E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSSenate uncertainty over New START and the omnibus approps bill… What is certain: Senate passage of the tax deal, which will take place around 1:00 pm ET… Then the deal moves to the House, where some Democrats (Hoyer, Waxman) are coming around to the legislation… It’s NBC/WSJ poll day; poll comes out beginning at 6:30 pm ET… Thune takes a shot at Romney over the tax deal?... National Review takes a shot at Steele’s re-election bid… Crossroads GPS is on the air… Obama meets with business leaders at 9:30 am ET and gives a statement to reporters 15 minutes before that… And NBC’s Andrea Mitchell interviews Biden.
*** Senate uncertainty: So we know that the Senate today will pass the tax-cut deal (see below for more on that vote). But there’s uncertainty over two other big items the chamber is currently considering: New START and the omnibus appropriations bill. Yesterday, GOP Sen. Jon Kyl said he "will work very hard" to ensure START’s defeat if it's brought to the Senate floor this year. Kyl's reasoning, per NBC’s Ken Strickland: He and several of his colleagues believe there is not enough time to thoroughly debate and possibly amend the treaty, and they prefer to take it up in the next Congress. As for the omnibus, Republicans are vowing to defeat it because the $1.2 trillion bill contains earmarks totaling $8 billion, the Washington Post says. "The American people said just 42 days ago, 'Enough!' … Are we tone deaf? Are we stricken with amnesia?" Sen. John McCain (R) said. The Post adds that the omnibus’ fate is uncertain, “with a key test vote likely later in the week. The White House has not rallied behind the Democratic proposal.” The reason the House passed a continuing resolution (C.R.) and not an omnibus is that they knew it was unlikely the Senate could get the omnibus through.
*** Starting START: Despite Kyl’s threat on New START, the Senate today will vote on whether to start debating on treaty, NBC’s Strickland reports. Because treaties have "privileged" status under Senate rules, the vote to bring it to the floor cannot be filibustered, and therefore only needs a simple majority vote of 51 to succeed. But after it reaches the floor, ratification could be problematic and dramatic. There are indications from Senate floor staff that Republicans who oppose ratification this year might require the Senate clerks to read the entire treaty -- word for word -- once the legislation is on the floor. That could take more than a dozen hours, Strick is told. The "reading of the bill" (or in this case “the treaty”) is always required under the rules. But in almost all cases, it’s waived by senators as a practical matter since bills can be hundreds of pages long. But if even on senator objects, the bill must be read. Could be a wild day in the Senate. By the way, could Reid's strategy on START and omnibus be simply, “You can't kill both." So kill omnibus; we’ll give you the C.R. But give us a START vote?
*** Tax endgame in the Senate: At noon this morning, Strick adds, the Senate will begin a series of votes that will ultimately lead to the passage of tax-cuts bill. There will be three votes that will attempt to change the bill, followed by the vote for passage of the tax bill itself. The votes to amend the bill -- proposed by the legislation’s staunchest opponents (Republicans Tom Coburn and Jim DeMint and independent Bernie Sanders) -- are expected to fail. The vote for passage, which sends the bill to House, should happen about 1:00 pm ET and pass with overwhelming bipartisan support. Indeed, NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell notes that Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown (D), who voted against the procedural vote on Monday, says he will support the final measure today.
*** And the endgame in the House: And what’s the status of the tax deal in the House? It’s not all that clear. Per NBC’s Shawna Thomas, last night’s House Democratic caucus meeting was a lot like last week's without the dramatic special guest (Vice President Biden). Members were standing up, airing their opinions about the bill and talking about the specific things they want changed. Apparently, the leadership spent most of their time listening and not a lot of time presenting choices to their caucus. Speaker Nancy Pelosi left fairly early on to attend a service for the recently deceased Richard Holbrooke. "I would say that the leadership has not fully expressed their opinion yet," Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR) said. But Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) seemed to echo the message of "urgency" that Majority Leader Steny Hoyer spoke about earlier on Tuesday. "In the end of the day I think we're going to have to pass a bill,” Waxman said. “That's the view of many of us.”
*** Poll day: How does the American public view the tax deal? What about New START? And what about President Obama’s standing and his 2012 re-election prospects? Well, beginning at 6:30 pm ET, tune into NBC’s “Nightly News,” or click on to MSNBC.com, for the answers in our brand-new NBC/WSJ poll.
*** Thune’s shot at Romney? A day after Mitt Romney penned an op-ed opposing the tax deal, GOP Sen. John Thune -- who voted to end the filibuster on the legislation earlier this week, and who might run for president -- took a shot at critics of the deal. "It is easy to stand on the sidelines and criticize this deal," Thune said, per CNN. "And it would perhaps be politically expedient to stand on the sideline and criticize this tax deal. But to advocate against this tax deal is to advocate for a tax increase."
*** National Review’s shot at Steele: Speaking of taking shots, National Review is running an editorial blasting RNC Chairman Michael Steele’s bid for a second term and calling for “Anybody but Steele” to replace him. In 2012, National Review argues, it will be “crucial that every GOP institution be running on all cylinders. For all the Herculean work of the outside groups, there are certain tasks for which only the party committee is suited, given its ability to coordinate with state parties. If nothing else, the subpar reputation the RNC has earned under Steele’s leadership will make it impossible for the committee to work at its optimum.” More: Steele’s poor performance as chairman has had one fortunate side effect -- it has created a robust field of alternatives. It gives us no pleasure to say this, but none of them would be worse than Steele, and we believe any of them would be better. Someone else deserves a chance at the top of the RNC.”
*** Crossroads back on the air: Politico yesterday reported that the Rove-backed Crossroads GPS -- the entity that can keep its donors anonymous -- is airing $400,000 in radio ads in 12 congressional districts that Democrats barely won to put pressure on the Dems to back to tax-cut deal. Example: “[W]hose side is Congressman Tim Bishop on? Will he side with Nancy Pelosi to raise job-killing taxes, or with struggling families and the small businesses that can create the jobs we need?” But why is Crossroads GPS airing ads on something (the tax deal) that seems like a sure thing? And why is it targeting Democrats who will most likely vote for it? One theory: Crossroads GPS is a 501(c) organization. That designation allows it to keep its donors anonymous, but the law says that these non-profits’ primary purpose can’t be in express-advocacy politics (i.e., vote for or against a candidate). One way around this is for a non-profit to keep its express-advocacy spending below 50% of total expenditures. And that’s where these legislative-advocacy radio ads come in.
*** Crossroads’ response: But Crossroads spokesman Jonathan Collegio responds to First Read that these radio ads are about getting the tax deal across the finish line. “The ad urges the members named to demand that Pelosi holds a vote on the package before tax rates jump on January 1,” Collegio said. “It’s not enough to passively oppose a massive tax hike -- the only way the legislation will come to the floor is if these members stand up to Pelosi and demand a vote on this thing. That’s why we’re running the spots.”
*** Obama’s day: At 9:15 am ET, the president will make a statement to the press before he meets with prominent business leaders at the Blair House 15 minutes later.
*** Interviewing Biden: NBC’s Andrea Mitchell today interviews Vice President Biden, and a portion of the interview will air on NBC’s “Nightly News” and MSNBC today. The entire interview will air on MSNBC’s “Andrea Mitchell Reports” tomorrow.
Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter.
Leave a Comment:
President Obama has made the START issue a little easier with his "Compromising" ways. If President Obama had not made headway then all other legislation would likely be at a standstill (blocked). The Senate needs to send a Thank You card to the man especially after all the posturing they did last week.
For all of the detractors against President Obama, all I can say is he’s the man, deal with it. This man has blocked the blockers. This man has denied the deniers. This man has usurped the usurpers. This man has legislated above the legislators. All of this, he has done in the name of God and Country. President Obama has shown himself to be more American than all the detractors that wave the flag on the platform of Patriotism. His patriotism makes George Washington blush.
But if President Obama’s supporters left the “Last Word” up to the detractors, the president would be a muslim in drag “Counting Down” to a “Hardball” moment of defeat come 2012. Well guess what people, the president was as right as he could be and the rest of the critics were wrong. Now that the Democrats have changed their tune on the proposals and see the point of view of the president, they are now on the verge of passing the “Compromised” bill after weeks of press wrangling that it was a bad idea. Tough Tiddies on all sides that wish for the president to fail. You are either with him or against him. But when these liberal Congressmen allow the media to back them into a corner and answer the media’s rhetorical questions, then they deserve to be painted by the media as the media so well pleases.
For the people that take the word of the media and make it their own thought, is the day we as a society lose the thought of independence. By allowing FAUX News, MSNBC, CNN and other media outlets to dictate the message, they will ultimately determine who the winner is. All these people they keep drudging up and commentators reply about is a sign that the media steers the ship. The president owns the media narrative even as the media rails against him. Go figure.
President Obama represents the best of America through hard work and determination. He’s loyal and dedicated to principles that make Democracy function in the way it was meant. Critics need to move from their bubbled and boxed in ways of thinking and try to fathom a new era of governance.
very good Louis and Ron
A large number of roughshod politicians and the media, particularly, the arm of the republican party FOX NEWS have made Americans feel anger, hate, xenophobiC love, but most of all an irreverence for the office of the United States Presidency and not hope. Yet, a new Washington Post-ABC News poll says the public trusts President Obama marginally more than congressional Republicans to address the country’s problems, by a margin of 43 to 38 percent. Most continue to say that the Republicans in Congress are not doing enough to compromise with Obama on important issues.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/14/AR2010121407681.html
"Biased and unfavorable reporting that hurts this country.
."
The prevalent realities do not impress the high level of personal integrit yif an enumeratted inventory of complaints from the GOP/TEA PARTY Americans has become a part of besieging the hostages sub-culture (the middle and poor working classes not the rich)to neutralize him. The Gop/tea PARTY and conservative democratcs reveal in stalls and disinformation, nanely START treaty, the DREAM Act, and DADT repeal. While Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) called such plans “disrespectful” to Congress and Christians, Reid said “Congress ends Jan. 4″ and “we’re going to continue working on this stuff until we get it done.”
The faux constitutionalist and faux patriots are always totuing the Founding Fathers intentions.
President George Washington signed a law that was almost identical to the one Cuccinelli railed against
President George Washington signed a law that was almost identical to the one Cuccinelli railed against
Why George Washington would disagree with the right wing about health care’s constitutionality.
The Second Militia Act of 1792, required a significant percentage of the U.S. civilian population to purchase a long list of military equipment:
[E]very citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack. That the commissioned Officers shall severally be armed with a sword or hanger, and espontoon; and that from and after five years from the passing of this Act, all muskets from arming the militia as is herein required, shall be of bores sufficient for balls of the eighteenth part of a pound; and every citizen so enrolled, and providing himself with the arms, ammunition and accoutrements, required as aforesaid, shall hold the same exempted from all suits, distresses, executions or sales, for debt or for the payment of taxes.
This Act became law only a few years after the Constitution was ratified, in President George Washington’s first term. Many of the Members of Congress who voted for the Act also were members of the Philadelphia Convention that wrote the Constitution. In other words, they probably knew a little bit more about the Constitution than Ken Cuccinelli.
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/03/23/cuccinelli-washington/
Run Michael Run get the chicken and potato salad for your recruits; that is if you can get out of Steele trap.
