About
Learn More about our progressive online community for the Granite State.

Create an account today (it's free and easy) and get started!
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Search




Advanced Search


The Masthead
Managing Editors


Jennifer Daler

Contributing Writers
elwood
Mike Hoefer
 susanthe
ActBlue Hampshire

The Roll, Etc.
Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Betsy Devine
Blue News Tribune (MA)
Democracy for NH
Live Free or Die
Mike Caulfield
Granite State Progress
Seacoast for Change
Susan the Bruce

Politicos & Punditry
Krauss
Landrigan
Lawson
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes
Welch

Campaigns, Et Alia.
Paul Hodes
Carol Shea-Porter
John DeJoie
Ann McLane Kuster
ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC

National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
The Next Hurrah
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo

50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin

Judd Gregg on the "Nuclear Option" of Majority Rule

by: Dean Barker

Wed Feb 24, 2010 at 20:07:18 PM EST
Because it never gets old:
"The point of course is this: if you've got 51 votes for your position - you win."
- US Senator Judd Gregg (R-NH)
Now that's bi-partisanship on health care reform I can believe in!
Dean Barker :: Judd Gregg on the "Nuclear Option" of Majority Rule
Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Judd Gregg on the "Nuclear Option" of Majority Rule | 7 comments
The NYT (4.00 / 1)
is poking around in this direction, too:

"Is there something wrong with 'majority rules'?" Senator Judd Gregg, Republican of New Hampshire, once said of the reconciliation process when his party controlled the Senate. "I don't think so."

His objective then, in 2005, was an unsuccessful bill to allow drilling in the Arctic wildlife refuge. Later that year, justifying reconciliation to pass a bill to reduce Medicaid spending, Mr. Gregg lamented, "You can't get 60 votes because the party on the other side of the aisle simply refuses to do anything constructive in this area."


What a hypocrite! n/t (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
Oy vey. (0.00 / 0)
Current Senate HCR bill eerily similar to former GOPer Linc Chafee's 1993 proposal.

Well, doesn't that just take the cake on so many different levels.

I love this video... (4.00 / 1)
I want to put in on top of our site permanently.

Hope > Fear



Create a free Blue Hampshire account and join the conversation.
An audio greeting? (0.00 / 0)
"Is there something wrong with 'majority rules'? I don't think so."

Or something that plays when you run the mouse over it?

www.KusterforCongress.com - www.paulhodesforsenate.com
www.nikitsongas.com - www.devalpatrick.com

[ Parent ]
Maddow mimics Gregg - priceless. (4.00 / 2)

On the other hand-- (0.00 / 0)
On the other hand, conservatives have long relied on the threat to use nuclear warheads to get their way when other nations proved recalcitrant. It's their way of saying, "if you don't do what we want, we will destroy (kill) you totally."
Of course, the proper response is to call their bluff, since dead people are incapable of doing what they want, anyway.

"You can lead a horse to water, etc."

[ Parent ]
Judd Gregg on the "Nuclear Option" of Majority Rule | 7 comments
Connect with BH
     
Blue Hampshire Blog on Facebook
Powered by: SoapBlox