Please join me at our new location.
http://www.politicsplus.org/blog
I’ll leave this site up, because it is where we have been, but I’ll be turning off comments in a couple days.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Saturday, February 27, 2010
GOP Sweetheart – 2/27/2010: Jim Bunning
I’ve read several rants blaming Democrats for letting Bunning get away with this, but that’s not fair. The Republican and Democratic leadership had agrees to pass this measure by unanimous consent, and most of the Senators left for the weekend. The Democratic leadership had no idea that Bunning planned this, and when he dropped the bomb, there were no longer sixty Senator’s left to override his filibuster. The net effect is that the GOP derailed several important programs in addition to cutting off unemployment benefits for thousands of workers, displaced by the GOP’s No Millionaire Left Behind program. They can now lie and say they did not know either, blaming it all on Bunning, who is not seeking reelection.
In the midst of the worst economy in decades, Republican U.S. Senator Jim Bunning last night again took to the floor of the United States Senate to block passage of legislation that would extend unemployment benefits to out-of-work Americans -- and his party is doing nothing to stop him.
It's worth watching his mean-spirited obstructionism -- and Harry Reid's and Dick Durbin's attempts to cajole him into supporting the legislation -- to get a sense of just how committed some Republicans are to doing the wrong thing for America:
Bunning is the poster-child of the most callous, heartless political party in modern American history, and they are proud of it. If they get their way, this coming Sunday, unemployment benefits will expire for countless out-of-work Americans because a handful of extremist ideologues decided to tie the U.S. Senate up in knots… [emphasis added]
Inserted from <Daily Kos>
Only a true GOP Sweetheart could be so heartless and so devious.
Mooseolini and the Professor
Sarah Palin will be getting some ‘fair and balanced’ political education, thanks to Rupert Murdoch. She will be tutored by paragon of fairness, love and understanding, Professor Glen Beck.
Somehow I think that Bimbo Barbie’s first course will be Tea Buggery 101.
Somehow I think that Bimbo Barbie’s first course will be Tea Buggery 101.
How Unpatriotic!
When I’m wrong, I say so. Now I’m a staunch Democrat, but that would not excuse blindness. When my party is wrong, it’s my duty as a patriot to say so. My party could not be more wrong on this one.
In the wake of congressional Democrats' reauthorization and extension of the USA Patriot Act, few elected Democrats have been as vocal about the post-9/11 security measures as they were during the Bush administration.
Leave it to stalwart House progressive Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) to raise a rallying cry against what he called America's love of its fears.
“This legislation extends three problematic provisions of the PATRIOT Act and, at the same time, leaves some of the most egregious provisions in place, absent any meaningful reform and debate," he declared in a media advisory.
The specific provisions he cited are the Patriot Act's powers to conduct roving wiretaps, conduct surveillance of people not thought to have any association with terrorism and tap into your personal records, such as library accounts.
The extensions were approved by Congress and sent to President Obama on Thursday, several days before the Patriot Act's most nefarious portions were set to expire. President Obama had yet to sign the bill at time of this writing.
The Associated Press called the votes a "political victory for Republicans."
Some Senate Democrats did attempt to propose some modifications to the legislation that would have allowed for greater oversight, but they were ignored. Democratic leadership bowed to the wishes of Republicans and conducted a voice vote on Wednesday, upon which the one-year extension was passed. The House voted 315-97 in favor on Thursday.
"Thrown away were restrictions and greater scrutiny on the government's authority to spy on Americans and seize their records," AP added.
"While I strongly support using the most robust tools possible to go after terrorists, Congress must revise and narrow -- not extend -- Bush era policies," said Congresswoman Jane Harman (D-CA), according to Reuters.
Kucinich's scorn for the legislation was even more pronounced.
"Despite years of documentation evidencing abuse of these provisions during the Bush Administration, the Department of Justice has failed to hold Bush Administration officials accountable for illegal domestic spying by barring any lawsuits to be brought against those officials," he said. "Months into this Administration, The New York Times reported that the National Security Agency had 'intercepted private e-mail messages and phone calls of Americans in recent months on a scale that went beyond the broad legal limits,' and that the practice was 'significant and systematic.' Passage of this legislation today continues to make Congress complicit in these violations of our basic constitutional rights."