Leftovers & Out Takes:
The 'Angel of Death of AZ' is at it again… How many MORE people have to die before her crimes against humanity is stopped?
Governor Brewer could use a heart transplant herself, because it's clear she doesn't possess one now…
The new NBC/WSJ poll comes out later today, in the meantime I found these numbers very interesting…
So much for epic – historic - mandate and the rest of the BS that spread around here daily! lol
I do have to admit though, that the over reach by some of the usual suspects is MOST entertaining. From the sound of them they seem to be attempting to convince themselves MORE than any thing else! ;0))
Can't wait until 1.3.2011, so I can ask where's the JOBS… Boner?
If there is anyone out there that's not convinced that MSNBC's feisty redhead, Ed Schultz, of the Mr. Ed Show is a complete MORON, last night's show is absolute proof of it. In a segment with a lefty and a righty talking head as guests, Mr. Ed made the assertion that the ruling striking down the HCR "individual mandate" was unimportant to the success of Barry's ClunkerCare plan. When the righty talking head challenged him saying he was "lying" to his viewers, Mr. Ed had steam coming out of his ears and started shouting her down repeating his ridiculous assertion.
I'm convinced Mr. Ed was not "lying". He's just plain too STUPID to comprehend this basic concept: If ClunkerCare can't force the healthy people to buy insurance when they don't need it, then the only people paying into the insurance risk pool will be the sick people who will quickly bankrupt the plan.
Mr. Ed is a perfect example of what happens when you give a Dumb Jackass a microphone and a camera: low information lefty liberals have their stupidity enhanced and encouraged.
From yesterday's FR:
From msnbc.com's Tom Curry
Months from now, a federal appeals court or the United States Supreme Court might reverse Monday's ruling by federal district court judge Henry Hudson that struck down the health care law's requirement that individuals buy insurance (also known as the "individual mandate" in health care jargon).
For the moment, Hudson's ruling has refocused attention on one of the crucial ingredients in insurance reform: improving insurance risk pools.
The health care law hinges on the millions of young and healthy people – good insurance risks -- who have decided they'd rather do without insurance.
Under the new law, 24 million people will be buying insurance through new purchasing "exchanges" regulated by the federal government. The more healthy people that the federal government can nudge into insurance risk pools, the lower will be the average cost in each risk pool. (As the Congressional Budget Office reported last June, "in the absence of a mandate, those who enroll would be less healthy, on average, than those enrolled with a mandate.")
If the new people entering an insurance risk pool are less healthy, then the premiums will at some point become too costly for most members – or too costly for the taxpayers if the government is paying to cover the uninsured.
Great way to start the day Louis, Bev, and Feisty. The Conservative dance that AZ's Brewer is playing--reduce the revenue, then complain that government is spending beyond its means--is so transparent and hypocritical that it's beyond laughable. This isn't "trimming the fat", it's real lives these people are playing with. No matter, the wealthy elites will be pleased.
Joe in Albany,
How's it going my dear friend? Firstly, I don't so much care for Ed Shultz because he's always full of hot air - and he's just too extreme for my liking. As for your assertion of Clunkercare? are you simply trying to mix you choice word "Obamacare" with Cash for Clunkers? if so, how do the two relate? but I digress.
I have a problem with you assertion that the mandate on the HCR is not a good deal for Americans as a whole. Firstly why is it OK to force someone to pay for car insurance, but not health insurance? In either case, the rest of us would have to fork out money when an incident (car accident or an illness) occurs. If we want to get rid of the mandate that everyone maintains adequate insurance, then is it OK for ER to turn down the uninsured? As you know if anyone goes to the ER for treatment, by law they cant be turned down. So by the same rational, if the government can mandate treatment, why not mandate that these very folks pay for it.
Most physicians I've talked to actually like the HCR as its a step in the right direction - they actually prefer the single payer system; then they wont have to tell their patient they cant provide treatment because insurance company wont pay for it.
Some say we have the best health care in the world... I say NO... we have the best physicians in the world... but they practice in the crappiest system. Trust me, I know a thing or two about health care in America.
If a capitalist nation/health care system can regulate itself, then private insurance companies would be utmost essential tool for the people for the US... but we know how that goes. Health Insurance companies will provide for the smallest treatment they can get away with for the most profit. I guarantee you that when you fall sick, the first thing insurance companies look at is how to drop your coverage. If they can't do that, they start hoping you die sooner... so they can take care of the healthier people. The presidents hands has been tied and even though he proposed something in the middle - essentially RomneyCare.. the republicans, including Romney stand against it. If you think this has to do with the actual policy, you are deluding yourself. They are hell bent in seeing Obama fail even if they bring down America along with it.
Look at the compromise Tax deal...at first they were for it, and now they are against it because they think it would benefit Obama.... sick I tell you; actually sick, and if you can't see this... I'm sorry for you friend.
Just my 2cents buddy.
John B, Des Moines, IA
Great way to start the day Louis, Bev, and Feisty. The Conservative dance that AZ's Brewer is playing--reduce the revenue, then complain that government is spending beyond its means--is so transparent and hypocritical that it's beyond laughable. This isn't "trimming the fat", it's real lives these people are playing with. No matter, the wealthy elites will be pleased.
Thanks John B,
I meant to write about that mummified faced looking witch but ran out of time. There is no uncertainty she has created death penalites.
That is an un-denial fact.
LouisJ, thank you for your thoughtful warm post. Very very well said.
To understand the ABC/Post poll, one must look at the comparisons, and the faulty conclusions drawn there from.
The election returns were a "poll", if you will, of likely voters- the most likely, in fact, given that they voted.
The ABC/Post poll was of "adults"- that is, anyone over the agent 18. They did not even screen by ASKING those polled if they had voted. Given that fact, their conclusions about the number of Democrats, Republicans, and Independents is questionable, at best.
Put it this way- it is akin to learning that the best rated school system in your state has one of the lowest scores on mathematical proficiency, then finding out that students from kindergarten through twelfth grade were each tested on algebra II.
ANOTHER leftist end-of-year CRAM DOWN attempt
After last year's Obamacare DISASTER hard working citizens have CAUGHT ON to the progressive democrat bag of tricks
LouisJ:
HEAR! HEAR!!
Joe in Abany:
Do you EVER have any positive observations to add to the morning discourse?
Look at your car insurance bill. What's the biggest expense on it? The liability insurance, your insurance against harming others and their property. It's about 75% of the cost of you car insurance. You're insuring yourself against the cost of harming others because of your negligence. In fact, if you don't want collision insurance, the insurance that pays for your losses in an accident, the government doesn't even care if you carry that type of insurance or not. If you have an accident and don't have collision insurance, your losses are your problem, no one else's. The government is making sure you have liability insurance so if you harm others, they will be compensated.
So how does that even remotely apply to health insurance? Health insurance is for only you, and just like with car collision insurance, if you neglect insuring yourself and there is problem, that expense comes out of your pocket.
Car insurance and health insurance are two totally different things.
Clearer now?
Thanks John! Earlier this year we learned that the price of a life was $75.00 thanks to a TN Fire Chief letting a house burn to the ground becuase a man hadn't paid his service fee! Imagine if there had been children in that house? It was bad enough his pets perished!
Now Jan Brewer has upped the ante with IGMFU!
Didn't take long for one of the usual suspects to attempt to spin the numbers now did it?
HEY FOLKS!!! Pay attention the conclusions are faulty because NJNB SAYS SO! LMFAO!
Like I would take the word of a proven LIAR!
You GO Mrs. GRINCH! Keep spinning until you find one you agree with!
Gonna go WAY out on a limb here, and actually side with JoAnna somewhat. Those auto premium rates (cost of your car insurance) she's talking about are not just pulled out of a hat by State Farm or the gecko, but are taken from claims experience. Claims costs. Guess why liability claims costs are so damned high? That's right- Lawyers gotta eat, too. And eat good, I might add.
Yes- I'm a libby about a lot of 'stuff', but would vote for tort reform in a heatbeat.
Tunde: Let me respond to one of your assertions. You said: "Firstly why is it OK to force someone to pay for car insurance, but not health insurance"
You are in no way, shape, or form required to buy car insurance. It is a requirement for the privilege of driving a car in most states. My grandmother lived most of her life in the city and never had a car or driver's license. Therefore, she never had to pay for car insurance. Also, and this may be outdated, I believe that some states even allow you to post some sort of bond instead of buy insurance. I'd have to see if that's still the case though. (BTW...Joanne and DBO...very well written responses...I agree with both of you).
I would also disagree that health insurance companies are the sole problem. According to Yahoo finance, the average profit margin of health insurance companies (I believe in the last 12 months, but I'd have to check the timing to be sure) is 5%. That ranks 122nd on their list of profit margins by industry. I believe that a large part of the problem is the cost of health care itself. When the HC debate first started, I shared some of my thoughts on this. I said that the first step should be to cap the annual rate increases of insurance companies at the increase in the annual medical CPI + some contingency percentage (say 2.5% for the sake of argument). If the company wanted a larger increase, they would have to prove their case...burden of proof on them. But...in the end, I think what would happen is that medical costs would continue to climb, thus forcing insurance rates to climb. (I realize I'm only discussing the affordability issue here, but I don't want to open up the whole HCR debate again).
Just my two cents.
Tunde...thanks for the post.
Feisty, the Lady that does her homework. Thanks.
John Boner-AKA- THE GRIM WEEPER.
"why is it OK to force someone to pay for car insurance, but not health insurance?"
It’s very simple: the Tenth Amendment:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Car insurance is mandated by the states and, therefore, not unconstitutional. The same goes for state health insurance mandates like in MA. Federal HCR mandates ARE subject to the Constitution and if the SC decides Congress overstepped its authority, they are unconstitutional (which I think they are).
If you want federal HCR mandates to be constitutional, then see Article V - Amendment. Good luck with that one!!
The Grim Weeper, I like that, it's my favorite so far.
BUT HEY YOU GUYS, you've got to get the trend. Men crying in public is in, Women crying in public is out!
I've got tears rolling down my face as I type this. Oh...the humanity! The mere thought of The Grim Weeper being in charge of the House hurts so bad! (Sob, sob, sniffle, sob)
And any delay in the approval of the START treaty really upsets me. (BOOHOOOHOOOHOOO, sniffle)
Ok, time to "man up". (sniff, sniff,) I'm Ok, I got it all out of my system.
Tom,
Have you sold off California yet. That would sure help the deficit, could sell it to the Cartel:)
Frank,
Great statements, and another thought, even if you provide insurance to purchase or register a vehicle, then you can let it expire, and take your chances. Most states, the cost of not having insurances is between $250 & $500 in ticket fines. What is the cost of insurance?
But the main thing is having a choice, which the health care law does not give you--it forces you to purchase something, so that a company can make a profit. Since it is not government run so far--thank goodness.
So when the government mandates that everyone own a gun, are you all going to support that also?
Skip,
Were Oprah's tears real or fake on Barbara Walters?
You said it correct, What has happened to our society that men are more sensitive than women?
"So how does that even remotely apply to health insurance? Health insurance is for only you, and just like with car collision insurance, if you neglect insuring yourself and there is problem, that expense comes out of your pocket."
