Mere moments after citing Matthew 7’s instruction to “judge not, that ye be not judged,” Joe Scarborough denounced Jon Kyl and Jim DeMint as “un-Christlike.”
Scarborough’s strange self-contradiction came in the course of his diatribe against the two Republican senators for having criticized Harry Reid for threatening to keep the Senate in session through Christmas.
I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning.
On Wednesday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid accused Republicans of “making love to Wall Street” during the financial regulatory reform debate.
An invitation to the fundraiser, sent to a Wall Street firm, was obtained by POLITICO.
Reid and Republicans have been trading charges about cozying up to Wall Street for weeks, with Reid going after his Republican counterpart Mitch McConnell for meeting with Wall Street execs and McConnell returning fire about a Reid fundraiser in New York.
But Reid’s spokesman Jim Manley said Reid isn’t “taking money from Wall Street PACs right now.” He explained that Reid’s campaign has a very large mailing list, and “just because they receive an invite it doesn’t mean they are being solicited.”
The invitation shows that the event, billed as a “pre-primary breakfast,” is hosted by Assistant Majority Leader Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and 14 other Democratic senators. The 7:45 a.m. session on May 19th will be held at the Liaison Hotel on New Jersey Avenue, just two blocks from the Capitol building.
The invitation requests donations of $2,500 from political action committee (PAC) “co-hosts,” and $1,000 from individual “co-hosts,” who would receive “priority seating.”
What kind of loser would pay $2,500 to get a close-up view of the loathesome Harry Reid and Dick Turban?
House Democrats in vulnerable districts are waking up to the news that they will have to vote for ObamaCare for the third time.
Senate Republicans succeeded early Thursday in forcing a change in a measure altering President Obama’s newly enacted health care overhaul, meaning the bill will have to return to the House for final congressional approval.It was initially unclear how much of a problem this posed for Democrats hoping to rush the bill to Obama and avoid further congressional votes on what has been a politically painful ordeal for the party. Obama signed the main legislation, making sweeping changes in the country’s health care system, into law on Tuesday after more than a year of battling with Republicans and struggling to round up sufficient Democratic support.ma
Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, said Republicans consulting with the Senate parliamentarian had found “two minor provisions” that violate Congress’ budget rules. The provisions deal with Pell grants for low-income students.
Manley said those two provisions will be removed from the bill, and he expected the Senate to approve the measure and send it to the House. Manley said Senate leaders, after conversations with top House Democrats, expect the House to approve the revised measure.
Just when they thought they could slither out of town for the Easter break these schmucks have to reaffirm their support of the wildly unpopular bill.
Thanks Easter Bunny!
I concur. Coburn made the statement as he delivered the Repulican weekly address.
Sen. Tom Coburn, an Oklahoma Republican and personal friend of President Obama’s, on Saturday took a highly public stand against the president’s health care plan and against his intentions to “ram” a bill through Congress, warning that such a move will “divide and bankrupt America.”
Coburn, chosen as the Republican lawmaker to deliver the party’s regular weekend address to the nation, cautioned Obama against supporting the use of “reconciliation,” a legislative maneuver Democrats could execute to pass a bill through the Senate with 51 votes instead of the 60 usually required to overcome a filibuster.
The senator, himself a physician, said that the day-long health care meeting Thursday between Democratic and Republican leaders, hosted by the president, had been the beginning of a true exchange of ideas that he said have been missing for much of the last year.
“If the president and the leaders in Congress are serious about finding common ground they should continue this debate, not cut it off by rushing through a partisan bill the American people have already rejected,” Coburn said.
Congressional Republicans have played the last week brilliantly. They shined at the health care summit; Lamar Alexander was a perfect choice as a lead-off before ObamaReidPelosiCare’s death by a million paper cuts as each Republican shredded it in front of its authors. Another brilliant move was selecting Coburn for the weekly address. He is a doctor, he is well-liked and folksy and a friend of Obama’s. This one had to hurt Barry.
Meet the new Angry – Democrats on the Hill. And they are angry with each other, no less.
The anger is most palpable in the House, where Pelosi and her allies believe Obama’s reluctance to stake his political capital on health care reform in mid-2009 contributed to the near collapse of negotiations now.
