Tuesday, January 18, 2011

112 - Paid to not work



It's been just over a week since that fateful day in Tuscon. President Obama delivered an inspiring speech at the Tuscon memorial service and that same day, Sarah Palin sunk her entire political career by proving that she just doesn't have a clue what it means to be presidential. We were slapped with the utter irony of Glenn Becks website post calling for non violence with a picture of Beck himself wielding a handgun to the immediate left of the post. We have found that Jared Lee Loughner was in fact a disciple of the far right wing sovereign citizen movement and Rep. Gabrielle Giffords is making a miracle recovery. And we learned today that Peace Corp director Sargent Shriver passed away.

So, with this insane backdrop, the House of Representatives is back in action with the Tan Man at the helm. And, of course, we are subjected to the political theater of the job-killing health care bill repeal. Wait, no it's job-destroying. Umm wait job-crushing. Republicans are backing away from their title but not the bill itself. The bill itself must be debated, voted on, passed on to the Senate, who will vote it down. And even if they somehow through some miracle of the Republican God pass the repeal, President Obama would never sign it and the votes are not there to override his veto.

So, it's dead. It hasn't even been debated yet on the floor of the house and it's dead. It was dead when it was submitted. It was dead when it was written. It was dead when it was conceived. And yet, here we are discussing it like it actually is a valid piece of legislation.

Why?

Some would claim that this entire production allows the Republicans to come back in a year and a half and say," hey, we tried to repeal it. we are on your side, Tea Party. Vote for us and vote out those socialist Democrats who are tearing our country down." And make no mistake, that will be one of the many of the Republican lies spread throughout the country come the next election cycle.

Today is a good day to do nothing.



There is a more important reason to stage this three act play in the House, the Republicans have once again stalled any forward movement. Once again, the party of no has taken our future hostage while they perform their melodrama out for all to see. Once again, they have found a way to take the national discussion and move it to the title of the bill instead of the contents of the bill itself. They began with repeal and replace and now have it down to simply repeal. They have not mentioned a single word about what they plan to replace the Health care reform bill with. Not one thing. Instead, they have moved off that message and are now calling the reform soemthing it is not, never will be and never was. Job-killing.

The so called fiscally responsible right ignore the numbers coming out of the Congressional Budget Office that said repealing health care would increase the deficit by $230 billion dollars. Additionally, repealing the health care reform bill would repeal the tax breaks passed in the bill for small businesses. That means, the party that fought tooth and nail to keep the Bush era tax breaks for the rich, now wants to raise taxes on small business owners. Why is this not being screamed from microphone by Democrats. Why are they instead fighting over the phrase job-killing, instead of screaming about the actual job-killing this repeal would mean?

The fiscally irresponsible Republicans have stated in no uncertain terms, their only real goal is to see that President Obama is a one term president. The best way they can hope to achieve this is by keeping the government tied up in knots unable to move forward, unable to pass anything that would actually help the people, unable to focus on any real issue at all. This has been their modus operandi since the days of the Ken Starr witch hunt. So, here we are at the beginning of the 112th congress and they're at it again.

In the end, the reason we should be most outraged is, if you voted for the winner or not, we sent them to Washington to do a job. We are paying them to do that job and instead of doing that job, they engage in a trivial partisan propaganda play. Every minute spent on the fake repeal is a minute they aren't doing their job. Every minute they debate the name of this pretend proposal, this bogus bill, is time spent away from actually getting to the true business of the government, which is governing.

How many hours did you have to spend at work to pay these people to pretend to work?

When words are meaningless




Jared Lee Loughner once asked Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, "What is government when words are meaningless?"

Jared Lee Loughner became obsessed with words and their meanings. He demanded deductive arguments and rejected inductive arguments completely, but couldn't recognize the difference between the two. Lost in his own incoherence, Jared's mind saw only his own dreamstate as reality, and this reality as the dream. And who can blame him.

Words have meanings. These meanings are agreed upon and placed into a big book which we call the dictionary. But over the last decade or so, we as a culture have been changing the language, blurring the meanings of words. We call things that which they are not and demand that everyone accept this new definition. Communist, Anarchist, Socialist, Fascist. These words have meanings. And we have allowed the punditry to usurp their meanings and label those around us with false terms used only to incite fear and illicit the desired response.