That isn't true. For starters, If you show up at the hospital with a broken arm they will treat you, regardless of whether you have health insurance. If you show up at the mechanic's shop with a busted car they won't fix your car without payment up front, which is OK, cause you don't need your car to LIVE. THis is why health insurance should be mandatory, while collision insurance is not.
Too funny Tom! Did you happen to catch Dennis, Columbus yesterday with Weeper of the House?
Oh what FUN this is going to be! Thanks for the support as well - I'm putting together my own investigative piece that someone left me a tip on and hope to have it ready to post after the first of the year! Stay tuned...
Morning Skip... Nothin like tears of an Orange CLOWN first thing in the morning to get your day started now is there? I'm thinking of investing heavily in Kleenex stock... the weepy booze hound will be going through plenty the next couple of years! lmao
"Joe in Abany:
Do you EVER have any positive observations to add to the morning discourse?"
If you mean will you ever see my posts getting any "great post" or "we're on the same page" reponses, or other accolades from the FR lefty liberal echo chamber and mutual admiration society posters, the answer is : It's not gonna happen.
(sniffle, sniffle) Thank Big Bear and Feisty I'm feeling better now.
HEY, that idea about investing in KLEENEX is a good one.
Oprah? So last century. Women are supposed to be the strong ones now. My upper body strength is only good for taking out the trash and opening jars for my much more confident and assertive better half.
(sigh) Ah, for the good old days when men were men and women were women. (Uh-oh, I think I'm tearing up again)
Feisty,
I am on my way to purchase Kleenex stock as we speak. Would this be considered insider trading?
Skip,
Glad that you are feeling better. Growing up in East Texas, I hear you, I remember the days when the men were men, and the women were too...
It will be our little secret Big Bear! ;0)
Thanks Fiesty. Yes I did see Dennis's WEEPER OF THE HOUSE. lmao. Going to be fun over the next 2 years torturing this guy. Keep the fun coming.
You're looking at the trees instead of the forest.
Tha argument against health care is that the government does not have the right to force us to do something. Well we allow the government to force us to do a lot of things. HCR is getting us all into a program that will in the end make us more healthy, ensure that the rates we pay are more fair, decrease the profit motives of insurance companies and providers when it comes to keeping us healthy.
Is your car really more important than your life?
Hypotheticals and comparisons aside, HCR was passed and is now law. Try to rebuff, repeal, reshape or whatever re- you want, there is no changing the fact it is law.
Just because some judge said it is not this or that, does not change the fact that it is here to stay.
People will be glad to go see a doctor without companies hounding them. We keep discussing billions of dollars and this and that about our future, but there are millions of (working) people that suffer daily because they fall through the gaps of health care.
Either you want to help or you want to hinder. Take your pick.
BigBear62
Tom,
Have you sold off California yet. That would sure help the deficit, could sell it to the Cartel:)
But the main thing is having a choice, which the health care law does not give you--it forces you to purchase something, so that a company can make a profit. Since it is not government run so far--thank goodness
HA HA!!! Gingrich, a right wing conservative said...
Repeal and replace = 2010, '12
Gingrich's own proposals on the subject of healthcare have included mandates for upper middle-class Americans, those making more than $75,000.
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2010/03/gingrich_repeal_and_replace_20.html
From Gingrich's 2008 book Real Change:
Finally, we should insist that everyone above a certain level buy coverage (or, if they are opposed to insurance, post a bond). Meanwhile, we should provide tax credits or subsidize private insurance for the poor. [Page 276]
http://books.google.com/books?id=LwauijGXprsC&lpg=PA235&dq=gingrich%20health%20care&pg=PA276#v=onepage&q&f=false
Thus Newt outlined his strategy to combat rising health care costs a plan of attack that includes insurance mandates for people who earn more than $75,000 a year
Blab on and on like the rest of your hypocritical leaders.
Wow Kleenex stock just jumped a point on the NASDAQ. You better get in fast if you want to make some money.
Oh..gotta go, I've got cookies in the oven and I still need to dust and vaccum, where does the time go?
LouisJ,
You know as well as I do, if the Supreme Court declares the mandate unconstitutional, then that part of the law will no longer be in effect. I am acceptable of the regulations placed in the HCR. But I still don't believe that the federal government has the right to mandate us paying for health care, unless of course it becomes an amendment, similar to the 16th amendment--which I think should be repealed also.
I agree with most of the bill, outside of the mandate to purchase--as long as the government is just regulating, no running the program.
There is nothing hypothetical about it- when a court rules something unconstitutional, it is a defunct law, unless, that is, the constitution is amended.
Do a little research on income taxation- ruled unconstitutional on numerous occasions. Wilson had the constitution amended, so we are all now taxed to the eyeballs.
Good luck getting HCR added to the constitution. These days, the people have a lot more access to information than our great grandparents.
Bev,
Who said I was a Newt fan?
He is a has been, and never will be again--same quote used yesterday about him.
He can't beat Palin, so why would anyone listen to him?
And Newt is wrong also, NO ONE should be forced to purchase insurance or be fined by the national government!!
We all knew there would be provisions worked on, and the "mandate" will be tweaked along with some type of Public Option provision added in. All of these things will likely conincide with each other so that it can be hammered out to the shape of the public discussion/debate. I'm also sure more town hall meetings will take place so that officials can allow the public to voice their concerns to the new provisions. However, the shouters that were paid to shout before will have no reason to shout then. They will be the beneficiaries of HCR.
You know this how? Obama and the Democrats have told us all many things, so which one those things have turned out to be true? We've spent trillions on job stimulus programs in the last two years, only to have to extend unemployment benefits again, and again, and again. That's a double failure. The promises of ObamaCare are also many, like lowered costs. Have you seen lowered costs on your insurance yet? If you have, you're quite unique.
A law that was declared unconstitutional this week, at least for its major source of funding. One could call that a major "tweak".
And recent poll puts ObamaCare approval at 43%. Many people have many problems with it. Sure, you can say it's not implemented yet, and when it is, people will be happy with it. It's had a pretty rough start though.
Source: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/behind-the-numbers/2010/12/health_care_opponents_divided_on_repeal.html
Ah liberals/progressives or what ever you call yourselves today, thank you all for my morning laugh. Fiesty, you are a trip of insanity in this world of reality.
"If you mean will you ever see my posts getting any "great post" or "we're on the same page" reponses, or other accolades from the FR lefty liberal echo chamber and mutual admiration society posters, the answer is : It's not gonna happen"
Sorry, no- not what I mean. But thanks for playing. And illustrating the point of my post further.
Big Bear can you explain how the law suits against the health care law are seen as a state rights issues and an attack on the 16th admendment?
Frank Grimes, Thanks for the reply... I know the analogy can be looked at many different angles... so as to serves one's perspective; but of course your grandmother isn't forced to by Car Insurance - she doesn't drive. But if she did, she would be forced to. Same thing applies for Health insurance, if you don't use it, you shouldn't be forced to buy it... but unfortunately we'll all need to use the ER at some point in time... so we should be forced to pay our fair share. And like I mentioned earlier, as long as the government forces hospitals to treat uninsured patients, I'm OK with them forcing everyone to pitch in a little bit.
Some on the right speak of their love for "Tort Reform"... I'm so for it because it curtails profits to lawyers and their sometimes greedy clients. A victim should be compensated for mistakes caused my medical professionals, but it shouldn't be milked like it was a cash cow. in this case... I love my gobment intervention.
And Joe in Albany, I actually agree with you in citing the tenth amendment. That's is why I'm OK with states enforcing this law just like Auto insurance... there are so many parallel between these 2 insurance entities. We are just sometimes blind to see them to suite are perspective... not that I'm perfect in my thoughts.... it's just the way I see it.
joannasmith wrote:You're insuring yourself against the cost of harming others because of your negligence. In fact, if you don't want collision insurance, the insurance that pays for your losses in an accident, the government doesn't even care if you carry that type of insurance or not. If you have an accident and don't have collision insurance, your losses are your problem, no one else's. The government is making sure you have liability insurance so if you harm others, they will be compensated.
So how does that even remotely apply to health insurance? Health insurance is for only you, and just like with car collision insurance, if you neglect insuring yourself and there is problem, that expense comes out of your pocket.
Joanna, I'm trying to view it from your vantage point, and I've twisted my neck far enough and still don't get it (I hope I'm not an idiot) from my very 1st post my reasoning for individuals purchasing health insurance has to do with their burden on everyone one else paying into this system. And yes, if you dont pay for health insurance, it's a burden on me because I pay for health insurance. I'm sure you know that the overall cost of health insurance is divid up amongst the paying. So someone not paying for health insurance and showing up at the ER.. I'm footing the bill for those. Joanna I'm certain you actually agree with this point because you do sound intelligent... but could care less as it's doesn't serve to win your arguement.
Not trying to "win [an] argument". Just trying to point out the difference in car/health insurance from the question that you asked. Insurance is just that, like minded people purchasing a product they hope they don't have to use. It's spreads the risk around, and supports the few that need to make a claim against it. For car insurance, there is a high risk your negligence will harm others, from that the liability portion of your car insurance is mandated by law to protect others. Health insurance is insurance that if you have health care needs, it will be paid for by funds from you and others that have elected to get in that risk pool.
Now the government comes along and declares by law everyone is now the same and all must purchase into the risk pool. But what if some people don't want to? What if young people, who are less at risk, don't want the same coverage as the 82 year old? What if their risk pool is much different for the young who may only want to insure against a catastrophic event such as cancer and they'll pay the rest out of pocket? Why should the least risky be treated the same as the most risky?
As far as the uninsured going to the ER, there is no obligation of anyone else to pay for the services rendered. The people that receive the service should pay for it. And if they don't have the cash, they need to sell their possessions, their car(s), their house(s), and work out a payment plan. If you don't have collision insurance on your car, and you hit a tree, no one is going to swoop in and pay the $20,000 you're out of and pick up the payments for the car you totalled. If your house burns down and you have no insurance, no one is going to compensate you for that house, and no one is going to forgive any debt you owe on any mortgage.
Why is a trip to the ER from an uninsured person that costs $20,000 expected to paid for by others? Just what is so sacred about that?
"Why is a trip to the ER from an uninsured person that costs $20,000 expected to paid for by others? Just what is so sacred about that?"
Problem is we do pay for it via higher premiums.
Yeah, that's the part that Conservatives would like to overlook, SaltGrass. A bunch of that money people deserve to "save" by not having insurance comes out of the pockets of people who HAVE insurance.
Joanna, sorry... I shouldn't have used the phrase "winning an argument"...but SaltGrass said it correctly... you and I both pay for those who do not have insurance and as long as there is a mandate that hospitals can't send these folks away, someone has to pick up the tab and it's us who pay into the pool.
Also about the analogy about age and risk of needing health care... we all do at different stages of our lives; it's just that our risks shifts from one to the other. For instance a young person might feel they dont need HC, while their chance of having cancer is low, there's there's a chance... their chance of being involved in a brawl requiring stitches or beinng involed in a DUI related automobile accident is considerably higher than the rest of the population, so yes, they need health insurance... I'll leave the minute details as to cost and coverage to HC companies - they are really good at this; but my point is we all have certain risks of needing ER visits or HC management.
And with ObamaCare, we pay, . . . . higher premiums. Especially the young. With of course the "promise" from the ObamaCare bureaucrats that the premiums will be "less higher" then if they did nothing - And we believe them because why?