But sources say there are also signs of strain between Reid and White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, and relations between Democrats in the House and Democrats in the Senate are hovering between thinly veiled disdain and outright hostility.
In a display of contempt unfathomable in the feel-good days after Obama’s Inauguration, freshman Rep. Dina Titus (D-Nev.) stood up at a meeting with Pelosi last week to declare: “Reid is done; he’s going to lose” in November, according to three people who were in the room.
Titus denied Tuesday evening that she had singled out Reid, but she acknowledged that she said Democrats would be “f—-ed” if they failed to heed the lessons of Massachusetts, where Republican Scott Brown won Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat last week.
Rahm piled on:
Emanuel, several Senate and House aides said, hasn’t been shy about assigning blame, either. He’s been especially critical of moderate senators, including Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.), for wasting months negotiating with Republican senators, such as his friend Chuck Grassley of Iowa.
While shouldering some of the blame for the Massachusetts debacle, Emanuel has reportedly criticized Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chairman Robert Menendez of New Jersey — and, on occasion, even Reid himself.
Reid and his staff were infuriated when they got word Emanuel was apparently telling associates the majority leader did too little to force Baucus to accelerate his work, according to two people familiar with the situation.
Pass the popcorn.
As the Democrats continue to circle the wagons, lets hop in the time machine and flashback to 2002 when Trent Lott was forced to resign over racially charge comments.
Sen. Harry Reid said Republican Senate leader Trent Lott’s decision to relinquish his post Friday came as no surprise.
“He had no alternative,” the Nevada Democrat and Senate minority leader said. “Senator Lott dug himself a hole and he didn’t dig it all in one setting. He dug it over the years. And he couldn’t figure out a way to get out of it.” […]
Lott’s resignation Friday culminated a controversy over his racially insensitive comments at Sen. Strom Thurmond’s 100th birthday party.
Lott said that Mississippians were proud to have voted for Thurmond in 1948 on the pro-segregationist Dixiecrat ticket.
Asked if the episode would serve as a warning to weigh his own words carefully, Reid said: “You play how you practice.”
“If you tell ethnic jokes in the backroom, it’s that much easier to say ethnic things publicly. I’ve always practiced how I play.”
Negro translation: It’s how he rolls, yo.
Harry Reid and Queen Nancy may want to pay attention to this before they claim victory.
With final negotiations on a health care overhaul beginning this week, complaints about “the evil Stupak amendment,” as the congressman dryly called it over dinner here recently, are likely to grow even louder. The amendment prevents women who receive federal insurance subsidies from buying abortion coverage — but critics assert it could cause women who buy their own insurance difficulty in obtaining coverage.
Mr. Stupak insists that the final bill include his terms, which he says merely reflect current law. If he prevails, he will have won an audacious, counterintuitive victory, forcing a Democratic-controlled Congress to pass a measure that will be hailed as an anti-abortion triumph. If party members do not accept his terms — and many vow they will not — Mr. Stupak is prepared to block passage of the health care overhaul.
“It’s not the end of the world if it goes down,” he said over dinner.He did not sound downbeat about the prospect of being blamed for blocking the long-sought goal of President Obama and a chain of presidents and legislators before him. “Then you get the message,” he continued. “Fix the abortion language and bring the bill back.”
Stupak appears to be more committed than ever to block the bill should the abortion provision previously approved in the House version be altered.
Now the disagreement over abortion financing has become a game of chicken, with Mr. Stupak saying he and 10 or 11 others, whom he would not name, will vote against a final bill that does not meet his standards, and some backers of abortion rights threatening to do the same in what is expected to be a close vote.
Stupak isn’t playing around here. He feels as left out of the negotiations as a C-Span camera.
Could abortion derail the whole thing?
The trend is not the Democrats’ friend. At least not in 2010. The party of the sitting president almost always suffers losses in midterm congressional elections. To that time-tested dynamic now add voter angst about high unemployment, big deficits and controversial legislation. Expect Senate majority leader Harry Reid to lose his effective 60-seat supermajority and Nancy Pelosi to hand the House back to the Republicans. Here’s why 2010 is looking like 1994 all over again:
1. Virginia and New Jersey. Big GOP wins in the gubernatorial races not only highlighted discontent with incumbents by recession-weary voters, they also greatly helped Republicans with candidate recruiting for 2010.
