Interesting ... potential DoD bill clusterfu*k

[Mr.K]

Regarding the Senate's intention for a short lame-duck: "the best laid plans of mice and men..."

CNN is definitely right to point out that election results will bear heavily on the lame-duck. Big Democrat wins could mean that almost nothing happens, for instance (the Senate Democrats would filibuster every bill in this scenario, knowing that they could return in a few weeks and pass those same bills in a fashion much more to their liking with the enhanced majorities won in November).

[Silent1]

It would seem to be in the Dems favour to see that no bills pass this week. They have little to lose and everything to gain. Am I stating the obvious, or am I missing something?

[Little_Luck]

So each new democrat that wins a seat in the house is +EV for us?

[HSB]

[ QUOTE ]
So each new democrat that wins a seat in the house is +EV for us?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not necessarily. A specific dem could be for a ban while their specific opponent is against it but the house bills had more support from Republicans than Democrats.

[EvanJC]

im slow, is this good?

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/investi...p;in_page_id=3

[1p0kerboy]

Link no good?

[capandfreedom]

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/investing-a...mp;in_page_id=3

This should work.

[JuntMonkey]

[ QUOTE ]
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/investing-a...mp;in_page_id=3

This should work.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's awesome if the article is actually current. It might be rehashing stuff from late last week, even though it does specifically state "today" in the article.

[LearnedfromTV]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/investing-a...mp;in_page_id=3

This should work.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's awesome if the article is actually current. It might be rehashing stuff from late last week, even though it does specifically state "today" in the article.

[/ QUOTE ]

ALL THIS (AND PRETTY MUCH ALL THIRD/FOURTH PARTY ARTICLES) IS IS SOME JOURNALIST'S INTERPRETATION OF EVERYTHING WE ALREADY KNOW. THE PEOPLE WRITING THE LANGUAGE AND FIGHTING OVER WHAT GETS ATTACHED OR DELAYED ARE NOT HOLDING PRESS CONFERENCES AND THEY ARE DEFINITELY NOT COMMITTING TO THE KIND OF ABSOLUTE STATEMENTS THAT WILL MAKE US FEEL BETTER.

[Sponger.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"The last-minute confrontation is pitting the House's most powerful member against Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John W. Warner (R-Va.), who has said he will not add extraneous measures to the annual defense authorization bill unless they can garner unanimous support from Democrats and Republicans alike."

[/ QUOTE ]

possible stupid question... if they can garner unanimous supoprt from Democrats and Repulicans alike why would they even need to attach it to the DoD bill? Couldn't they just spend 3 seconds of floor time to pass whatever stuff on its own?

[/ QUOTE ]

nobody wants to take a shot at this?