Sure do. But it's not up to the government to require you to purchase insurance. Besides being unconstitutional, it's up to the individual, and not the government, to select their risk category. If they so choose to not buy insurance, if something happens where they need medical services, they are obligated to pay for it, just like if you don't buy house/property insurance, and just as if you don't buy the collision insurance for your car.
Not sure if we would know one way or the other, because there is no control group in the experiment of politics, but on the surface it would appear to be true. I know that the life time cost of insurance would tend be greater under the plan, because everyone would be required to pay for a longer peroid of time. The individual return on the investment would dollar cost average with the biggest benefits being received later in life.
fisty,
I have a job for you..........................it starts wih b and ends with j
Saltgrass,
The only thing that I have said, is that the mandated part of the HCR should be eliminated. It has nothing, IMO, to do with the 10 amendment or states rights, that came from someone else. It has to do with freedom of choice, which the government is taking away with a mandated health insurance for people who choose not to purchase it.
As for the 16th amendment, I would like to see it repealed. Because of that amendment, everyone should have to pay income taxes, yet 47% of the people in this country don't. And then those with money have so many loopholes and deferred payments, they don't pay their full share either. Taxing a person's income is just wrong, taxing what they spend with their income should be the correct way to tax people.
Just remember, once you give up a right, such as freedom of choice, you will not get it back from the government without revolution.
From the article:
OMG, that's like saying you're leaving office to spend more time with your family. All the former Republican secretary of states support the START treaty, from Baker, Colin Powell, to Condi Rice. We all know this is further obstructionism to prevent Obama from being given credit for any accomplishment.
As for McCain's statement about amnesia, that's hi-larious coming from him. And the old, tired phrase "the American people" needs to be retired along with him. If voting was mandatory, the mid-term election results would have been completely different. Election participation in the U.S. is so pitiful as to be primarily right-wing elderly. And even the exit polls showed that most voters did not want tax cuts extended for the richest 2% (one of the issues McCain has suffered amnesia).
Also, conservatives have out-stripped progressives in information dissemination (propaganda) via FOX Political Organization, Hate Radio, websites like Drudge, NewsMax, viral E-mails, and people like Beck with a zillion books, conducting rallies in Washington, Palin on Twitter, Facebook, Reality TV/Dancing with the Stars -- she makes balloon boy look like nothing. Obama/Dems need to get ahead of the right-wing control of media.
The Senate brought down Caesar and ended the Roman Empire. Looks like the new senate is trying it again.
Time Is Running Out:
Some may argue that all news is biased, but I’m not so sure. Recently I was reading a short article by Barry Rand, CEO of AARP, who spoke to the new realities of aging. Mr. Rand reports, “We’re approaching a time when older adults will outnumber children for the first time in history.” As I walk through shopping malls, churches, and public restaurants I am certain the statistics are accurate.
A “new reality is that by 2030, racial and ethnic minorities will make up 42 percent of the US population and one in five Americans over the age of 65 will be Hispanic.” The political consequences of this data has been ignored by the conservative right, but beginning now through the next 5 presidential election cycles politicians should be vying for minority support. If they don’t, they will lose. The days of old white guys running the country are coming to an end. Immigration reform should be a high priority for both political parties.
Today, “70% of AARP members still provide financial support for their kids and 40% are helping to support BOTH kids and parents.” With information like that, one has to believe the middle class is struggling. Yet, the incoming GOP financial services chairman states that Washington’s role is to serve the banks. How far off-base and out of touch can this conservative be?
“By 2015, unmarried boomers will account for 21 million households or 46% of all boomer households.” The healthcare needs of this population will grow and they will be saying, “Don’t mess with my Social Security or my Medicare and Medicaid.” As GOP/PT move further to the right, they are moving farther away from the middle class. Before you know it, the GOP tent will only hold wealthy bankers.
Ron, fascinating information here. Thanks for bringing it to our attention.
Interesting information Ron, and it goes a long way toward explaining why Conservatives are so frantic, so determined to gin up fear and loathing at this point. They're fighting the clock of changing demographics. They need to enshrine their point of view into law and Constitution soon or those demographics will overtake them.
Ron; Good Morning;
The ratings agency Moody’s warned that the U.S. that borrowing Billions of Dollars from China “will put its top level credit rating at risk if Congress extends a sweeping package of tax cuts and unemployment spending.” “Unless there are offsetting measures, the package will be credit negative for the US and increase the likelihood of a negative outlook on the US government’s AAA rating during the next two years,” said Moody’s Steven Hess.
And some republicans want to make this deal permanent? What do you think that will do to our long term rating? The republican party now wants to create an even bigger ditch and push everybody into it. These guys are the party of fiscal irresponsibility. By putting a two year time frame on this Tax Cut Deal the politicians have virtually guaranteed that these Tax Cuts will be an ongoing battle for years to come starting with the 2012 election cycle. They are not going to go away without a major fight. Sooner or later we have to wake up and pay the band. And the bill is going to be a whopper. This is already being presented by MSM as President Obama’s Tax Cut Deal. He owns it now and he will be reminded of this for the next 2 years. I smell a rat!!
Lawrence Summers, the departing White House economic advisor, said yesterday during his final major address that the federal government must increase spending on highways and other infrastructure, and that Americans’ impulse to save money means the federal government needs to spend more to stimulate economic growth. I have been writing about the Infrastructure Bill proposed by President Obama that will create 35,000 jobs for each 1 Billion Dollars. This would create new tax revenues and get people off unemployment. While the Tax Cut Deal may offer some short term stimulus, it will not be enough for the long term. We still need to curb spending and increase revenues. We are spending 2 Billion per week in Afghan, the defense budget needs to be trimmed and we need to address the rampant fraud in Medicare/Medicaid and more in addition to the Tax Cuts.
Read what the Arizonian “Death Panel Queen” has to say now about her decision to deny Health Care to Transplant recipients. http://thinkprogress.org/2010/12/14/brewer-medicaid-money/
Excerpt from above:
When asked by Channel 4 News Reporter, Her Response:
Well she spent 50 Million on the State Prisons. Remember the deal she had with those people that managed the prisons and the Immigration Law that was passed? This is one very despicable lady at best. Keith Obermann last night had a great piece on her as well. See it at MSNBC TV. If any of these people die because of this I hold Brewer personally responsible. The blood is on her hands.
Good Morning Navy:
Well writen as always! I also read the comments from the Death Panel Queen. Like Feisty's comments above, this lady has no heart. Arizona residents will die because of her actions, but I see no evidence that she cares one bit.
Ron:
how true. The really upsetting part is that she is really picking and choosing who may life or die. She spent 25% of the money that President Obama sent her on the Prison System that she was working with when they thought they were going to be arresting all the immigrants. She could have took 5% of that money and these people would have their transplants. This is going to happen more and more I am afraid and that is not the American way. Why are not more people mad at this?
Navy,
I am gonna have to argue some of your figures.
If you divide 35,000 into your $1 billion dollars, that meaning that all $1 billions dollars is spent on salaries, not the equipment, materials, or etc... then everyone will get a salary of $28,571.43. Although for some that is a lot, but for many, that keeps them working, which I don't have a problem with. So where is the money for the equipment, materials, or etc....
Unless of course you mean that other jobs will trickle out of the original $1 billion dollars--whether you call it trickle down, out, or up--there is a ripple effect, isn't there?
And yet again, the numbers used by the Left just don't add up. They haven't since Obama started the entire fiasco by begging the country for his $787 billion dollar pork bill in 2009, and it goes through Nancy Pelosi saying "Unemployment checks are the best stimulus". None of it worked, there was no so called "ripple effect", there was no stimulus to job creation.
A poster not seen here in a while stated that $1 billion spent on a railroad would produce "millions" (note the plural) of jobs. You just can't make this stuff up, well at least not any sane person can. You have to be insane to believe the Sunny-Day and Rose-Colored-Glasses numbers the Left are putting out.
JoAnnaSmith1,
Yes, I remember that conversation, with Pietro, we had a good conversation, civil, and informative. And yes, even 35,000 jobs might be created by spending a $1 billion, but what some don't think, or won't admit to is there has to be a trickle/ripple effect for all of those jobs to be created. Now, it might work a little faster than tax cuts, but there has to be a plan, not just give someone a $1 billion and say, create a new road.
That is my problem with spending, it goes somewhere, but where. Why does it take years to redo roads & bridges? Because there is no plan. To get the money to spend on infrastructure, they should take all the tax from gasoline, and require that it is spent on the rebuilding of roads, bridges, & etc... and for alternative energy sources. I would even allow the tax to go to 20 cents without complaining.
The the money is divided by the usage of each state--with 1/4 of the money going to research & development of new resources. Then the roads, rail lines, and bridges get fixed. Appropriate the money to help out, not place in a general fund.
Jobs for Main Street Act of 2010
On December 16th, the House passed the Jobs for Main Street Act to create or save jobs here at home with targeted investments ($75 billion) for highways and transit, school renovation, hiring teachers, police, and firefighters, small business, job training and affordable housing – key drivers of economic growth that have the most bang for the buck. These investments are fully paid for by redirecting TARP funds from Wall Street to Main Street. Read the bill»
KEY INVESTMENTS MADE BY REDIRECTING FUNDS FROM WALL STREET TO MAIN STREET:
STABILIZING JOBS THROUGH INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS
The bill redirects $48.3 billion from Wall Street to help put people to work rebuilding our crumbling roads and bridges, modernizing public buildings, and cleaning our air and water, including:
STABILIZING PUBLIC SERVICE JOBS
The bill redirects $26.7 billion from Wall Street to stabilize public service jobs such as teachers, firefighters, and police officers, including:
CONTINUING EMERGENCY FUNDING: EMERGENCY RELIEF FOR FAMILIES HURT BY THE ECONOMY
High unemployment and rising costs have outpaced Americans’ paychecks. The bill continues emergency help to working families to make ends meet at a cost of $79 billion, including:
OTHER ITEMS
Navy
Very good post !
That's why every administration of both parties has turned a blind eye to illegal immigration. But the problem with illegals who enter at the prime of their working lives is one day they will be old too. That's the reason for the DREAM Act. To try to get these folks eligible for entitlements? Currently there up to 20 million illegals in the country. This is a mess that's going to backfire.
Enough
Dang it folks sometimes enough is enough
Senate is going to vote on the Tax compromises today. They have already voted on closure so the passage of the deal should go through. Everybody has already voiced their objections on both sides of the aisle and it has been duly noted. Okay enough is enough. Pass the cotton picking thing and let’s move on. It sets the stage for a serious discussion that we need to have come springtime about our Tax policy and what it’s doing for and against us.
Senator Kyl is still determined to Block the Start Treaty. Okay Senator with all due Respect enough is enough. Quit being a Dog in the Manger and let the vote be taken. Pass it or fail it but enough is enough let’s move on.
We’re still fooling with DADT in spite of all the studies and testimony. We’ve fooled with it to the point where our Generals are making fools of themselves. That’s what happens when you fool with stuff. Now the Commander in Chief and the Secretary of Defense has to deal with that problem. Enough is enough take the votes resolve the problem and let’s move on.