In an educated America, this false labeling could not occur. So, the punditry rejects the educated and chooses instead to follow a shout the loudest and it's true method. Death tax. The Angry Left. Death panels. Hillarycare or more recently Obamacare.

Espoused beliefs that are never followed like: Fiscal responsibility, Never forget the heroes of 9/11, Support the troops, A pledge to America, all lead to a world where the words that are being said are meaningless, because those saying them are not telling the truth, they are not being real, they are fake. And in Jared's disturbed mind, these people who were not real they were fake people.

Jared once asked Rep. Giffords a question, when she didn't answer the question to his liking, he told his friends that she was a fake. And from that point on, if he saw or heard her name, he became upset. He didn't bring it up, but if it was already there, he expressed his discontent and his belief that she, like all in Washington, were fake, a feeling many of us have had and would readily agree with were we there to hear Jared say it.

But, Jared took it further than the rest of us. He saw something dire in the way language was being used. Something sinister and ultimately infinite. He saw a conspiracy that changed the date to an infinite year, one that could never change and could not be escaped from. He saw alternate realities in which the world was not like this and found that he could visit those worlds through lucid dreams. He saw pictures from Mars and saw a conspiracy in which NASA was doctoring up images of space to fool the American people. He believed the Mars Rover mission and all of the Space Shuttle missions had been faked. There simply was no real in this reality.



The image above is a billboard for Tuscon radio station, KNST, Tuscons Conservative talk radio. It is located just three miles from the Safeway where Jared Lee Loughner opened fire. And it is a perfect example of how we usurp the meanings of things.

straight shooter
n. Informal
One who is honest and forthright.


But, if we place bullet holes around that title, it changes it's meaning. It no longer just means honest. It means something else entirely. Blood libel means something too, or did until Sarah Palin used the term the other day and now it means something completely different. Because she ( or rather her handlers )says so. We allow these people to invent their own meanings for things and redefine our culture in the process. Without definitive meaning, there is no discourse, no debate, no consensus , no compromise. We spend our time debating the meanings of words, instead of the actual issue at hand. Without definitive meaning, the words just become a white noise. Like the people of Babel, our speech has become confounded. Our words have become meaningless.

You don’t allow the government to control your grammar structure, listener?




Jared Lee Loughner is a disturbed young man. This is not up for debate. The question is what disturbed him?

Amidst all the rhetoric being thrown around, the rush to judgment, the finger pointing, the press is now trying to spin a picture of a young man with no political agenda at all. According to them, Jared is just some loon who shot people.

But, nothing could be further from the truth. Jared is a loon with a political agenda. One that may not be instantly recognizable as either right or left but an political agenda nonetheless.

Jared placed a video on YouTube entitled Introduction: Jared Loughner. It is just text on a black background with soft music playing. The first words seen by the viewer are: My final thoughts: Jared Lee Loughner!

The introduction alone tells us that this is Jared's message to the world, his explanation for the crime he was about to commit. His explanation for what drove him to this place. It is a picture into the very troubled mind of this young man.

You don’t allow the government to control your grammar structure, listener?


a terrorist is a person who employs terror or terrorism, especially as a political weapon.


The majority of citizens in the United States of America have never read the United States of America’s Constitution.


You don’t have to accept the federalist laws.


Nonetheless, read the United States of America’s Constitution to apprehend all of the current treasonous laws.


The property owners and government officials are no longer in ownership of their land and laws from a revolution.


The government is implying mind control and brainwash on the people by controlling grammar


No! I won’t pay debt with a currency that’s not backed by gold and silver!



These are not the statements of someone who is non political. His actions, attempted assassination of a sitting Congresswoman are not the actions of someone non political.

Was Jared reacting against Tea Party politics? Was he in support of Tea Party politics? Only Jared knows. Someday, he may make that known to all of us. Right or left? doesn't matter. What matters is the attempt to turn Jared Lee Loughner into a non political ignores the truth and , in my opinion, dishonors the dead. they died for a reason. It is Jared Lee Loughners reason, but there is a reason. We need to remember that.