The title of his press release pleaded for congress to "repeal" the Patriot Act and "restore Constitutional rights to Americans."
"As Members of Congress sworn to protect the rights and civil liberties afforded to us by the Constitution, we have a responsibility to exercise our oversight powers fully, and significantly reform the PATRIOT Act, ensuring that the privacy and civil liberties of all Americans are fully protected," he said. "More than eight years after the passage of the PATRIOT Act, we have failed to do so. As National Journal correspondent Shane Harris recently put it, we have witnessed the rise of an 'American Surveillance State.' We have come to love our fears more than we love our freedoms."
The USA Patriot Act was passed by Congress in the weeks proceeding the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Many Democrats criticized its passage as too hasty, with some even claiming they did not have a chance to read the hefty legislation before the vote. At the time, the Republican majority did not question it, falling in line to support the legislation seemingly regardless of what the Bush administration put in it... [emphasis added]
Inserted from <Raw Story>
I think that Democrats feared giving national security ammunition to the GOP. I think their rationale is that Obama id far less likely to abuse the power than a GOP President. I think they are right. However, if America should ever be cursed with another Republican President, this power will be turned against us with a vengeance. Given the current makeup of the Extreme Court, the Patriot Act’s unconstitutional provisions would be ignored. For the Democrats not to repeal those provisions was an act of cowardice.
Open Thread – 2/27/2010
Yesterday I did manage to get caught up replying to comments. I spent the rest of the day working on website design for my nonprofit. Today, I’ll just have to see what the day brings.
Jig Zone Puzzle:
It took me 4:06. To do it, click here. How did you do?
Short Takes:
Here's an idea. Democrats should agree to not to use reconciliation in return for Republicans agreeing not to use the filibuster. Since both are political tactics occasioned by arcane Senate rules, it's a fair trade.? Fat chance, huh?
Gov. David A. Paterson ended his campaign for election on Friday amid crumbling support from his party and an uproar over his administration’s intervention in a domestic violence case involving a close aide. While I cannot comment on his guilt or innocence, I consider his resignation a plus.
The average income reported by the 400 highest-earning U.S. households grew to almost $345 million in 2007, up 31 percent from a year earlier, Internal Revenue Service statistics show. That shows that in 2007, the GOP’s only successful program, No Millionaire Left Behind, was working just as they intended.
Plus Humor:
The boys from Red State Update weigh in on the health care summit.
Cartoon:
What’s up for your weekend?
Friday, February 26, 2010
A Moment in Time at the Summit
I tried to find one exchange that personified the health care summit. Here’s my choice.
CALVIN WOODWARD
AP News
Feb 25, 2010 13:07 EST
When President Barack Obama and a Republican lawmaker sparred Thursday over what might happen to health insurance premiums in an overhauled system, both cited a nonpartisan analysis that looked at that very question. The president gave a fairer summary of what the analysis found.
Tennessee Sen. Lamar Alexander declared in his statement to the White House health policy conference that "for millions of Americans, premiums will go up" under the Obama plan. That much could be true — but for millions of others, premiums are expected to go down and those who face higher costs would be getting better coverage than they have now.
The debate on that point is key if Americans are to accept the insurance changes Obama wants. Democrats know that pitching their plan as a means to extend coverage to the uninsured is not enough: They must convince middle-income Americans who already have insurance that they, too, will end up with a better deal under the overhaul. So the squabble was about more than a bureaucratic report.
Obama sharply challenged Alexander on his claim and insisted he had the facts on his side when quoting from the report by the Congressional Budget Office. For the most part, he did.
THE CLAIMS:
Obama: "Lamar, when you mentioned earlier that you said premiums go up, that's just not the case, according to the Congressional Budget Office."
Alexander: "Mr. President, if you're going to contradict me, I ought to have a chance .... The Congressional Budget Office report says that premiums will rise in the individual market as a result of the Senate bill."