2. History. More big political change isn’t predicated on America rekindling its love for the Grand Old Party. A recent poll had the Republicans finishing a distant third in popularity behind a fictional Tea Party and the actual Democratic Party. Yet American politics has a regular ebb and flow. In 13 of the past 15 midterm elections going back to 1950, the party in control of the White House has lost an average of 22 seats in the House. In 10 of the past 15 midterms the party running the Senate has lost an average of three seats.
3. Mean Reversion. Democrats have a wide field to defend after huge victories in 2006 and 2008. Particularly in the House, there are lots of Democrats in places with a proven willingness to vote Republican. Currently 47 of them are in districts won by both John McCain in 2008 and George W. Bush in 2004. And voters in those districts may be especially unhappy with a Democratic legislative agenda that causes many Americans mixed feelings.
4. Obama-Reid-Pelosi Agenda. A RealClearPolitics aggregation of polling data shows Americans disapprove of healthcare reform by a 51-38 margin. And only a little more than a third think the $787 billion stimulus plan has done much good, according to pollster Rasmussen. There’s also plenty of worry among the electorate that Washington spending is creating a dangerous level of government debt.
Happy New Year, Queen Nancy.
Jim DeMint gave lumps of coal to Obama, Reid and Pelosi before the Christmas break. Erik Erickson at Red State calls this the best Christmas present ever. I don’t know if I would go that far, but it certainly warmed my heart to see that the Republicans are going to keep fighting the good fight for us.
When Senator DeMint engineered, and Republican Leader McConnell actually objected to the appointment of the conferees, he was really handing the ball off to the left wingers — progressives if you will — and now they have their shot to either hold their own clan members who are against the Senate compromises and force them to vote No, or have their policy demands be ignored and take the crumbs from Senator Nelson’s and Senator Lieberman’s table.
Now, because of the Senator DeMint’s objection, unless the House votes for the Senate bill unchanged — which is highly unlikely (see below) — then the Senate ObamaCare bill must be amended on the House floor to gain the votes they need to pass it on the House floor. And because of Senator DeMint’s objection to the appointment of the conferees, there will be no conference, or conference report.
If the House amends the Senate bill, they then have to send the amended bill back to the Senate — where all the 60 vote margin cloture votes still apply — cloture on the motion to proceed, and cloture to end the filibuster and cloture on any amendment.
Do I believe that this objection to the appointment of the conferees will kill ObamaCare? Yes, if the progressives or those 64 House Democrats who voted for the Stupak amendment do not roll over and play dead.
This monkey wrench may explain why the White House is putting out the word that it wants the health care bill to pass the House after the State of the Union, in February.
Erickson goes on to explain why he believes this may be the “kiss of death” to Obamacare.
This is encouraging news. No conference means we get to watch the Democrats eat their own while they fight over the public option, taxing “Cadillac” plans, abortion, taxes, etc. Pass the popcorn!
Under the current merged legislation (the version unveiled on November 18th), the federal government fully finances care for the expanded population for two years and increases its matching funds (known as FMAP) thereafter. Page 98 of the managers amendment specifically identifies Nebraska for higher federal matching funds, fully funding its expansion for an additional year:
‘‘(3) Notwithstanding subsection (b) and paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection, the Federal medical assistance percentage otherwise determined under subsection (b) with respect to all or any portion of a fiscal year that begins on or after January 1, 2017, for the State of Nebraska, with respect to amounts expended for newly eligible individuals described in subclause (VIII) of section 1902(a)(10)(A)(i), shall be determined as provided for under subsection (y)(1) (A) (notwithstanding the period provided for in such paragraph)
So the state of Nebraska gets a pass on paying for Medicaid expansion for a few years. But what happens after the three years are up? Nebraskans will be kicking in for this abomination like the rest of us. In the meantime, the majority of Nebraskans still will be forced to buy health insurance, will see their premiums rise and many will see a decline in their coverage. And all the while, their tax dollars WILL pay for abortions. Just ask Bart Stupak.