Jared Lee Loughner will be reduced to a name in the rhetoric soon enough. But the rhetorical Jared Lee Loughner is not who this disturbed young man really was. He is not some non political kid. He had a message. One that may have been misguided and crazy but a message that was his. If we do not attempt to understand that message, if we write him off as a non political nut job, then we run the risk of creating more like Jared Lee Loughner.

The Blame Game is more than justified



The condemnation of those that rushed to judgment concerning the motives of Jared Lee Loughner, the man who shot Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) is valid. We shouldn't rush to judgment. We had and still have almost no idea why this young man decided that violence was the answer.

But, is anyone really surprised by the judgment itself? Take a schizophrenic young man and place him into an environment of angry hate filled rhetoric and the surprise isn't Loughners crime, but the fact that it's not happening more often.

And let's not forget Jim David Adkisson, who some on the very very far right consider a hero after he walked into a church with a shotgun and opened fire killing 2 and injuring 7 before he was done. Adkisson's prime motivation was, in his own words, "he could not get to the leaders of the liberal movement that he would then target those that had voted them in to office."

When searching the mans home, officers found "Liberalism is a Mental Health Disorder" by radio talk show host Michael Savage, "Let Freedom Ring" by talk show host Sean Hannity, and "The O'Reilly Factor," by television talk show host Bill O'Reilly.


The Tea party's message is Don't blame us, but how can we not look to the environment of violence that they have bred and not place at least some of the blame squarely on their shoulders? They claim that because Jared Lee Loughner was not on their membership roles then, of course, he wasn't a Tea Partier who turned violent. After all, the Tea Party and it's member have never promoted violence right?



Right?



Never.


Nope, not them.

Want more money? Vote Democrat!



There are many reasons people vote Republican. One of them is the fear the Democrats will take their money and the Republicans will cut taxes and put more money in your pocket.

But look at these numbers from the Wall Street Journal:

PresidentJobs createdJobs when leaving officeJobs when enetering officePayroll expansion
George W. Bush 3.0 million135.5 million132.5 million2.3%
Bill Clinton 23.1 million132.5 million109.4 million 21.1%
George H.W. Bush2.5 million 109.4 million106.9 million 2.3%
Ronald Reagan16.0 million 106.9 million 90.9 million 17.6%
Jimmy Carter10.5 million90.9 million80.4 million13.1%
Gerald Ford1.8 million80.4 million78.6 million2.3%
Richard Nixon9.4 million 78.6 million 69.2 million 13.6%
Lyndon Johnson11.9 million 69.2 million57.3 million20.8%
John F. Kennedy3.6 million57.3 million53.7 million6.7%
Dwight Eisenhower3.5 million53.7 million 50.2 million7%
Harry Truman8.4 million50.2 million41.8 million20.1%


Here's whats interesting. In average, Democratic presidents create nearly two times more jobs and salaries increase almost three times faster than under their Republican counter parts.

On average, Democrat president created 11.5 million jobs per president while Republicans created only 6.03 million jobs per president. Additionally, averages payrolls expanded by 25.1% per president under Democrats while Republican presidents were only able to generate a comparably meager 7.5% per president.

So, if you're struggling and need a job or a raise...who are YOU going to vote for?



Source: Wall Street Journal January 9, 2009

112 - Day 4 - Transparency Republican Style







GOP lawmakers in the House, true to form, voted to remove the rule, from their own promised rulebook requiring them to post committee meeting attendance publicly.

from their own Pledge to America:

We will fight to ensure transparency and
accountability in Congress and throughout
government



This clear violation of the Pledge to America is just the latest in a string of gaffs from the not even a week old House majority. Where is accountability if the American Voter can't even check to see if his/her Congressperson is even in attendance?


from their own Pledge to America:

Cut government spending to pre-stimulus, prebailout
levels saving at least $100 billion in the
first year alone


Now down to $50 billion, though most predict they wont come anywhere close to that.

from their own Pledge to America:

We will adhere to the Constitution and require every
bill to cite its specific Constitutional Authority


Except where it requires them to leave a party to be sworn in before actually voting.


from their own Pledge to America:

We will fight efforts to use a national crisis for
partisan gain



Except, of course, when it applies to the Right scoring political points with grand meaningless gestures like the doomed to never pass the Senate or be signed by the President, Health Care Repeal. Then, its completely ok to waste the time and money of the taxpayer.