Obama: "No, no, no, no. Let me — and this is an example of where we've got to get our facts straight."
Alexander: "That's my point."
Obama: "Well, exactly, so let me — let me respond to what you just said, Lamar, because it's not factually accurate. ... Here's what the Congressional Budget Office says: The costs for families for the same type of coverage that they're currently receiving would go down 14 percent to 20 percent. What the Congressional Budget Office says is that because now they've got a better deal, because policies are cheaper, they may choose to buy better coverage than they have right now, and that might be 10 percent to 13 percent more expensive than the bad insurance that they had previously."
THE FACTS:
Both are right, but Obama offered important context that Alexander left out.
The analysis estimated that average premiums for people buying insurance individually would be 10 to 13 percent higher in 2016 under the Senate legislation, as Alexander said. But the policies would cover more, and about half the people would be getting substantial government subsidies to defray the extra costs.
As the president said, if the policies offered today were offered in 2016, they would be considerably cheaper under the plan, even without subsidies. One big reason: Many more healthy young people would be signing up for the coverage because insurance would become mandatory. They are cheap to insure and would moderate costs for others.
Moreover, the analysis estimated that almost 60 percent of the people covered under individual policies would qualify for subsidies, bringing their own costs down by more than half from what they pay now…
Inserted from <TPM>
Here’s the video:
In short, while the Republicans were not as ill prepared as they were during their conference, they had nothing to bring to the table, except for their tired old talking points and lies. The Democrats were not that impressive either, but Obama stood out.
The GOP has made it abundantly clear that there is no negotiating with them. Without the public option, the bill is far less than it should be. Nevertheless, the good qualities it does have are too significant to allow it to slip away. After a VERY brief pause (ten minutes would be ideal), lets move on to reconciliation. AQs soon as it’s passes, and signed, it will be tome to start pushing for health care reform: single-payer.
Open Thread – 2/26/2010
Yesterday I did not catch up, because I watched the summit and want to the prison as a volunteer. The guys I work to help there are an inspiration to me, because they stay positive and focused on turning their lives around, despite a horrid environment. The group is strictly voluntary, and it has grown to 140 prisoners. I got hove very late and have only had about an hour’s sleep, so today, I’ll only be offering one article. In addition, the HSP for the volunteers that work with me was hacked and our website was destroyed along with thousands of others. They also lost the ‘guaranteed’ backup. I fired then and finally regained control of the URL yesterday. I’ve found a new HSP and have to design a new website. The next few days will be busy.
Jig Zone Puzzle:
It took me 3:41. To do it, click here. How did you do?
Cartoon:
TGIF!!
Thursday, February 25, 2010
OOPS! The Summit Is On!
In today’s open thread I said that I hoped to catch up on comments before leaving for my volunteer day with prisoners. I was not consider that I would be watching the health care summit on TV, which is exactly what I’m doing. Worst case scenario is that I’ll be back up to date before the weekend is over.
On the summit, the most notable feature is that all the Republicans have an expression like they just ate a bad clam. Obama has been quite congenial, but has called the Republicans on several of their lies. The Republican response to that has been for the speaker to evade and for the next speaker to repeat the lie. Obama has also demonstrated the ability to express knowledge in depth on the issues with no teleprompters in the room. The Republicans have offered nothing new: start over, don’t use reconciliation, health savings accounts (not a bad idea for the rich), tort reform.
One area of substantive differences has been over exchanges –vs- voluntary associations and unregulated sales against state lines. The Democratic position is that it’s up to the federal government to set minimum standards on what an insurance company must offer. The Republican position is that what should be covered should be left up to insurance companies and business owners.
Which of you trust your employer and an insurance company to determine what coverage you should have with no input from you or your elected representatives?
What are your observations on the summit?
Keith Olbermann - Special Comment - For His Father
If you have not seen this, watch it. If you have, watch it again. I wish every Senator and Representative would watch this. I have nothing else to say, because my words would only lessen the impact of his.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
