Republican Senator John Barrasso was asked the perfect question at yesterday’s health care summit…
Obama: “Would you be satisfied if every member of Congress just had catastrophic care–you think we’d be better health care purchasers? I mean, is that a change you think we should make?”
Barrasso: “I think actually we would. We’d really focus on it. We’d have more, as you say, skin in the game. And especially if they had a savings account–a health savings account–they could put their money into that, and they’d be spending the money out of that.”
Obama: “Would you feel the same way if you were making $40,000. Or if that was your income. Because that’s the reality for a lot of folks.”
Exactly. It is one thing to state that the U.S. has the best health care system in the world or to claim that the only way to fix health care is to do it incrementally, all the while knowing that your millions could buy you anything you wanted in terms of health care. It is quite another to say the same if you’re struggling to cover your insurance premiums or worse, had no insurance.
Elitist bastards.
___
To receive new posts directly on your Facebook page, become a member of MarioPiperniDotCom’s fan page by clicking here or to receive email notifications of new posts, click on Subscribe. .
In a recent interview with Newsmax, [Jeb] Bush was asked whether he thought Palin was a viable candidate for president. Though he had some nice things to say about her “charisma,” it was clear that Bush thinks Palin doesn’t have the intellectual heft to occupy the oval office. He said that Palin’s success depends on her willingness to add a “depth of understanding of the complexity of life we’re living in today” to her rhetoric.
“That’s up to her,” he said. “I mean, I don’t know what her deal is, but my belief is in 2010 and 2012, public leaders need to have intellectual curiosity.”
Ok, two things. First of all, Bush is right. He recognizes Palin for what she is – an empty-headed opportunist who appeals only to weak-minded conservatives. That’s an easy one. As a thinking conservative, Jeb understands that a Sarah Palin would have zero chance of winning a presidential election against Obama…or for that matter, against Goofy.
But here’s the bigger question. What does Jeb think of brother George who he helped put into office by stealing the Florida election in 2000? By what criteria could he claim that George W. was any more intellectually curious than Palin? I’m not sure what the order would be but in any ranking of shallow, know-nothing politicians, Palin and Bush would take the top two spots.
And in any ranking of hypocritical politicians, Jeb Bush would be tied for top spot along with most members of Congress – Democrat and Republican.
___
To receive new posts directly on your Facebook page, become a member of MarioPiperniDotCom’s fan page by clicking here or to receive email notifications of new posts, click on Subscribe. .
Republican Senator and douchebag Mitch McConnell is threatening to hold up funding for 9/11 trials.
“We will do everything they can do deny them the funds to do it. That is my pledge.”
In response, Attorney General Eric Holder penned a letter to McConnell.
“Since the September 11, 2001 attacks, the practice of the U.S. government,
followed by prior and current Administrations without a single exception, has been to
arrest and detain under federal criminal law all terrorist suspects who are apprehended
inside the United States.”
[...]
The decision to charge Mr. Abdulmutallab in federal court, and the methods used
to interrogate him, are fully consistent with the long-established and publicly known
policies and practices of the Department of Justice, the FBI, and the United States
Government as a whole, as implemented for many years by Administrations of both
parties. Those policies and practices, which were not criticized when employed by
previous Administrations, have been and remain extremely effective in protecting
national security. They are among the many powerful weapons this country can and
should use to win the war against al-Qaeda.
Nothing here too difficult to figure out. McConnell and his GOP cronies are playing the fear game in hope of scoring a few political points from a conservative base they’re betting are too stupid to notice the hypocrisy of their statements. Scum do that sort of thing.
___
To receive email notifications of new posts from MarioPiperniDotCom, click on Subscribe.
Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (Ill.) on Thursday admitted the “general feeling on the Democratic side” was that Republicans have so far been able to cast controversial protest votes and stall important legislation “with impunity.”
He consequently seemed to suggest Republicans’ behavior in Congress over the past year as hypocritical, as Democrats could never vote against important legislation and emerge unscathed.
“Some of the votes [Republicans] cast — we would be on trial for treason if we had voted against defense appropriations in the midst of a war,” he told reporters on his way to the Senate chamber. Durbin was referring to GOP members who tried to block the defense bill out of concern that a hate crimes bill was attached to it.