Source

112 - Day 3 - Killing construction jobs Republican style





So whats has united the Associated General Contractors of America,the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Trucking Association, the Ironworkers,and the Laborers International Union?

One of the not emphasized rule changes the GOP brought to the Congress this week.

In a move that will potentially cause further destabilization in the buiding trades sector and decimate the already struggling workforce, the GOP have made a job-killing proposal that reneges on a commitment made by Republican in 1998 led by then Republican Congressman Bud Shuster.

The new rules package reverses a policy in effect for over a decade that required that all revenues paid into the Highway Trust Fund be used for eligible highway and transit projects. Enacted in 1998 by Republican Rep. Bud Shuster, this rule provided the kind of certainty and stability that the industry and state and local governments need to plan long-term major infrastructure projects.

Source


Already facing Depression era unemployment, the Republicans throw a curve ball of uncertainty into the industry in a blatant display of political posturing.

After all, we already know after just two days, they are willing to break their own new rules and the Constitution to suit their political purposes.


Breaking the Pledge to America: Refusing Amendments on Health Care repeal
Republicans miss oath, unconstitutionally vote anyway


Now, they inject more uncertainty into an already uncertain industry, which will lead to the killing of more jobs for working class Americans.

So here we are Day 3, and instead of working to bring jobs back to America, the Tan Man and his cohorts are working to place the killing blows on an already ailing industry in the name of their backwards approach, or downright disregard to fiscal responsibility and the American working class.

112 - Day 2 - Perhaps they should have read the Constitution first


Rep. Pete Sessions ( R-Texas )


Two Republicans, including a member of the GOP leadership, voted on the House floor several times despite not having been sworn in, throwing the House into parliamentary turmoil Thursday — the same day the Constitution was read aloud on the floor.

Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas) chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, and Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) missed the mass swearing-in ceremony on the House floor Wednesday but proceeded to cast a series of votes. Sessions, appointed to the Rules Committee, participated in some committee activities, and that panel was forced, at the suggestion of House parliamentarians, to suspend consideration of a rule for the repeal of last year’s health care overhaul until the matter was resolved.


Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.)


Republican leaders hoped to get a unanimous agreement from the House to retroactively approve of their votes and Sessions’ work at the rules committee after they took the oath on the floor around 3 p.m. Thursday.

Failing that, their votes — which were not difference makers on any of the roll calls in which they participated — would likely be subtracted from the final tallies. House officials were searching for a precedent to follow but had not yet found a previous instance of members-elect voting without having taken the constitutionally required oath of office.

Fitzpatrick participated in a reading of the Constitution on the House floor Thursday. If he paid attention to the reading of Article 6, he heard these words “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”

Democrats jumped on the flub — which will surely be taken by some as a serious breach of the nation’s governing principles and by others as an embarrassing blip to the start of the 112th Congress.

“Perhaps they should have read the Constitution yesterday rather than today,” said one senior Democratic aide.

And the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee sent out a release pointing out the contradiction between the votes of the unelected and the attention the new Republican majority has given to the Constitution.

“Jokes aside, Congressmen-elect Pete Sessions and Mike Fitzpatrick’s actions raise serious questions: What in the world was more important to Congressmen-elect Pete Sessions and Mike Fitzpatrick than taking the oath of office, committing to support and defend the U.S. Constitution?” said Jennifer Crider, a senior official at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. “Why did Speaker Boehner and House Republican leadership allow two people who were not sworn Members of Congress to vote and speak on the House floor? Republicans have spent a lot of time over the past two days proselytizing about House rules, but they don’t seem very keen on actually following the rules.”

Sessions and Fitzpatrick each voted six times, including appearing for a quorum call, after Speaker John Boehner was elected and administered the oath to all other members on the House floor Wednesday.

source

112 - Day 1 - The $100 billion dollar broken promise


Boehner: The second woman Speaker of the House?



