Start A Petition

113th Congress House Calendar (First Session) (VIDEO)

US Politics & Gov't  (tags: congress, corruption, ethics, government, elections, republicans )

- 2024 days ago -
Another short year for another do nothing congress.

Select names from your address book   |   Help

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.


Kit B (276)
Saturday December 1, 2012, 4:29 pm

Interesting that Maddow didn't say who ran against Truman as a third party candidate, that was Henry Wallace.

If you or I went to work day after day, or on days we could even be bothered to show up, I do believe we would be fired. This worthless collection of "do nothing" obstructionist need to be fired.


Jason S (50)
Saturday December 1, 2012, 4:36 pm
good posting, thanks

roxy H (350)
Saturday December 1, 2012, 4:50 pm
oooo they were busy passing piss ass gun laws and hunts and animal killing laws, and busting into public land they weren't doing nothing... they were sticking their asses into plenty of shit

Susanne R (235)
Saturday December 1, 2012, 9:16 pm
If the House of Representatives plans to work 126 days in 2013 and be off for 239, I think they should give up their "salaried" status in favor of an "hourly" status. That would be a nice spending cut. Let's face it, they don't do anything other than filibuster when they're working anyway. Obstructionism can be accomplished by not being there, so they don't have to show up at all!

Past Member (0)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 2:10 am

Diane O (194)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 3:10 am
Four more years of gridlock. You folks have short memories. Obama had a democratic congress for two full years during his first term and he still had gridlock. His own democrats wouldn't pass his budget. Imagine that those do nothin DEMOCRATS. Not passing Obama's budget? They should be fired. I mean, whose side are they on?

Seems our liberals are practicing "selective memory" again.

The American people, in November 2010, cast their votes to remove the spending democrats in congress and replace them with no more spending republicans. In case you are practicing selective memory you need to be reminded that the House picked up nine seats one month ago.


Barbara H (1)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 6:56 am
I agree with Susanne R pay the House onlu for the time they are actually working.

As for "hourly" pay, I don't think we should even count the time they are actively 'filibustering' or debating for the third or more time on a bill they have already tried ot pass. As for their voting, we could just set up an automatic "nay" app for their cell phones so they just need to hit the button...

The Do Nothing Congress has been outdone by the Do Absolutely Nothng Congress.

Chris C (152)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 10:30 am
I'm with Susanne R.
Diane O - The real gridlock started in 2010, when the Repugnants took over the House! Please - don't go away mad...just go away!

Carrie B (306)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 11:54 am
Diane, Obama did not have a democrat congress for two years. I have explained this to you before. Let's try again.

"No! Obama Did Not Control Congress His First Two Years!

Can we, once and for all, put that lie to rest? People I actually like and respect heard this on Fox (to be precise, you probably heard it the last time on “Morning Joe” with Joe Scarborough in mid-April of this year) and keep repeating it. But I don’t care if you heard it in Sunday School (and in Kansas… you may have) – it’s a lie.

Before I accuse anybody of being unbelievably forgetful, I will admit that I can’t remember what I had for breakfast today. Being forgetful is not a crime. Lying is sometimes a crime, but when you lie on internet political blogs, that’s not a crime. However, it should tug at your conscience a bit.

Let’s take a trip back to 2008.

And let’s brush up on some basics. First, did you forget that the President needed 60 votes to pass legislation? The healthcare bill is a good example of that. There were NOT 60 Democrats in the Senate. Remember that? So there had to be reconciliation.

What about the Stimulus? Again, there was NOT 60 Democratic votes to pass it. Reconciliation did not work. It was blocked by the Republicans, and Obama traded job-creating for tax cuts. Remember those tax cuts he let go on? Yep, traded for job creation - which it did accomplish as much as the baby stimulus that he was able to get would allow.

Is it all coming back to you now? How about this: It was Obama’s inaugural dinner. Senator Kennedy suffered a seizure. It’s kind of hard to work when you’ve had a seizure. He went back to Massachusetts.

Old news is so much fun to go back and read about. Here’s one I had forgotten, too. Al Franken had not yet been seated because the previous senator had challenged the election. Mein Gott, that went on forever with no way for him to vote in the Senate.