Gosh only knows what’s going to happen with the Dream Act but contrary to what seems to be conventional wisdom within our Legislators our immigration problems aren’t going to go away.
The President made a deal because our Legislators whose job it is to make the deals wouldn’t. Okay when you make a deal there’s going winners and losers. Enough is enough. Quit letting the pursuit of the perfect solution stand in the way of dealing with some kind of solution. Do something and when necessary set down and take out the parts that don’t work and keep the ones that do.
Simple fact of the matter is that there aren’t any perfect solutions to the Human Condition short of the grave.
If you’re waiting to either praise or demonize the President for a failure to come up with a perfect solution you are barking up the wrong tree.
If you’re waiting to either praise or demonize the Legislators for failure to come up with a perfect solution your chasing a false trail.
There are no perfect solutions. There are only solutions that do the most good for the most people. In this process there are going to be individual winners and losers.
Enough is enough. Let’s make a decision because the longer you put off making a decision the more possibility opens up for a bad outcome no matter what decision you ultimately make when circumstances devolve to the point where you have no choice but to make a decision.
Independent - Bravo!!!!!!!!
Well said, IR. Where are the Democrats with backbone to stand up and do their jobs instead of expecting Barack Obama to take on the entire Conservative machine by himself?
Great posts to start the day Louis, Feisty Redhead, Beverly, Ron, IR.
As Rachel Maddow pointed out, the reason all this stuff happened in lame duck sessions for the last 4 years--the filibuster abuse by the GOP who now claim there isn't enough time to debate, well, if they would not have put holds on everything or blocked the debate from going foward, most of this stuff would have been done months ago.
Sure, IR, why bother to read and understand the treaty- just vote on it!
You cannot be serious.
The preamble states that missile defense systems are equivalent to offensive weapons. Obama says that the preamble is just that- a preamble, and has no meaning. The Russians say that the preamble is an intrinsic part of the treaty.
There are two countries that are signatories- we and the Russians. Given the disparity of understanding as to the meaning of the document, does it sound to you like it is a good idea to ratify the thing?
I am, of course, giving Obama the benefit of the doubt here, but I have not forgotten his propensity to say whatever he thinks will get him what he wants, all the while knowing that the opposite is true.
I could not possibly care less about the illustrious names of former Secretaries of State who are behind this treaty. I remember all too well that the same cast of characters was behind SALT II- and threatened that the Soviets would annihilate us if it was not ratified. It was the best treaty we could get, they warned, and not ratifying it put us at risk of mutual destruction.
Ronald Reagan kind of proved them wrong, did he not?
Independent Redneck Va.
Once again a great dose of mother wit coming from down yonder; thank you
Senator Kyl is still determined to Block the Start Treaty. Okay Senator with all due Respect enough is enough. Quit being a Dog in the Manger and let the vote be taken. Pass it or fail it but enough is enough let's move on.
You sho got that right. Senator Kyl is a greedy, angry, nasty, dog period in my eyesight. What is he gaining? Nothing except more contempt from common sense conservatives. Believe me, once he looks at his greedy, ugly, self in the mirror that junkyard dog is gonna drop that bone. He is really making the Republicans look bad.
Gosh only knows what's going to happen with the Dream Act but contrary to what seems to be conventional wisdom within our Legislators our immigration problems aren't going to go away.
As long as we have xenophobes, I'd like to say, that is the xenophobes problem. America is a melting pot and these idiots need to get a grip on diversity.
Morning to all my valued Friends and Neighbors across the country this morning( including you No Jo) It’s so good to be able to get on here this morning and see you’ll haven’t froze up or gotten buried in a snowdrift somewhere.
No Jo unlike yourself I’m pretty careful with what I say. You might want to read up there again. I didn’t say pass it. I said vote on it. It may pass and it may not but at least We the People will get the resolution that it deserves. As far as it being rushed thru to the best of my knowledge this has been available for perusal for at least 8 months. To say that isn’t time enough for somebody to do their Job sounds pretty specious to me.
IR, I was pretty specific about the area of uncertainty in the treaty.
Would you sign a contract with that kind of disagreement between you and the other party? I know that I would not.
I do not want them to vote on it until both sides agree on what the preamble means. If the Russians are right, they should vote no. If Obama is right, it should be ratified.
It is a pretty significant difference to have between the signatories. It needs to be clarified before any vote is taken.
Oh and by the way No Jo. of course I'm serious. If I wasn't serious why would I say it dear?
I have not forgotten NJ's propensity to say whatever she thinks will get her what she wants, all the while knowing that the opposite is true.
http://globalsolutions.org/files/public/documents/New-START-factsheet.pdf
(Sniff, sniff, sob, sniff) Ok, I'm feeling better now that I read IR's comment. Although NOJO kind of got me going again. Thanks IR and Merry Christmas (sniffle)
Okay with that No Jo I am fully aware that you have and some others have some reservations about certain provisions. All your doing though is using that as an Excuse for not bringing those reservations to for floor so that a majority can decide one way or the other whether it's good or bad.Do we want to throw out the good in pursuit of the perfect. Keep doing that and nobodies going to get anywhere and then one day circumstances are going to force what may turn out to be a bad situation because you didn't make a decision when you should have. Enough excuses for inaction.Let's quit spinning it and move on
Skip I hope it ain't as cold and the wind ain't blowing as hard in Oklahoma as it is up on the Hill. At least I've a mountain to slow it up some them plains out there ain't got no windbrakes at all. Keep warm and stick with it
I ask again- how do we know if it is good or bad when there are significant differences between the parties on the meaning of the treaty?
Would you enter into a contract to sell your car if the price and terms of sale were not mutually agreed upon?
The Russians insist that the preamble is binding, and we must reduce or eliminate our missile defenses. In this world, where rogue nations are developing nuclear weapons, that is a ridiculous agreement, and should be rejected.
Obama says that the preamble is non-binding, and will not impact our missile defenses. If he is right, it is a good treaty, and should be ratified.
I know I would not vote with this level of misunderstanding.
Persistant cuss with that convoluted reasoning there ain't you No Jo..Maybe somehow you ain't finding your way thru this Thick Southern accent. I've had this problem before up in New Jersey.Let me repeat this one more time.My boss can't make a decision on whether to approve or disappove the contract if I let it set on my desk with the excuse that I haven't quite got it right yet.It is time to put it on his desk so he can either approve it or turn it down and tell me to go back and rework it. But if I keep it setting on my desk any more he's probably going to fire my sorry butt for nonperformance. Lead, follow or get out of the cotton picking way so somebody else can give it a shot. But for goodness sakes quit sitting on it it ain't going to Hatch itself
Are YOU serious? They have debated and researched and read and re-read and dissected this treaty for over six months!
And, despite the fact that you don't care about the opinion of former Secretaries of State, former Presidents, experts in the field, all of them are more learned on the subject than you. Or me.
Thanks IR, yes the wind was brutally cold over the weekend. We got a bit of a break yesterday and today, really almost spring like, but we're getting snow this weekend so back in the deep freeze.
Ah, NOJO and JO-JO1 and the Party of "NO". You could hang them with a new rope and they would complain it was made in China when it was their party that sent the rope-making jobs off-shore.
Waddaya gonna do? Sometimes you just have to smile and grab another Kleenex.
Merry Christmas EVERYBODY (U2, Jo-jo1 and nojo) or Happy Hannuka, Joyous Kwansa, Rockin' Ramada or Wonderful Winter Solstice. However choose (or not) to celebrate the season. (uh-oh, I think I'm going to cry again, Kleenex, quick, Kleenex somebody)
It's true that there is broad bipartisan support for the treaty as John B cites.
But it's also true that there is a significant difference in interpretation over missile defenses as no joe points out:
http://lugar.senate.gov/issues/start/pdf/RussianUnilateral.pdf
http://lugar.senate.gov/issues/start/pdf/USUnilateral.pdf
While I surely respect the judgment of the luminaries that have come out in favor of the treaty, I still find it troublesome that there is such wide disagreement between the countries on the missile defense issue. The U.S. has had a 20 year head start in developing missile defenes and we are WAY ahead of the rest of the world, most particularly Russia. Therefore I don't think it's in our interests to sign a treaty which the Russians adamantly maintain restricts "qualitative or quantitative build-up" of missile defense. If there were some diplomatic wiggle room ambiguity on this point, then maybe it would be OK for the U.S to ratify. But there's no ambiguity here, the respective positions of the U.S and Russia are diametrically opposed. Kind of defeats the purpose of signing any "agreement" eh?
Why not bring it to the floor and vote despite being asininely flawed?
Couple of reasons.
One is that this is the same typical Obama/Dem bull sh1t way of trying to govern. The American people are tired of inept leadership taking an important issue and trying to cram through a piece of crap at the last minute. You guys don't get it. (IR - what kind of an idiot what hand his boss an obviously flawed contract just to get it off his desk? Do your job, fix it and then get it to your boss.)
More importantly, (and this will completely go over the libbies heads) is the world perception of American weakness. Obama and the liberals are correctly perceived as being weak on foreign policy/national security. Regardless, it is important for the world to know that there are American politicians, there is a party, that does have a clue.
Bottom line - If Obama is honest and believes that START does not limit America's right to misslile defense, then there is no principled reason to not add clear strong language stating that. He should put it in there in bold capital letters. Be a man. If he doesn't, Republicans should force the issue, before coming to the floor, and show that at least one party in America is not nutless.
Oh Bob-18, you big poopyhead, it's Christmas. I don't think you're very good at this. Give it a rest.
Wow Kleenex stock is up another point, glad I got in when I did.
Bill don’t see you so often any more. If you don’t make it back before Christmas Merry Ho Ho Ho from the Hill folk.
Not surprisingly there are a lot of aspects to your points that I do not disagree with. And there are procedural ways to deal with those concerns that would serve you and I much better than the ones that Senator Kyl is taking at this time. By his actions the concerns and how they being expressed this deal is getting lost in partisan politics and when dealing with these kinds of issues I don’t think we ought to go there. I have a fundamental problem with folks of either side of the aisle playing with some of these more arcane rules for exactly that reason.
Bob what can I say? Once again I reckon we should just step back in awe of your over whelming brilliance. I can only offer my sincere congratulations on taking the lead in the Point standings for The Cheerio Go Kart Racing Rookie of the Year. Just hope you don’t get tangled up in Skip’s new Rope and hang yourself before you get to the Finish line. He’s right you’d probably b!tch about that too.
Nah, nothing brilliant about that post, just common sense, an awarenes of reality and an average range intelligence. Sorry if that is overwehelming for you.
Another thread, another baseless claim by bob;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/8626041.stm
He'll no doubt be along pretty soon to explain how that means the opposite of what it says.

Bob look out there old sport looks like John B's got you fixing to get tangled up in that new rope. Hate to see you lose your Rookie of the Year points and crash and burn on the backstretch
John B's ropes are always nothing more than a bunch of irrelevent silly string.
N. Korea is sinking S. Korean ships and shelling their island while showing off their new nuclear facilities, while Russia is helping Iran get the bomb, while they sign agreements in Venezuela to deploy medium range missiles, while Poland and the Czech Republic get stiffed/pissed by Obama on missile defense, while France mocks how naive Obama is and Merckel........... on and on... the Taliban gains - more American losses this year than 87 months under Bush with insane policy that removed any realistic chance to have a good outcome .........Karzai dealing with Iran......John comes up with a BBC popularity pole with a bar showing how popular Obama is in Kenya. Compares the lowpoint of the Iraq war to now when the war is won (No doing on Obama's part btw). The world knows how weak Obama is and a lot of the bad guys actually like him for that. They don't care about popularity contest.