WASHINGTON -- The GOP "budget cut" numbers are getting squishier by the minute. At least it seemed that way in the hallways of the Capitol on a ceremonial first day of swearing-ins, family photo ops and back-slapping goodwill.

Republicans campaigned coast to coast on, among other things, a promise to cut $100 billion out of the federal budget.

But now they are talking about cuts as slim as $30 billion, blaming the change on the fine print that no one read -- or if they read, did not understand.

It turns out the $100-billion figure meant $100 billion from a budget that President Barack Obama proposed, which was never passed. And now that the fiscal year is nearly half over, well, there's just no way ...

Even some Tea Party types who are sticking to the original goal concede that it'll be hard to reach as long as the GOP exempts -- as it plans to -- funding for defense, homeland security, veterans and entitlements. "I still think it's realistic," freshman Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.) said of the $100-billion target, "but the trick will be how we get from here to there."

Yeah.

But at least Griffith, a former leader of the Virginia legislature, expressed a determination to give it a go. He's a solid, earnest fellow from the mountains, and when you make a promise there, you try to keep it if you can.



A lot of other Republicans are more "realistic." Rep. Peter King (N.Y.), who's been in Congress since 1993 and now chairs the Homeland Security Committee, told me that $100 billion is of course unrealistic and the cuts will be $50 billion, tops. Rep. Darrell Issa (Calif.), the new chair of Oversight and Government Reform, told me to forget this year's number and explained that his goal is to cut $200 billion over two years. Rep. Ron Paul (Texas), the incoming chair of Financial Services' domestic monetary policy subcommittee, said that all of these numbers are chicken feed and a waste of time.

And over in the Senate, a top GOP aide told me that the real bottom line is a max of $30 billion for the rest of this fiscal year.

All these numbers can expand or contract depending on the baseline used. The cuts may sound bigger or smaller, for example, depending on whether you use the numbers the Democrats were talking about or the figures in President Obama's original 2010-'11 budget.

As for health-care reform, some Republicans are eager to focus on repealing and dismantling it. "My people are scared of Obamacare," said Griffith. "They want me to do what I can to get rid of it, and I'll have credibility with them to the extent that I do."

But King said the GOP had to be careful. "We'll vote to repeal and then move on," he said. "Then the experts on the committees will figure out what else we should vote on later. In the meantime, we have to focus on other issues."

source

The 10 worst decisions of 2010



By: Molly Ball
December 31, 2010 05:34 AM EST

They must have seemed like good ideas at the time. But the politicos who made these bad decisions are surely looking back on 2010 and kicking themselves.

A bad decision isn't just a gaffe — something that slips out when your mouth runs ahead of your brain. It's something you do on purpose, like doubling down on that thing you shouldn't have said, talking trash about your own state or getting blown up by your own political grenade.

What follows are 10 choices that those involved would almost surely take back if they could.

Delaware Republicans' nomination of Christine O'Donnell:

It's easy to play coulda-woulda-shoulda with primary candidates, speculating about whether a primary loser could have won the general election. But few nominations so clearly cost their party the seat as the Delaware GOP's selection of the gadflyish perennial candidate O'Donnell over moderate Mike Castle. Overnight, Democrat Chris Coons went from sacrificial lamb to senator-in-waiting, and the GOP's hopes of taking the Senate were essentially dashed.

Jack Conway's "Aqua Buddha" TV ad:

Kentucky Democrat Conway was desperate for a way to halt the momentum of his opponent, tea-party-allied Republican Rand Paul. So he cut an ad hitting Paul on his alleged collegiate pranks: "Why did Rand Paul once tie a woman up, tell her to bow down before a false idol and say his god was Aqua Buddha?" In a state in which large swatches of the population reflexively view Democrats as suspicious heathens, painting your GOP opponent as a suspicious heathen might seem like a nice move. But it backfired in a big way. Paul accused Conway of attacking his religion and ended up winning by 12 points.