With Kennedy in Massachusetts and Franken in purgatory, awaiting his chance in the hell that is Congress, that left just 58 votes in the Senate. Memory Refresher: It took 60 votes to pass a bill in the Senate. The Republicans were already playing dirty politics and would not work across the aisle with the Democrats.

By the way, that was 56 Democrats and 2 Democratically-minded Independents. Not 58 Democrats.

Then, in April 2009 – good news. Republican Arlen Spector switched to Democrat. That gave the Democrats 60 seats with which to discourage a Republican filibuster (their most prized procedure at the time). But… oh no… we forgot, Al Franken was still in Purgatory out there in election recount turmoil. So… back to 59 votes.

We can pause here to lovingly remember the filibuster I just mentioned. Republicans made history during that time by using it more than any time ever before. Reminder (because this can get confusing): It takes 60 votes to overcome a filibuster. The Democrats only had 59 at this point… technically. One of those votes was the very ill, Senator Kennedy. He did cast one vote during that time.

Then, Senator Byrd was admitted to the hospital.

Then Al Franken was sworn in but Byrd was still in the hospital and Kennedy was too sick to ever vote again.

Senator Byrd finally returned, but Kennedy did not.

It wasn’t until August- 2009 that Senator Kirk was appointed to Kennedy’s seat, and finally they had the 60 votes.

That filibuster-proof 60 votes lasted exactly 4 months – Not 2 years. Not 1 year. Not 6 months.

Just 4 months – from August 2009 to February 2010 - when Scott Brown was sworn in.

But here’s a fact that nobody can deny:

Republicans had the presidency, the House, and the Senate from 2001 – 2007.

For six years, Republicans had total and complete and undeniably absolute control over everything.

And how did that work out in the final analysis?

It doesn’t bear repeating. You know the answer to that as well as I do. Six years to screw up the whole country – nay, the entire damned world!

And you whine because Obama could not fix it all in four months?

Alright, I expect you to whine. But from this point on there is no excuse for lying. Not now that you know the truth."

JL A (281)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 12:18 pm
FactCheck: First year all time record for a President getting major legislative packages through Congress,

Past Member (0)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 12:32 pm
I was watching C-span the other day and they (R) were, as usual, naming buildings and post offices.

Past Member (0)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 12:33 pm
"Obama had a democratic congress for two full years during his first term and he still had gridlock"

Hello!!!! OMG!!!

JL A (281)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 12:34 pm
Jason, my district's GOP rep. had no other kind of accomplishments to report in his latest quarterly newsletter--and no articles even regarding proposals or positions on anything else. You cannot currently send a star to Jason because you have done so within the last week.

Shelly Peterson (213)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 1:13 pm
Kudos, Barbara H.!!!

Past Member (0)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 1:46 pm
Yup. We still have progress gridlock. The right is fanatically hanging on to the old status quo. Protect those that pay them. To HELL with the people, democracy and the country.

JL A (281)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 2:08 pm
But Pelosi's approach and fillibuster reform can give us grounds for hope that next year will prove better Jason.

Lois Jordan (63)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 4:28 pm
Much thanks for posting, Carrie. *I'm sorry I'm unable to send you another star as I've sent one already this week.....for your excellent comment!

Carrie B (306)
Monday December 3, 2012, 1:33 am
Diane, how about that 2 years of a democrat congress you have commented on sooo many times, but every time I show you the facts, you seem to disappear or change the subject. You do that quite often when confronted with facts you can not dispute. Shame on you for being so Romney like.

JL A (281)
Monday December 3, 2012, 9:52 am
You cannot currently send a star to LLOYD because you have done so within the last week.

Shirley B (5)
Monday December 3, 2012, 10:59 am
Carrie, you knock me out with your truths. During Obmas administration it was like he was alone in all he wanted to do for the country.I personally will not rest until all the retarded teabags are voted out. I hope the country wakes up and sees what they have done to Congress with their loudmouth lies. I am getting too old to go through much more of this. Hope I live long enough to actually see this country move FORWARD!
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story

Loading Noted By...Please Wait


butterfly credits on the news network

  • credits for vetting a newly submitted story
  • credits for vetting any other story
  • credits for leaving a comment
learn more

Most Active Today in US Politics & Gov't

Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of or its affiliates.

New to Care2? Start Here.