Anyway he cares about Obama and he tries real hard.
It's OK, I rather enjoy demonstrating that bob doesn't have his oars in the water. He hasn't disappointed me yet.
No kidding, and where are the Teapublicans (or Blue Dogs) on Obama's suggestion to work on reform of the tax code between now and the next expiration in two years? No, they want the cuts to be made permanent NOW without a comprehensive and truly viable assessment of revenues. No, they want the cuts to be made permanent NOW and then they'll blame deficits on entitlement programs.
The deficits were caused by two wars, unfunded tax cuts, and bail-outs for big business. You may note that the Republicans are mum on this. If they were sincere about the deficit they would end the two wars, end loopholes and caps on taxes that benefit the rich (including themselves), and demand repayment from big business with interest.
Instead, the Republicans attack the least among us, as usual. Even though it is the middle class that pays for Social Security (FICA is capped at the first $106,000), and even though employers pay premiums for unemployment insurance along with W2 with-holdings, and even though Medicare is a fee-for-service program that requires premiums at minimum of $200/month from the elderly--this is always where Republicans focus when it comes to cuts in spending.
The average UI check is $1,200/month gross. Anyone who believes a family of four wants to live on this indefinitely is full of chicken crap and needs to lose their job too so they can see what it feels like. Also, it is illogical to conclude that tax cuts = spending cuts. It will = more debt (China) and less services (teachers, cops, etc.)
Instead of raising the age or decreasing the amount of payments for Social Security, reduce the cost of things in a fair way (Medicare fraud, paying Access, disability, etc. through Social Security), and increase revenues in a fair manner by removing loopholes and caps on Social Security contribution.
Also, start requiring other nations to spend on defense, and get fair trade agreements in place. Start providing incentives for companies to headquarter and create jobs in the U.S.
Stop with the right-wing spin and start getting real.
The mindset of Hypocrisy. At some point in the last 4 years, this country stopped functioning. We have a bunch of GOP hooligans and thugs in the Senate who decided when they lost their "permanent majority" that they would stop doing the work of the people who pay them and spend all their time defeating the opposition.
Tax cuts are the only party platform the GOP knows; they are the answer to everything but 30 years of trickle down madness has created stagnant wages for the middle, no upward mobility for the poor, well paying jobs shipped overseas, a crumbling infrastructure, failing schools but 2% of the population, who were doing fine before Reagan, have steadily increased their wealth.
Mitt Romney, Sarah Palin and other out of government politicians now say the Obama/GOP tax compromise is not good enough, it will add to the debt (well, no kidding since those cuts added to the debt for the last 10 years), they don't think the unemployed should be helped either, and of course, the rich must be protected at all costs. They want all tax cuts permanent. Will nothing make these republicans happy? President Obama could have told the GOP to take a hike (I wish he would have except I understand it is the other 98% of America who would be hurt), told the GOP that he would veto any tax plan that contained retention of the Bush tax cuts for the 2% richest among us. President Obama, unlike legislators who prefer to fight, obstruct and otherwise fail to help the people, did what had to be done, he compromised to get the best deal possible.
John Boehner cried when talking about children and his concern for their future yet he plans to cut education spending by a huge chunk. He chokes back tears when talking about how hard his life was (I do not doubt that it was) yet votes against aid to the poor, the unemployed. Empty tears.
Senator McCain who once supported the repeal of DADT now rants against it; he keeps moving his goal posts. He has become a bitter man who no longer has principles or perhaps it is that he no longer remembers what his principles once were.
Arizona Governor Jan Brewer created Republican Death Panels by cutting $5 million from medicaid. She could find money to renovate a stadium, and $50 million for prison upgrades but has sentenced to death row Arizona citizens who need organ transplants.
Senator Kyl is determined to stop the START treaty this year. If it doesn't pass this year, it means that the entire process must start over in 2011 because it will be a new Congress requiring all new hearings, all new testimony, all new debate--delay, deny, obstruct, defeat President Obama. So what if such tactics harm the United States. It will not be a defeat for the President but a defeat for America. Reagan has turned over in his grave at the foolishness of his party.
Politics for power only, for selfish interests, for unwillingness to compromise is a mindset of hypocrisy and the disastrous result is broken government at all levels.
Jody: You scored a Touchdown on this post. Excellent examples of hypocracy. Personally, I vote for Boehner as the most hypocritical.
Outstanding, Jody. The November win has made Conservatives fearless that their hypocrisy will be recognized for what it is. That or they're so confident that they don't care.
Fear not, Jody. David Plouffe is coming backup to the White House!
He is a political genius!
He will get the message out!
Look at what a great job he did for Gordon Brown in the U.K. elections!
Oh, wait- Brown and his Labour Party came in third.
Oh, well, never mind.
Thanks, Ron. One of those mornings when over a cup of coffee, recent happenings formed a pattern and the words came. I listen to these folks and wonder how they live with themselves.
I notice No Joe doesn't discuss any of the conservative politicians' actions but changes the subject to Gordon Brown and the UK--best laugh I've had today. FYI, David Plouffe has always been around--just quietly off campus.
Jody, there was nothing in your post but regurgitated talking points. I might as well argue with my cat. He is still going to want more catnip than I am willing to give him.
By the way- you might want to watch it, because a couple of lines in your post in reference to the new Speaker are word for word from a column I read in the newspaper today.
In case you did not know it, David Plouffe and Anita Dunn crossed the pond last year to manage the Labour Party's campaign.
It was an epic fail, because you cannot run a gauzy, ephemeral, non-specific campaign when there is a record to see.
That will be Obama's problem. The mid terms showed just how great his job approval ratings are.
No Joe. Regurgitated talking points? You are of course, referring to your own comments since mine happens to be the news of the past two weeks, no talking points there Skippy, just current events and my view of them which you don't have to like. I'm still laughing at your change of subject to Gordon Brown and the UK. Yes, I know all about David Plouffe, I do keep up with things and it still has no relevance to AZ Republican Death Panels, tax cuts, START, or Boehner's empty tears.
You go right ahead and talk to your cats because they're the only ones who pay attention to you but of course, you feed them.
Jody-
You should make a brief visit to progressive website Firedoglake.com.
At present, the founder of Firedoglake, Jane Hamsher, is busily organizing Democrats to contact Democratic House members and urge them to vote no on President Obama's Bush tax cuts compromise:
"It's Nancy Pelosi's obligation to refuse to bring major legislation like this up for a vote unless a majority of the Democratic caucus supports the bill, as she already agreed not to do."
And;
"If a majority of Democrats won't vote for the Obama-GOP tax plan, Speaker Pelosi must not bring it to the floor for a vote. Let's find out where Democrats stand."
I only bring this matter to your attention, Jody, because your original post displayed a distinct lack of balance regarding who is opposing President Obama's compromise with Congressional Republicans...and why.
I'm sure that failing to mention the opposition from the left regarding the Obama-GOP deal was merely an oversight on your part...and not a display of your own hypocrisy.
Great post, Jody. Don't let them get you down...
Jody- as great as you post was, if you could somehow make it 10X as good and factual, NoJo would STILL find fault with it for some obscure, non-relevant reason. Hang in there, and please continue to contribute to these conversations!
Nice to read some common sense commentary, even though, admittedly, I rarely contribute the same myself.
Jody, Iowa
Great post !
{It’s Beginning To Look A Lot Like Work…} You guys beat me.
Silver Bells, Silver Bells – It’s Christmas Time In The City – And DC Is Humming With Activity
First Read:
At noon this morning, Strick adds, the Senate will begin a series of votes that will ultimately lead to the passage of tax-cuts bill. There will be three votes that will attempt to change the bill, followed by the vote for passage of the tax bill itself. The votes to amend the bill -- proposed by the legislation’s staunchest opponents (Republicans Tom Coburn and Jim DeMint and independent Bernie Sanders) -- are expected to fail. The vote for passage, which sends the bill to House, should happen about 1:00 pm ET and pass with overwhelming bipartisan support.
http://blackwaterdog.wordpress.com/2010/12/15/wopo-abc-poll-87-non-true-liberals-supports-president-obama/
87% Not-Real Progressives Support President Obama
More top corporate executives expect to hire workers and boost spending on their companies over the next six months.
A survey released yesterday by Business Roundtable, an association of CEOs of big U.S. companies, shows 45 percent of executives say they expect their companies to add more workers.
That’s the highest percentage who have said they planned to add jobs since the survey began in late 2002. Meanwhile, only 18 percent said they expected their work forces to shrink, one of the lowest readings over the past five years, and 38 percent predict no change.
Think Progress:
Republicans won the midterm elections, but they still haven’t won the public’s trust — a new Washington Post-ABC News poll says the public trusts President Obama marginally more than congressional Republicans to address the country’s problems, by a margin of 43 to 38 percent. Most continue to say that the Republicans in Congress are not doing enough to compromise with Obama on important issues.
Reid warned yesterday that he’ll bring the Senate back after Christmas to address unfinished work in the lame duck session, such as the START treaty, DREAM Act, and DADT repeal. While Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) called such plans “disrespectful” to Congress and Christians, Reid said “Congress ends Jan. 4″ and “we’re going to continue working on this stuff until we get it done.”
“Nearly eight in 10 Americans favor allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.” With 77 percent of the public supporting open service, the results “signal continued widespread public support for ending” Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.
And finally: President Obama has tapped rockstar Jon Bon Jovi to serve on a new presidential advisory council. Bon Jovi — who founded a nonprofit to provide affordable housing for the homeless — will join the new 25-member White House Council for Community Solutions, a panel established to provide advice on “the best ways to mobilize citizens, nonprofits, businesses and government to work more effectively together to solve specific community needs.”
_____________
Let's go Congress. Senator Reid - Make them do it on DADT, START and the DREAM Act.
Start the New Year and new Congress with a clean slate moving forward. Tie up all the loose ends on these critical critical issues for our Nation.
Good morning Pat, Boston, MA
http://blackwaterdog.wordpress.com/2010/12/15/wopo-abc-poll-87-non-true-liberals-supports-president-obama/
Thank you it is an excellent site. I boookmarked it. I'm glad it reiterates that the media is hellbent on ratings.
Fox Noise is a right wing propaganda tool which forces the left to spin their lies.
Great post, Pat, providing bits of news we have not all seen or heard.
Cheers to Senator Reid, make them work, bring them back, bring in the cots and order pizza--the GOP obstructed for 11 months, now they might have to work for their pay. Senator Kyl is out of touch--disrespectful to Congress and to Christmas. Does he find it disrespectful that many people have to work on Christmas Eve and Christmas Day and is it disrespectful that most employees do not get the entire week off with pay, they're lucky to get both Christmas Eve and Day off. Hypocrisy mindset of Senator Kyl--I want my days off, who cares if these things must get done.
Good Morning Pat:
I'm finding Think Progress is an excellent website. Thanks for referencing it in your posts. In fact, I like it better than Huffington.