Eric Massa's tickle defense:


Upon the sudden announcement that the erratic New York Democrat was stepping down in March, word began to leak that he had been under ethics investigation for alleged sexual harassment of staffers. An indignant Massa insisted his retirement was for health reasons. He didn't help his case any by going on Glenn Beck's show and describing the alleged groping incident as drunken horseplay: "Not only did I grope him, I tickled him until he couldn't breathe!" Massa later tried to claim the allegations were payback from Democrats angered by his health care stance, making him very briefly a cause célèbre on the right, until he became too radioactive even for Rush Limbaugh and faded into the woodwork.

Sharron Angle speaks to Hispanic high schoolers:

The tea-party-backed Nevada Republican was declining most mainstream press interviews and campaigning out of public view after her handlers realized she had a knack for sticking her foot in her mouth. So why did the campaign think it was a good idea for her to speak to a Hispanic students' group at a Las Vegas high school in October? Confronted about her ads featuring Latino-looking gangsters, Angle said she had no way of knowing that's what they were: "I don't know that all of you are Latino. Some of you look a little more Asian to me." She also claimed she'd been mistaken for Asian while serving in the state Legislature. Reid's campaign's attempts to paint her as an off-the-wall fruitcake couldn't have asked for a better Exhibit A.

***BONUS BAD DECISION:
Harry Reid and Sharron Angle agree to debate: Normally, debates are an important means for voters to see the unfiltered contrast between two candidates, but "the dud in the desert" did neither candidate — nor the public — any favors.

Martha Coakley riles up Red Sox Nation:

The Massachusetts Democrat thought she was headed for an easy win in the January special election to replace the late Sen. Ted Kennedy. But between derisively asserting she was above such political duties as shaking hands outside Fenway Park, and mistaking Red Sox hero Curt Schilling for a Yankee fan, Coakley couldn't have seemed more out of touch with the voting public. By losing to Republican Scott Brown in the bluest of blue states, she deprived Democrats of their 60-seat supermajority and ability to easily pass legislation — and put the party into the defensive crouch it would stay in all the way through November.

Joe Barton's BP apology:


The Texas Republican just couldn't stand to see BP CEO Tony Hayward take a tongue-lashing from the rest of the House Energy and Commerce Committee at a June hearing. So in a classic case of boldly standing up for the not-so-little guy, Barton, the GOP's ranking member on the panel, seized the floor to offer his regrets. "I think it is a tragedy of the first proportion that a private corporation can be subjected to what I would characterize as a shakedown," Barton said. Outrage over the apology was swift, dragging Republicans off their preferred message of populist anti-Washington fervor for several days. Yet it didn't stop Barton from making an unsuccessful play for the committee gavel after the election.


Joe Miller's journalist detention:

After winning the Republican primary in the Alaska Senate race, the tea-party-favored Miller should have had it in the bag. But amid reports that Miller's work as a local government lawyer was being scrutinized, security guards working for the campaign handcuffed a reporter for a news website and detained him for half an hour, apparently for the infraction of trying to ask the candidate questions. The Anchorage police promptly freed the journalist. The incident, meanwhile, only intensified the impression that Miller was an angry loose cannon, and Miller lost to primary loser Lisa Murkowski's long-shot write-in bid.


Sue Lowden's "Chickens for Checkups":


Nevada Republican primary candidate Lowden might have survived advocating "barter with your doctor" as one way to reduce health care costs. But it was when she chose to amplify and defend those remarks with a vivid image — "In the olden days, our grandparents, they would bring a chicken to the doctor" — that a late-night joke was born. Lowden's unforced error paved the way for an ascendant Sharron Angle to win the primary, and Republicans' chances of knocking off Harry Reid took a possibly fatal blow.

Raul Grijalva's home-state boycott:


For a Democrat with a safe seat in the House of Representatives, this was a year to duck and cover as your more vulnerable colleagues got swept away by the GOP tornado. Instead, Grijalva stuck his head up: In response to Arizona's passage of a controversial anti-illegal immigration state law, Grijalva joined those calling for a boycott of his own home state. Cue the Republican bumper stickers: "Boycott Grijalva, not Arizona." His opponent, a 28-year-old first-time candidate, drew close in the polls, but Grijalva ended up surviving with less than 50 percent of the vote.

**BONUS BAD DECISION:
MSNBC's Keith Olbermann donates to Grijalva (and two other Democrats) the same day the congressman appears on his show, earning a suspension when the donation comes to light.