“They did it with impunity,” Durbin lamented.
Alright. Durbin is correct about everything here but to hell with lamented feelings. The bigger point is what Democrats are going to do about it all. They have massive majorities in both chambers of Congress and Obama in the White House and Republicans are going to continue doing what works for them, not the country. So what to do?
They [Republicans] do so because they’re pretty confident that Democrats won’t effectively raise a fuss, the media won’t care, and the public won’t know. And they’re right.
Let’s look at this in a different light by imagining a hypothetical. Let’s say Democrats ran the government for several years, and ran the country into a ditch. Disgusted, voters elected a Republican president with a huge mandate, gave Republicans the biggest House majority either party has had in 20 years, and the biggest Senate majority either party has had in 30 years.
Then imagine that, despite the overwhelming edge, Democrats decided — during times of foreign and domestic crises — that they simply would not allow the GOP majority to govern. Dems ignored the election results and reflexively opposed literally every bill, initiative, and nominee of any consequence, blocking anything and everything.
[...]
Now, in this hypothetical, what do you suppose the political climate would look like? Would the huge Republican majority simply wring its hands? Would GOP officials decide it’s time to try “bipartisan” governing? Would Republicans shrink from pursing their policy agenda?
Or would every single day be another opportunity for Republicans to be apoplectic about Democratic obstructionism? How many marches on Washington would Fox News organize, demanding that Democrats allow the governing majority to function?
Put simply, I’d like Democratic leaders to think about what Republicans would do if the situations were completely reversed. Then they should do that.
The question is whether Democrats could ever muster up the fortitude to act like the majority they are. Whining about Republican obstructionism has gotten them nowhere. Conservatives are winning the PR battle and it’s time for Dems to try a different approach.
End of story.
___
To receive email notifications of new posts from MarioPiperniDotCom, click on Subscribe.
Dan Speers, whose wit and poetry are found at CitizenPoet.com, is today’s guest author.
___
I was talking with a friend in Florida last evening and she asked why there was a double standard among RepubliCons when it came to the nude photos of Scott Brown. After all, if a woman had posed nude for the centerfold of a magazine, then the conservatives would have been all over it.
She wasn’t questioning the propriety of the photos, only how in her opinion the RepubliCons seems to be so consistently narrow-minded and ideological in their hatred of Liberals that they will go through all sorts of rationalizations and mental contortions in order to support anyone who appears to advance or advocate their cause.
Since she is operating a phone bank from former Massachusetts residents who are now living in Florida and calling home on behalf of Martha Coakley, I asked her what she was using as some talking points pertaining specifically to Scott Brown that most people in Massachusetts might not know. She said that was easy, that the real Scott Brown is a typical RepubliCon politician who is willing to let thousands of people without health insurance in this country suffer from illnesses, struggle with medical problems, and die every year, and yes, that includes babies whose mothers do not receive adequate medical care.
But according to her, the indictment goes further:
Yes, Scott Brown did suggest that President Obama was born out of wedlock, and yes he was lying when he tried to claim that Martha Coakley was using dirty politics and making up the story. Yes he does support a Constitutional ban against gay marriage. Yes he denies connections to the Tea Baggers, but takes their money and appears at their rallies. Yes, he voted against aid to 9-11 workers. Yes, despite his convoluted daughter defense anis supporters’ claim that it is being used for an easy abortion, he did oppose emergency contraception to rape victims.
And finally, she came back to original question about the nude photos of Brown. You know, she said, so much of what Brown says and does reflects a certain mentality of RepubliCons–one in which they want to control the lives and fortunes of Americans and they indulge in a kind of fantasy world where by accusing others of what they are doing and what they want, they are somehow absolving themselves of any guilt.
That may be, I told her, but psychology and rationalizations aside, the best thing she might use to tell voters back home is simply this: We had eight years of RepubliCon screw-ups in Washington that led to this economic mess in the first place, and this is no time to vote to go backwards–and that’s what a vote for Brown would be.
___
To receive email notifications of new posts from MarioPiperniDotCom, click on Subscribe.