Ron, Think Progress is an excellent site. You can see they do a lot of research. And the progressive commentators are absolutely hilarious. They have me LMAO every single day. I only posted there a couple of times, but I may go back over the holidays.
They are so so funny in the comment section.
Ron Indiana
Good Morning Ron
Eyeball to eyeball I have come to dislike Huffington. Post and Fire Dog Lake. I can't tell the difference between those 2 and a sleazy right wing blog. All they do is bash the President as if they could do a better job. Hah! as Chris Matthews would say.
Btw; here lately Chris has been giving me a tingle up my spine.
Beverly in Chicago
Huffington Post doesn't do itself any favors with the Obama bashing. I'm not a Democrat because I'm an ideologue, I'm a Democrat because I like to think about issues and look for solutions. Purely ideological stand points turn me off regardless of the party. For example, I stopped giving money to MoveOn when they ran that stupid "Gen Petraus, don't betray us" ad, and I'm not too happy with liberals who bash Obama for the sake of purity.
I'm on board with you Bev! I was never a fan of Fire Dog Lake and HP has become unreadable as far as I'm concerned!
Arianna & Jane are too rabid for my tastes these days!
Thanks for the link Pat, Boston - I've bookmarked it as well!
Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL
I'm on board with you Bev! I was never a fan of Fire Dog Lake and HP has become unreadable as far as I'm concerned!
Arianna & Jane are too rabid for my tastes these days!
Hey what's up girl friend? Usually you make us laugh every day; all day.
Let me see if I give you a laugh . Would you agree Jane Hamster looks like a dumb bunny every time she goes on Lawrence O'Donnell? Or is it a bump on a log?
Mission accomplished with the Jane Hamster! LMAO! I'm thinkin ol' Jane is a masochist because she keeps getting spanked by Larry and still comes back for more...
Now that I think about it... she's got the McBlinky deer in the headlight look down pat! lol
This is a classic... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EASpPlcVbdI
*Warning! Make sure you have no soda or coffee in your mouth while viewing*
Feisty
Now that I think about it... she's got the McBlinky deer in the headlight look down pat! lol
This is a classic... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EASpPlcVbdI
*Warning! Make sure you have no soda or coffee in your mouth while viewing*
Thanks for the warning
Here's 2 short videos less than a mintue I'm sure you'll be ROFWL
http://bajanreporter.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/mcain-gives-obama-the-tongue.jpg
That deer sure can salivate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoOK3prNrZI
Talk about lost and clueless; Ha Ha.
More last minute attempts to jam disasterous expensive burdensome legislation crammed with earmarks and handouts down everybody's throats without debate, amendments or worse even READING the legislation
Will hard working citizens continue to permit our supposed representatives to FAIL to do their jobs, let a bunch of unelected staffers write important laws then vote for the laws without even READING the laws?
Vote all of the criminals out in 2012
One last heist from the Democrats. They obviously learned nothing from the November elections. Talk about the privileged class in America, that's what the Democrats have become to Americans, nothing more than than the "Let them eat cake" ruling class.
Shaping up to be another bad week for Obama and the Democrats. The only thing that appears to have any chance of success of passing is the Republican brokered extension of what are now to be known as the Obama Tax Cuts For The Rich. Everything else such as, START, DADT, and the omnibus trillion dollar pork filled appropriates bill, are all dead in the water. To top it all off, the Obama/Democrats ObamaCare also got slapped down as unconstitutional this week by a Virginia appeals judge.
I bet Obama can't wait to get to Hawaii. With any luck, he won't come back.
You mean vote out people like Boehner, who hands out corporate checks to republicans on the House floor? I'm with you
Hey, this is the deal that Mitch McConnell and the Senate GOP leadership made.
...but don't let that stand in the way of a good rant.
I believe she was referring to the Omnibus spending bill. You know the one- the democrats did not want the burden of a budget align with HCR, Cap and Trade, etc., so they have been funding the government with continuing resolutions.
The republicans are demanding a continuing resolution though January, when they will be able to fund the government the way the electorate wants it funded. The democrats, not understanding that they lost, want to do it their way.
We shall see what happens. . .
Hey, Feisty- look! It's that 'cram down' deal again.....
What IS it with these people???
Crammed - Rammed - Jammed... wish-full thinking on their part perhaps?
You know how freaky the family values crowd is... ;0)
I never thought I'd ever see so much support for extending all of the Bush-era tax cuts...
At least not among lefties, anyway.
And, certainly not at First Read.
Who knew...?
Are you kidding me?! You now have the audacity to give the Republicans credit for a deal the President initiated?
The Republicans said no. They vowed to defeat anything Obama wanted. They refused to budge. That isn't brokering, that's obstructing!
The Republicans also told the American public they would never compromise and they would never pass a bill that wasn't paid for. That's deceit.
You and the Republicans are simply unbelieveable!
People come on here every day and try to CRAM some knowledge in nasty redhead.......................so far it hasn't worked.
No Jo, JoAnne, Jill, there really isn't any reason to come on here and try to educate nasty, bev, drive on or newday. You guys always come on here with a fact filled argument and it is like putting lipstick on a pig.
These guys do not care about coherant arguments, they just want to bitch and whine that us republicans are not seeing the benefit of their entitlement policies.
They can not debate you because they do not have the capacity so they resort to name calling, making fun of christians, anybody white or heterosexual.
Basically a really sad bunch. Just thank the good lord that you do not lead such a pathetic existance as these guys.
I come on here for a laugh now and then, but sometimes I cannot help myself. It is really hard to believe that there are people in this world so pitiful.
It just cracks me up when nasty calls No Jo a liar. No Jo comes on here every day with important factual arguments and since nasty doesn't have the mental capacity to understand, she calls No Jo a liar. Yep, thats what kids in 5th grade do. Way to go nasty, you told her.
Pathetic.......really pathetic, why don't you listen and think a little bit and quit being smartasses and you might learn something.
Now I know nasty is going to come on here and try to insult me.........so what......whats new?
Obama had no choice. He had to accept the Republican deal. The only thing he got was an extension of unemployment benefits - needed only because all his job stimulus programs have failed. And it was a "take it or leave it offer" from the Republicans. Joe Biden even carried that Republican message to the Democrats in Congress. See source below for details:
Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-12-10/house-democrats-fuming-over-tax-talks-lash-out-at-obama-s-deal.html
That's dealing from a position of strength. Imagine that? The extreme in the minority Republicans rolling the POTUS! Elections of have consequences. I guess this was one of them.
Ever hear of PayGo? Who passed that again? Think there was any deceit in that?
And besides, the Republicans made the best deal they could at the time, them being in the super-minority and all.
Proud Republican (something contradictory about that name, somehow...), the Midol is in the 2nd cabinet, 1st shelf.
And to prove my point..............look at above post.
You don't have to take my word for it...
The FACT is NJNB has been called out for spinning her tall tales more than once by the moderators. lol
Beverly, I'm glad you enjoy it. She really has put together a lovely website. It's not hero worshipping of the President that's she is doing - she's just trying to get some positive information out there in between all the negative. And I applaud her.
Kind of like Tiger Beat, right?
Please- Ms Palin's reading list is not the topic of discussion here.
Well... at least we know once and for all where NJNB gets her info from!
to voteÂ
My view of the leaking of huge numbers of government documents is mostly negative, but last night on Olbermann's show, Michael Moore made a valid point in favor of leaking at least SOME classified documents. They showed a picture of George Bush in August 2001 being handed the secret memo entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike Inside the United States," which Bush then promptly ignored.
Had that document been leaked to the press, the world would have become aware that Bin Laden was going to attack the US despite Bush's incompetence. The leak would have put airport security around the country and everyone else on high alert, and totally messed up Bin Laden's plans. There would have been no 3000 Americans killed on 9/11/01, no 9-year bloody Afghanistan war, no excuse for the Iraq war based on the lies that Saddam Hussein had something to do with 9/11, and no thousands of US casualties and hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths in those two wars.
We'd be living in a different -- and probably better -- world if someone in government had had the courage to go to the press with that memo, despite the likelihood of prison. He or she would have been called an enemy of the state by the punditocracy just like Assange is, but would have been considered a hero by most everyone else.
I knew it.
Leaking classified documents that puts the nation at risk while embarrassing a republican- good.
Doing the same that embarrasses a democrat- bad.
Doing the same that embarrasses Obama- evil.
Liberals are obvious, but Obama worshippers are so predictable it is laughable.
nojonobo:
I guess I'll have to be charitable and assume that that's the Obama Derangement Syndrome talking and not nojonobo. I'm sure she won't talk like an idiot once medical science has found a cure for that dread disease. As I clearly stated in detail, the leaking of the Bin Laden memo would NOT have put US security at risk. To the contrary, it would have saved hundreds of thousands of lives. But apparently the loss of those lives is less important than saving G. W. Bush from embarrassment to nojo and the loony tunes fringe of the radical right. To the rest of the world, G. W. Bush IS an embarrassment to America.
Houston;
How do YOU know it would have saved lives. The point is you don't neither does that fat slob Moore. He is the one that needs to sprang a leak. He sit his fat azz on T.V. and attempted to rationalize posting bond for that wikileaks clown.
Did you read that memo? Did you write it? Did Moore write it? If someone is determined to do something, it probably can't be stopped if the determination is strong. 9/11 was planned for years. That was not a plot that popped up when Bush was elected.
You talk like a LOONEY TOON of the left.
BTW: Who gives a ratz azz what the rest of the world thinks. They don't like your azz anyway and it has been that way loooooong before Bush. I have lived all over the world and people do not care for the American way irregardless who is the POTUS.
The leftist mythology that Bush was warned about Bin Laden plans to attack the U.S would crack me up, if it werent's such a vile, scurrilous misrepresentation of the facts. Below is a link to the August 2001 security briefing to Bush that the left points to as "evidence" that Bush was forewarned about a Bin Laden attack. I challenge any reasonable person to read this material and show me the hard, actionable intelligence on which President Bush could have based a realistic policy that would have prevented 9/11. I further challenge any reasonable person to explain to me why the 70 full field investigations conducted by the FBI into Bin Laden related suspicious activities does not constitute a reasonable and prudent response to the threat as it was understood at the time.
The armchair quarterbacks who maintain that Bush was "warned" about a Bin Laden attack and therefore was negligent in preventing 9/11 are just twisting reality to suit their pathetic narrative. And they should be ashamed of themselves for doing so.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A2285-2004Apr10?language=printer
My God- we REALLY have a holdout STILL defending Bush on this one... HOW many years later?
Bill- are you that Japanese guy they found in some jungle 20 years after the war, still ready to fight??
Read the link before you go on babbling.
Bill, you did not expect to get anywhere talking sense to these people, did you?
No? I did not think so.
Proud republican, thanks for your remarks to me. You, I, Bill, Joannasmith, Mixed Bag, bob, Big Bear, and a few others, (where are you, Richard, Washington State?), don't expect to have any influence on the far left, professional democrat posters.
We post for the people who come here to read, but do not post.
I have never been given to name calling, but, in this case, I am sorta glad that they do it. It undermines any argument they make.
Anyway, Marry Christmas to all, and Happy, healthy New Year. It should be a good one, now that we have the means to stop the Obama spending spree.
Here's hoping they put a cap on the White House entertainment fund!