Charles Rangel fires his lawyer:


Rangel, the longtime Democratic New York congressman, unexpectedly walked out of the first day of his House ethics trial last month, saying he deserved legal representation and didn't have it since parting ways with the law firm to which he'd paid $2 million in fees. It was a dramatic bluff, and the committee called it. Instead of giving Rangel the delay he sought, the panel decided it didn't take a trial to see that the charges against Rangel were "uncontested." The venerable 21-term representative was found guilty of 11 charges and later censured.

© 2011 Capitol News Company, LLC

Source

McConnell's iron grip slips



By: Glenn Thrush and Manu Raju
December 23, 2010 04:31 AM EST



For two years, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) maintained iron discipline over his 40-to-42-member conference, mustered a mostly united opposition against the White House — and helped define the GOP as “the party of no” in the eyes of critics.

But in the waning days of the 111th Congress, the White House and Democrats think they have finally found a crack in Fortress McConnell. On two critical pieces of legislation — the repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy on gays in the military and the START agreement with Russia — Republican moderates defied their leadership and backed two major priorities of President Barack Obama.

McConnell publicly opposed both — and underscored that point during an appearance on CNN last Sunday, geared, in part, at halting momentum for the deal on the arms control treaty.

People close to the laconic, deliberate GOP leader minimized the two votes, saying McConnell was simply respecting the diversity of his caucus and had delegated the whipping operation to other Republicans. Moreover, they cite several lame-duck victories — extending the Bush-era tax cuts to all income groups, killing both the $1.2 trillion omnibus spending bill and the DREAM Act — and say the conference will re-unite early next year when the focus returns to issues of taxing and spending.

But the two lame-duck votes suggest that the GOP's six-seat pick-up in November may, paradoxically, complicate matters for the man who had come to embody Republican resistance in the age of the Obama. And while nobody in the White House thinks McConnell has lost his grip, they see an opportunity to increase their leverage as McConnell finds himself squeezed between an incoming class of emboldened conservatives with a tea party tinge - and the eight to twelve Republicans who showed their independence on “don’t ask, don’t tell” and START.

After two years of nonstop Democratic infighting, the White House is clearly enjoying the possibility of a GOP family feud — and are closely watching how the old-school McConnell meshes with new-breed Republicans like Utah’s Mike Lee, a strict constitutionalist who won’t vote for anything James Madison would have rejected, and tea party idol Rand Paul, a fellow Kentuckian whose election McConnell initially opposed.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs on Wednesday suggested that McConnell “miscalculated” in the lame-duck by failing to “put aside partisan political interests” on START.

Sen. Chris Dodd, the retiring Connecticut Democrat, said McConnell’s position reflected the influence of the tea-party wing of the party. “I think Mitch was overplaying his hand. It was a case of the tail wagging the dog.”

"It was crazy opposing START — crazy — and he shouldn't have done it. I don't think Mitch is terribly comfortable with the tea party types," added Dodd, who has served with McConnell for over two decades.

“It will be interesting to see if he will dance to their tune or try to make them dance to his,” said an Obama ally. “Either way, it will be fun to watch.”

McConnell, in an interview with POLITICO last week, said he was simply "try[ing] as best I can to keep as many of us together as I can. Even when we were down to 40, from Olympia-to-DeMint is a pretty diverse group," referring to Maine moderate Olympia Snowe and South Carolina firebrand Jim DeMint, a tea party leader.

"[W]e've had everybody singing out of the same book a remarkable percentage of the time,” he added.

But that percentage is dropping, at least at the moment.

Earlier this week, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, among the most independent Senate Republicans, expressed disgust that the GOP leadership allowed Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to enjoy the most successful lame-duck session in decades.

"Harry Reid has eaten our lunch," Graham told Fox News radio. "This has been a capitulation in two weeks of dramatic proportions of policies that wouldn't have passed in the new Congress."

With the president on the ropes after the Nov. 2 midterms, McConnell bucked some conservatives — championed by Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer — by agreeing to a landmark bipartisan deal with Obama to temporarily extend the Bush-era tax cuts for all taxpayers, including the wealthy, a central McConnell policy priority. Yet in doing so, McConnell knew he was allowing Obama to regain the political initiative and reclaim his lost mantle of bipartisanship.