“As I’ve watched the events of the last few days it is clear once again that President Obama is trying to pretend we are not at war. He seems to think if he has a low key response to an attempt to blow up an airliner and kill hundreds of people, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if he gives terrorists the rights of Americans, lets them lawyer up and reads them their Miranda rights, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if we bring the mastermind of 9/11 to New York, give him a lawyer and trial in civilian court, we won’t be at war.
[...]
“President Obama’s first object and his highest responsibility must be to defend us against an enemy that knows we are at war.”
Republic Rep. Pete Hoekstra is milking the issue as much as he could and is even raising money over it.
“They just don’t get it,” Hoekstra, the ranking Republican on the House intelligence committee, wrote in a fundraising letter to supporters. “These are the same weak-kneed liberals who have recently tried to bring Guantanamo Bay terrorists right here to Michigan!”
More from Hoekstra…
President obama “needs to explain” the decision “to stay silent for 72 hours,”
Rep. Peter King expressed the same sentiment in that he is…
“disappointed it’s taken the president 72 hours to even address this issue.”
Senator Jim DeMint…
[America] “at war and when President Obama pretends we aren’t, it makes us less safe.”
Really. President Obama stayed on vacation in Hawaii and spoke out on the attempted bombing three days later. In 2001, President Bush stayed on vacation and spoke out only six days later in regards to the attempted shoe-bombing by Richard Reid. The two attempted acts of terrorism are remarkably similar and yet no one complained about Bush’s lack of urgency back then. Somehow, conservatives feel justified in denouncing Obama as weak on terrorism and we’re supposed to take these phony hypocrites seriously?
These assclowns are getting really tiring.
___
To receive email notifications of new posts from MarioPiperniDotCom, click on Subscribe.
Every Republican in the House and nearly every Republican Senator voted against the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (also known as the stimulus). Although the Congressional Budget Office has credited the stimulus with creating up to 1.6 million jobs, the same GOP politicians who opposed the stimulus have attempted to justify their opposition to the policy by smearing it as a failure. But as ThinkProgress has documented, the same politicians are returning to their districts to take credit for the economic success of the stimulus.
And here’s the thing; they’re going to get away with it. The reason Repubs have been so bold in moving ahead with their lie and smear campaign is because they’ve met with success. They have been allowed to muddy up every issue from the economy to health care to the point where every blatant lie has caught hold with their base.
The right-wing noise machine is, if nothing else, an impressive and fine-tuned mechanism with conservative politicians, pundits and media working in perfect unison to get their message across. Lies and half-truths, it matters not. The base is watching Fox and listening to Limbaugh where truth is nothing more than a four letter word.
Yesterday John McCain had his little hissy fit over Al Franken’s objection on allowing Joe Lieberman to continue speaking on the Senate floor after his 10 minutes was up. It turns out that Franken was under orders by the Senate leadership to limit all Senators to their allotted time. Anyway, here is what McCain had to say about the Franken-Lieberman affair.
I’ve been around here 20-some years. First time I’ve ever seen a member denied an extra minute or two to finish his remarks. … I just haven’t seen it before myself. And I don’t like it. And I think it harms the comity of the Senate not to allow one of our members at least a minute.
Ok, so McCain was offended by the lack of courtesy in the Senate. As we discussed yesterday, that in itself is a pile of bull but even more interesting is the following revelation.
On October 10, 2002 — just ahead of the looming mid-term elections — the Senate rushed a debate on a war authorization giving President Bush the power to use force against Iraq.
During the course of the frenzied floor debate, then-Sen. Mark Dayton (D-MN) spoke in favor of an amendment offered by Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) that would have restricted Bush’s constitutional powers to wage war against Iraq. After a minute and a half, Dayton ran out of time, prompting this exchange:
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator’s time has expired.
Mr. DAYTON. I ask for unanimous consent that I have 30 seconds more to finish my remarks.
Mr. McCAIN. I object.
Byrd stepped in to grant Dayton time to finish his remarks. But just moments later, Byrd asked for more time to speak for himself. Again, McCain objected, prompting Byrd to chide him for doing so. “This shows the patience of a Senator,” Byrd said. “This clearly demonstrates that the train is coming down on us like a Mack truck, and we are not even going to consider a few extra minutes for this Senator.”