This is the sentence in the August 2001 memo to Bush that is too terrible for Bill in Fairfax and the other Bush apologists to acknowledge exists:
It's clear that if that one sentence had been widely known to the public, something would have been done to beef up airport security and Bin Laden would have no doubt scrubbed the attack plans. That cannot be denied, except for those who are in denial like Bill, nojo, and inthemiddle.
BTW: IntheMiddle has his head up his "azz" as ususal.
Did I miss something? You mean he's come out for some air in the past? Damn!
Houston:
There is no room in there, I have to get past your mother and Fiesty first, jackazz.
Man, you had better go play with the kids...you F'ing trick azz b#$^%
What a charming man you are ITM - and I use the term MAN loosely!
Have you beat your wife today? Maybe give your dog a kick or two?
The wekend warrior is dismissed to go back to his miserable existance at the BBQ shack... lmao
So many excellent posts here this morning.
Well done to you all. It is high time we pushed back against all the negative and blame game against President Obama.
Recall Obama said he would go after earmarks in approriation bills "line-by-line". The first bill with earmarks shows up on his desk and he signed it. He's been doing the same ever since. And it won't stop with this latest pork filled bill.
So it's appropriate to point out what a liar and a fraud Obama is. He's nothing short of a rubber stamp handy-man for Nancy and Harry's spending sprees.
JoAnnna, you are right. Obama is one of two things: Either a flat-out lying con artist who has the liberal lemmings bamboozled or he is just a simple minded idiot being controlled by the crusty, nasty wench from California and the dumb-ass Reid.
Too funny. "he's a comie that hates the rich" and "he's a dumb ass that just gave the rich lots of dough for two more year"
C'mon, y'all- what's REALLY eating you? You can share.
Y'all? Hello? Ennybuddy home?
Why did the wait for the last minute to address all these issues? What a joke.
The tax cut deal will be amended in the House. Specifically the inheritance tax provisions will return to their 2007 levels: 3.5 million exempted (7 million for couples) with a tax rate of 45% after that. It will then go back to the Senate where Mitch O'Connell will have an interesting dilemma. I suspect he will scuttle the bill and have taxes go up on everyone until the Republican majority in the House is seated in January. The unemployment benefits will be lost at that point.
So that means no START either and certainly no omnibus bill--perhaps not even a continuing resolution. When families are deeply dysfunctional, they can't get break the cycle of dysfunction without an outside mediator. Sadly, our country has no outside mediator.
Fancy That, you've put together a scenario that as each day goes by, it looks more and more like what you wrote will be what happens. The days of the Democratic dominated Congress are limited now, and they left so much to the very end that it is now a real possibility that they will get nothing done at all. The tax rate extension deal on the table brokered by Obama and the Republicans can only pass if it is not changed by the House. There just isn't enough time to do otherwise.
JoAnnaSmith:
I know younger or more sensitive viewers such as JoAnna couldn't tolerate watching Rachel Maddow, but last night she spoke on this very subject. It is a FACT that major legislation was delayed until right before Christmas last year as well, because Harry Reid threatened the Repubs with keeping them in session over the holidays if they didn't get anything done. The Republicans may have their "principles" that they're willing to shut down the government to maintain, but when it comes to principles versus vacation, vacation wins with them every time.
Anybody know whether or not Rachel Maddow supports the Obama-GOP deal to extend all of the Bush tax cuts?
How about Olbermann?
It has all piled up at the very end of the year and the session because the Republicans have said no all year, have refused to read their homework, have been too busy obstructing to do anything positive.
Houston
I think you are wrong and in fact think that it would be a good wake up call for the Democrats and the people they are providing such disservice to if nothing passed till next year and taxes went up and UEI stopped
Let the Democrats explain why they killed a bill from Pres O to help the Americn people
Reid's management of the agenda leaving everything to the lame duck Congress was stupid
Mixed Bag
You gotta be kidding Rachel and Keith both nearly experienced "exploding head syndrome" when they talked about the compromise
felden
wrong the facts and wrong on the law
Reid did not bring up the budget bill and he did not bring up DADT and he did bring up the START treaty until the lame duck session
The Democrats screwed this pooch
Robert,
The fact is that the Republicans in the Senate would not allow Reid to bring these bills up for a vote because either they had placed a hold on the bill(s) (only takes one Senator) or they filibustered the procedural vote that allows the bill to come to the floor.
So felden is correct. Senate rules favor the party in the minority if they have 41 votes.
FR:
Oh, now that's hilarious. Kyl needs to do no work at all to block the treaty that even G. H. W. Bush said should be passed. Kyl just has to sit there on his lazy rear end and do nothing but shout NO. It's too bad the taxpayers have to pay for deadbeats like him to occupy space in the Capitol building.
Houston
To say nothing of Reid and his band of blind mice right?
Somone yesterday commented that extending the Bush tax cuts amounted to a way to "rob the poor and give to the rich."
Ummm...can someone please explain: How do you "rob from the poor" ?
Even if you took 100% of everything ALL the poor in this country have and gave it to a single truly "rich" person, it probably wouldn't even equal half of what they do pay each year in income taxes!
Why do people follow a party (Dems) that wants ALL the people in the country to be poor and dependent on the government?!? Sounds a little too much like the ruling class Lording over the poor, weak, peasants to me.
Pay your taxes to your king, or else we'll burn your homes, throw you in prison, take your children, and do unpleasant unmentionables to your wife.
Remember our history. A larger government, with more money, more power only equals more corruption. Don't believe that? Look at the mistakes even the Republicans made when they were in power.
We need smaller government. THE ONLY WAY TO GET SMALLER GOVERNMENT IS LESS TAXES!
(Note that doesn't mean we don't care about the poor people who are struggling. It just means that we believe MORE in the goodness of the American heart. If we can get government out of the way, allow more families to keep what THEY earn, then THEY will look out for the needs of their communities so much more effectively than any government bureaucrats can!)
Search your souls... you KNOW it's true. If Dems want higher taxes, can't THEY voluntarily pay more?
 I think it is funny that the people that are against the health care plan because it means the goverment takeover of health care. They are also against mandating that people have to get insurance which then insures that the government is going to be more involved in health care. When people who don't have insurance get sick and require hospitlization or emergency room treatment and then can't pay for it drives up the cost of private and work related insurance payments we all make and in addition to make the hospitals whole so they don't go out of business the federal goverment, states and localities must pay for bad debt and charity care and make disproportionate share payments which comes from tax dollars thus guaranting that the goverment will be more active in health care. It is time to stop listening to the 30 second sound bytes to try and answer tremendously complex problems. Without the healthier people in the insurance pools the whole financing system does not work.Â
 I think it is funny that the people that are against the health care plan because it means the goverment takeover of health care. They are also against mandating that people have to get insurance which then insures that the government is going to be more involved in health care. When people who don't have insurance get sick and require hospitlization or emergency room treatment and then can't pay for it drives up the cost of private and work related insurance payments we all make and in addition to make the hospitals whole so they don't go out of business the federal goverment, states and localities must pay for bad debt and charity care and make disproportionate share payments which comes from tax dollars thus guaranting that the goverment will be more active in health care. It is time to stop listening to the 30 second sound bytes to try and answer tremendously complex problems. Without the healthier people in the insurance pools the whole financing system does not work.Â
While watching, it’s a Wonderful Life; I can’t help but think that the Republicans remind me of rich Mr. Potter while the Democrats remind me of George Bailey and the working class. Have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year America.
I'll be glad when 2012 gets here so we can vote out more Dems and RINO's. Then the adults can get on with leading this country back from the cliff Obammy and his minions have put us over. Just like Nov 2nd, we will be heard again.
BUSH 2012
Louisiana Don,
After January 5th, nothing gets passed, nothing gets funded unless it proudly displays the REPUBLICAN GOLD SEAL OF APPOVAL. We don't really need Democrats in congress anyway. They take up space and consume oxygen and that's about it.
Correction, nothing gets passed without the signature of the President. But, I have a feeling their will be a lot of veto action.
Let's hope that when the GOP assumes control in Jan., they remember how they were elected, and just what the majority of people in the country were saying to them. If they continue on like the Spending Party Dems, we need to remove them from their position of power during the next election cycle.
And Edward, Dems may take up space and consume oxygen, but the majority of them are good for a laugh. I enjoy opening this site in the morning to hear the comments from some of the left-wingers for my morning dose of humor.
Y gotta love Fiesty on this site - she can comment all day and you will enjoy reading of her stupidity.....
Fiesty is right on and a free thinking, which I think is needed in this world. To many others are just talking heads that watch the right wing FOX and they can't think for themselves.
Hey Job1, free thinking is a good thing, unless it seems to be a conservative thing, then it's just too many people watching FOX. My goodness, the majority of the "cut & paste" verbage on this site are comments derived from the liberal leaning sites like moveon.org for one, that continually distort the truth.
Many who do not lean to the left are free thinkers......believe me! We just may not agree with you.
Well good, that what it's all about. Free thinking.
Right on Safecracker,
Fiesty may not contribute much in the way of facts, but I look forward to seeing her front and center on every issue. I originally lived near her, in NW Indiana, for 32 years. I made the move to southern Nevada in 1989 and have never regretted it. So I know what the armpit weather of the midwest is like and how it must distort her thinking.
So I guess everyone is ok with the new $1.27 trillion pork bill?
Nope Reality Check, I am not ok with the pork bill. This site, as liberal as it is, should publish each earmark, identify the amount and the politician and the party who sponsored it. Give us all a target for the next election cycle.
Exactly, show each earmark, what it cost us, and who was resposible for it. This is the kind of publicity that they don't like. This hits them where they are vulnerable. In their re-election. Check out PROJECT VOTE SMART.com to view everyone's voting record.
China, North Korea, India, Pakistan, Israel, soon Iran, are not sitting at the Table of Compromise saying they will lower the number of their nuclear weapons, why should Russia and the U.S. do so? If anything, we need to start rolling-out the A-bombs- one-a-week like we did in the good ole days before America was taken over by soft, faint-hearted, sensitive (and pesky), body-hugging libs. Now the goal is only "1500" atomic bombs, next it will be 1000, then 500! What, in the future there will be no more A-bombs in the world except in Iran, China, and North Korea? Are you kidding me? (sweat!). If America had been as soft during WW II as we are prsently we'd be speaking Germain now, every Jew on the planet would be dead, and the animal Nazis would be ruling the earth with Muslims right there with them as second-class supporters--that is, of course, people having not found out the former child, homosexual prostitute (Hitler, according to the History Channel report) did indeed have not only Jewish blood running in his assumed 100 percent "Aryan" blood (notwithstanding Persians/Irani are "Aryans also), but also Northern African blood as well--cheek swabs conducted on 32 of his cousins lately-- like the Christ. * Merry Christmas * and God bless our Troops Always.
Greasy pork being served up by slimy politicians.
Ah heck. What's another trillion added on to the 13 trillion we already are indebted to (mostly to China.) Here's a great Xmas gift idea. Order online direct from China, those cute little fury caps with the Red Star on the front. Be the first on your block in new fashion.
We are so screwed with this spending. Payback is going to be a mo-fo.
I saw where unemployment and foreclosure numbers are down. Not a coincidence that things have gotten better since the Republicans won. obama couldnt' effectively run an ice cream stand.