And when McConnell went back into partisan mode — backing Minority Whip Jon Kyl and Sen. John McCain, both of Arizona, in an unsuccessful bid to defeat “don’t ask, don’t tell” and START — he found himself, uncharacteristically, on the wrong side of public opinion and in opposition to a sizable minority in his own conference.

For much of the 111th Congress, McConnell had to worry about defections by two or three of his conference, most notably Snowe and Susan Collins, both of Maine, along with retiring Ohio moderate/conservative George Voinovich and, at times, Massachusetts freshman Scott Brown.

But eight Republicans defied leadership on “don’t ask, don’t tell” — Collins, Snowe, Voinovich, Brown, freshman Mark Kirk of Illinois, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, and two conservatives, John Ensign of Nevada and Richard Burr of North Carolina. Thirteen bucked McConnell on START, including Indiana Republican Dick Lugar, the ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who worked hand-in-glove with administration officials on the treaty, and Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, a member of the GOP leadership.

“McConnell picks his battles very, very carefully,” said Sen. Bob Bennett (R-Utah), who was unseated by Lee. “There are some in leadership who don’t. McConnell picks fights he can win. Once he picks one he thinks he can win, he almost always does.”

START was different, he said, because McConnell simply outlined his own personal preference on the bill — knowing a substantial number of Republicans would eventually vote differently.

“That’s a different kind of message than this is something where the entire conference has to be,” Bennett added.

Added McConnell spokesman Don Stewart: “The only bills that had a change in partisan makeup after the election were the [omnibus appropriations] bill and the tax bill. ... Before the election, Democrats were bragging about raising taxes; after the election and Sen. McConnell’s leadership, nobody will see a tax hike next year.”

Yet Democrats see signs that McConnell may be off his game. His claim that his 2012 objective was to unseat Obama may have appeased his party's right wing, but it has tested extremely poorly in Democratic-sponsored focus groups of independent voters, according to a party official. In an interview last week, McConnell responded to Democratic complaints about him by telling POLITICO, “There’s much for [Democrats] to be angst-ridden about. ... If they think it’s bad now, wait till next year.”

Meanwhile, Obama has adopted a feel-good tone of bipartisan comity, appealing to independents turned off by the partisan rancor of the past two years.

“My sense is the Republicans recognize that with greater power is going to come greater responsibility,” he said at a news conference Wednesday before flying to Hawaii for his Christmas vacation. “And some of the progress that I think we saw in the lame duck was a recognition on their part that people are going to be paying attention to what they're doing as well as what I'm doing and what the Democrats in Congress are doing.”

But some liberals question whether the re-emergence of the GOP’s moderate wing is a lasting phenomenon or an opportunistic one-shot deal for Republicans to cast votes that were popular in their home states.

"[Republicans] were in lockstep again to shoot down the omnibus,” said Maryland Sen. Barbara Mikulski. “I think [McConnell] will give his people more latitude on issues of war and peace, issues of conscience, but not on spending bills," she predicted.

Indeed, when Democrats tried to move their agenda forward early in the lame-duck session, McConnell got all 42 of his senators to vow to block all legislation unless a government-funding bill was approved and the Bush-era tax cuts were extended.

In the next Congress, McConnell plans to also insist that Democrats allow more open debate on amendments on the floor and will unify his caucus if he feels like they are being "jammed."

"On taxes and spending, we've got clear instructions from the people of this country and most of us feel exactly the same way about it," said Alexander, the only member of the GOP leadership to back the arms pact with Russia. "The New START treaty is for every individual Republican senator and Democratic senator for that matter to make their minds up about it."

But McConnell has his eye on other issues as well, including entitlement reform, which he said is needed to slash the deficit and would require an "aggressive" push from Obama in order to generate bipartisan support.

Still, that could come at a risk — and Democrats think the lame-duck gives them hope they can reverse some of the 2010 losses in 2012.

"I think the pendulum moves very quickly right now," said Alaska Sen. Mark Begich.

© 2010 Capitol News Company, LLC

Source