what I'm working on, "What's the impact on the firm, if we drop the coverage and pay the fines?" That's simply a financial cost, we also have to analyze the cost to the morale of the employees, and decide if we can obtain staff without offering health coverage, but if we're doing this, you can bet that our competitors are doing it as well. I would think it would have been more honest in the process to say, "We're going to offer insurance coverage to 30 million Americans, and this is the cost. To cover that cost, we're going to raise taxes in the following manner". Would that fly, probably not, so we disingenuously say we've found $500 Billion in savings from Medicare/Medicade fraud. Really? Why not use that $500 billion in savings to expand Medicare to cover those that were currently not covered? Big pharma is going to contribute 100 Billion (I think). Is that out of the goodness of their hearts? Probably not, probably it's going to come at the expense of the cost of prescription drugs. Taxes on medical devises, same thing, they're ultimately going to be passed onto the consumer, you and me. Taxing tanning? Okay, that one's just funny, how much will that really generate in revenue? Thankfully I live in California, and get my sun from mowing the lawn, going to the beach, doing just about anything outdoors, so the impact of that on me is at best minimal.

Okay, I'm off the soapbox now. One last point, Senator Reid's comment about a few "Brave Republicans" reminds me of his efforts to pick off Senators Snowe, or Collins, during the HCR process so he could have a veneer of bi-partisanship. This smacks of exactly the same thing, and it seems to me to be a continuation of the cycle, not an attempt to end the cycle.

I thank you both for your responses, and I hope I don't offend you with my reply.

Veneer of bi-partisanship? They were the only Republicans willing to stick a toe in the Health-care debate. A bill modeled on the Romney Mass. plan and the death panels amendment came from a Republican. The President and the Dems tried, but yes, they wanted HCR and they were not going to back off because the minority in congress were playing sore loser.

Look at how they acted when Newt Gingrich lead the revolution and when they had the majority under Bush. We don't need the future to see that the Republicans will be closing the Dems out. They already have.

5 Cents,

You're making my point for me, your commentary is straight out of the tit for tat playbook. What I'm asking the Democrats to do is break the cycle, if they don't, and the Republicans become the majority again, I'm asking them to break the cycle. Someone has to do it, or we'll be locked into the same process from now until a group of legislators (hopefully both parties and center of the road), actually gathers their courage, and steps up. I don't care if it's the Democrats that break the cycle, or the Republicans, my point is that it has to be done to close out the recriminations, and allow the process to return to a more normalized situation. We (Republicans) have excluded you (Democrats) from the process, and now you're returning the favor. I get it, payback is a (fill in the blank). Payback needs to end, or the country as a whole will continue to suffer, you'll have more and more of the "You lie", or perhaps "The Republican Health Care Plan is for you to die", rhetoric, and no significant cooperation between parties. I personally believe (probably because I try to be a centerist) that the best legislation comes from the center, with both parties having input, and both parties reasonably content with the legislation proposed, not ecstatic, but reasonably content. When that happens you don't see inflammatory rhetoric, and you don't see gloating on the part of either party. Right now, the Democrats are in control, previously Republicans were. There was chest beating on the part of the Republicans previously, there's chest beating on the part of the Democrats now. My point is pretty simple, be adults, work together, find a better solution by cooperating.

How can we include them when they don't want to play? Sit on our hands and not govern until what....?

I think this president has tried. Especially with HCR. I don't think it is tit for tat. I think the Dems want to accompish something and they are tired of the lies and flat out obstanancy from the right.

How can we get the GOP off the sidelines? Wait until they are the majority again?

Getting them off the sidelines is easy, invite them into the meetings from the beginning. If they refuse to play, that's another point for the Democrats, and a clear indicator of intransigence. If however, as I hope, the Republicans agree to enter into the discussions, you've answered your first question, and potentially, put a real opportunity for a bipartisan bill on the table. I don't expect the Democrats to abdicate their responsibility for governance, clearly, the Democrats won the election, and have the right, and the responsibility, to govern. But if the object is to get one Republican to agree to a program so that the magic number of sixty is met, it's possible, but not very useful with respect to restoring functionality to the Senate in this case, but government in general as well.

Right now, in my opinion, trust between the parties doesn't exist. Didn't exist when the Republicans were in the majority, doesn't exist now. Trust gets built one brick at a time, this could be an opportunity perhaps to build a little trust, rather than animosity, but it requires someone to make the opportunity available, which, given that the Democrats have the majority, means that the Democrats have to take that step. If we wait until the Republicans have the majority, if and when that happens, then the Republicans will have to take that step. The longer it goes on, the less likely that anyone will try to bridge the gap.

Where did that come from? No one expects the transition to be rapid or anytime soon ~ it will be decades to accomplish. If we don't start now~ When?

The economy is screwed already. And yes, I will blame big business for DECIDING to put their bottom line ahead of this countries urgent need. It is easier to choose profit over the right thing ~ Our government did this ~ decades of relaxed trade agreements to help other countries economies, bring them up from the bottom. Outsourcing for profit. Not caring Americans were being put out of work. Damning us when unemployment keeps us from spending to maintain our own standard of living.

It's our fault, we don't support our own manufacturers. WALMART! Put everyone of our mega companies out of business. You cannot buy American made anything. The industries have been outsourced. We did it by purchasing at WalMart instead of the American Corporation.

Yeah, I blame Big Business. They've sold American to foreign investors that hate us.

Just out of curiosity, I googled "Barry and racist" and google came back with a whole slew of sites that indicate the diminutive 'Barry' is racist code for Obama. I actually knew that intuitively because of other posts I've seen using the name Barry, but didn't realize it was so well documented in articles and social analysis. There's a lot of racist code out there, Barry being only one that we can use to identify racists on these threads. I'm sure most of you know those words when you see them. I hadn't seen 'Bammy' before, but that's almost too obvious. I'm afraid ole Juven has outed himself. LOL!

Juven,

Good question. I do not know where they are. If you find out please join them.