After being publicly shamed, McCain acquiesced to Byrd’s request. But moments later, McCain added this disclaimer: “I wish to say very briefly that I understand people have a desire to speak. We have a number of Senators who have not spoken on this issue. It is already looking as if we may be here well into this evening. From now on, I will be adhering strictly to the rules.” In other words, he acted just like Franken did yesterday.
It’s not surprising that the incident would have slipped McCain’s mind. If there’s been a pattern with conservatives, (politicians and media), it’s that life in America began with the inauguration of Barack Obama. For Conservatives, there was no politics in the United States prior to January 2009…or if by chance there was, then it’s completely irrelevant to anything occurring today. By those rules, everything is conveniently the fault of Obama and Dems.
These guys have hypocrisy down to an art form.
___
To receive email notifications of new posts from MarioPiperniDotCom, click on Subscribe.
Here is further proof that there is NOTHING that President Obama can ever do which would satisfy the right. David Shuster asks Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison why she and other Republicans did not create an uproar in 2008 when President Bush refused to increase troop levels in Afghanistan when he was asked to do so by his military chiefs.
Shuster: Senator the complaint from Democrats though is that you’re essentially shopping for the right generals and Democrats are pointing out that in September of 2008 when President Bush was in office the top U.S. Commander in Afghanistan at the time Gen. David McKiernan said this about his request for an additional 22,000 troops. “The danger is that we’ll be here longer and we’ll expend more resources and experience more human suffering than if we had more resources placed against this campaign sooner. The additional military capabilities that have been asked for are needed as quickly as possible”
That request from Gen. McKiernan was not granted until February of this year–was granted by President Obama. So will you acknowledge that Republicans who were speaking out today should have spoken out back at the end of the Bush administration?
Hutchison: Well I’m not sure exactly what your time frame is. I think certainly President Obama took several months to address the issue that Gen. McChrystal had asked for more troops and I think at this point we need to be talking about winning. We need to be talking about what is success. We need to establish that we are going to stop al Qaeda from exporting terrorism. That should be the mission and we should do whatever it takes to win this war on terrorism…(crosstalk)
Shuster: But Senator Republicans weren’t saying that when Gen. McKiernan was making the request in the fall of 2008 when President Bush never mind taking three months–he didn’t act on the request at all and the Republicans didn’t–we’ve checked your record–can you refresh our recollection as to whether you were complaining about your colleagues and about the Bush administration ignoring Gen. McKiernan back in the fall of 2008?
Hutchison: Well actually I ahhh… Sec. Gates was the Secretary then and I know certainly that he is doing everything that he can with the requests that are made for Afghanistan and we’ve had a ramp up of troop’s strength. We’ve been trying to allocate recourses away from Iraq and into Afghanistan. I really don’t know why we are talking about what has happened in 2008 so much as we ought to be talking about what’s happening for the next two years to win this war on terror.
Hutchison wonders why we care about what happened in 2008. Let me help her out. Hey, Kay…can you spell Big Stinking Stupid Hypocrite?
There’s been so much BS in the current health care debate, it’s impossible to keep up with it all.
The Republican National Committee’s health insurance plan covers elective abortions for its employees, an option Republicans strongly oppose in health overhaul legislation that Democrats are trying to push through Congress.
Republican Party Chairman Michael Steele learned of the policy’s abortion coverage Thursday through a news report and immediately instructed staff to inform the insurance carrier that the RNC wanted to opt out of elective abortion coverage, RNC spokeswoman Gail Gitcho said. “Money from our loyal donors should not be used for this purpose,” Steele said in a statement. “I don’t know why this policy existed in the past, but it will not exist under my administration. Consider this issue settled.”
Gitcho said the policy has been in effect since 1991.
The GOP platform traditionally includes strong anti-abortion language. All House Republicans, except one, voted for an amendment imposing restrictions of coverage for abortions in the health care bill that passed the House last Saturday. Inclusion of the abortion restrictions prompted an angry backlash from liberal House Democrats, and some are now threatening to vote against a final bill if the curbs stay in.
For almost 20 years, RNC employees have been able to get elective abortions covered by their health insurance plan and no one complained. Now suddenly, with the Dems trying to get health care reform passed, insurance covered abortion is a major issue for these bums.
The hypocrisy reeks.
___
To receive email notifications of new posts from MarioPiperniDotCom, click on Subscribe.
