Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Democratic Party’

From the Washington Post:

The fervent courtship [between Obama and Congressional Republicans] is turning the debate on the economic package into a test of whether the Obama White House can put an end to years of distrust between the parties and overcome their recent inability to shape consensus legislation.

Isn’t it funny that when the GOP controlled both the legislative and executive branches the Washington Post and the rest of the “news” media cared neither a jot nor a tittle for consensus?

When Republicans routinely refused to inform Democrats when and where committee meetings were being held or refused to allow (or severely limited) Democrats who made it to those committee meetings a chance to speak, or when Republicans refused to allow Democrats their right to offer amendments to legislation, consensus was not very high on the Post’s — or the rest of the media’s — agenda. For the most part, the so-called liberal media failed to cover the GOP’s disenfranchisement of Congressional Democrats and, by extension, their constituents. Now that the Democratic Party controls the White House and Congress, “consensus” (which is code for giving Republicans whatever the fuck they want) is suddenly all important.

Read Full Post »

Earlier I noted that Harry Reid can’t touch Joe Lieberman. And guess what? I was right:

President-elect Barack Obama has informed party officials that he wants Joe Lieberman to continue caucusing with the Democrats in the 111th Congress, Senate aides tell the Huffington Post.

I hope the pro-Obama zealots who’ve routinely proclaimed that he’s an uber-liberal who was just masquerading as a centrist all these months are realizing what asshats they’ve been, but somehow I doubt they’re that intelligent.

Read Full Post »

Taking Lieberman to the woodshed would put Obama in a very awkward position. After all, why is it not okay for Lieberman to behave in a “post-partisan” manner but perfectly fine for Obama to recruit Republicans for his cabinet?

Reid should have given Lieberman the shaft in 2006, but he chose not to. Too bloody late now, thanks to Obama’s “unity” nonsense; making an example of Lieberman now would undercut Obama’s plan to hold hands with Republicans and sing “Kumbaya” for the next four years.

Read Full Post »

First the Senate does a Constitutional end-run to take up the bailout of Bush’s golfing buddies despite having no real authority to do so by tacking the bailout to the “Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act of 2008:”

The mental health bill has passed the House before and becomes the Senate vehicle upon which everything is loaded. By constitutional mandate all tax bills must originate in the House but by attaching it to a bill that has already passed the House, that rule is circumvented and the mental health bill is so old it’s original cosponsors were Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici. Gotta love the irony that this is all on the back of keeping American workers sane.

Then, not content with looting the taxpayers’ treasury to the tune of $700 billion and completely ignoring the public outcry against that figure on Monday, the Senate plutocrats upped the price tag of this theft to $810 billion with irresponsible tax breaks:

In a historic vote, the Senate approved a massive $700 billion rescue plan for the nation’s finance system Wednesday night, but only after tacking on another $110 billion in tax breaks to lure votes from both parties.

Yes, because at a time when our infrastructure is crumbling and unemployment is at a five-year high due to the Republican Party’s criminal behavior (aided and abetted by Congressional Democrats), what we need is even more of the same tax-cut and deficit-spend idiocy that contributed so much to this overblown mess in the first place.

I’d say that there are 74 senators who should be burned in effigy, but metaphorical burning is too good for them; they should have a taste of the real thing, perhaps in the form of a “T” for “Thief” branded on their foreheads.

Read Full Post »

…It’s another Bush boondoggle. I’m especially happy that the Repugs actually whined that a speech by “Ms. Impeachment-is-Off-the-Table” was their motivation for scuttling the unnecessary bailout and Barney Frank’s response to their petulance.

The GOP’s mishandling of the publicity surrounding their killing of the deal makes them look like a bunch of petty idiots for failing to get 12 extra votes to bail-out Bush’s golfing buddies simply because Nancy was mean to them, and America’s corporate sociopaths didn’t get their corporate welfare. It’s a twofer!

Here’s the transcript of the speech, and below is the speech itself:

Read Full Post »

Regarding the Grand Theft Bailout: “Boehner Calls Bill A “crap Sandwich” — But He’ll Vote For It.”

Way to stick to your guns, John; you were the one monkey-wrenching this thing on Thursday and Friday:

House Republican Leader John Boehner, of West Chester in Butler County, has emerged as the main deal breaker in talks surrounding the proposed $700 billion bailout of the financial markets.

Boehner was one of 14 congressional and administration officials to take part in a meeting at the White House on Thursday, after which the deal that some lawmakers had said going into the closed-door session was nearly done fell apart.

Both Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., in remarks made after the meeting, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., in comments made Friday morning, referred to “House Republicans” as the culprit for breaking up the deal.

As the leader of the House Republicans, they are talking about Boehner.

What a difference a day made, huh? And what a miserable situation that we actually have to hope that House Republicans will buck Boehner and do the right thing by derailing this legislative freight train, because the Democratic majority in Congress has made it clear that it will not behave in a fiscally-responsible manner. Talk about role reversals.

Jesus. Fucking. CHRIST.

Read Full Post »

This is just pathetic. All emphasis added:

At the insistence of House Republicans, some of the program’s $700 billion would be devoted to a program that would encourage holders of distressed mortgage-backed securities to keep them and buy government insurance to cover defaults

Meaning that the institutions will now have an incentive to hold the securities until that paper is absolutely worthless, thus enabling them to cash-in on their government insurance policies for a minimum guaranteed pay-out no doubt higher than what the market would offer. In other words, this bailout is going to cost much more than the current numbers being thrown at us, and will be a pain in the ass economically for several years, constantly draining the Treasury of funds for infrastructure and other expenditures that are more important.

The proposed legislation also calls for the financial sector to help make up the difference if the government does not recoup its investment in five years, [“a senior administration official who was authorized to speak only on background”] said, but details were unclear.

That’s funny; when someone speaks on background it’s usually because they’re not allowed to speak at all on the subject they’re gabbing about. I won’t be surprised if many of these statements turn out to be trial balloons from the Bush Junta, sent in an effort to manipulate the final form of the legislation and therefore the vote on Monday.

To help struggling homeowners, the plan would require the government to try renegotiating the bad mortgages it acquires with the aim of lowering borrowers’ monthly payments so they can keep their homes… Democrats insisted on greater congressional oversight, more taxpayer protections, help for homeowners facing possible foreclosure, and restrictions on executives’ compensation.

To some degree, all those items were added.

Which begs the question, “To what degree?” Two-percent? Ten-percent? How much did the Democratic Party’s proposals get watered down?

At the insistence of House Republicans, who threatened to sidetrack negotiations at midweek, the insurance provision was added as an alternative to having the government buy distressed securities…

But the Treasury Department has said the insurance provision would not pump enough money into the financial sector to make credit sufficiently available.

And since that’s the case, there is no point in the insurance provision, is there?

Despite the changes made during an intense week of negotiations, the heart of the program remains Bush’s original idea: To have the government spend billions of dollars to buy mortgage-backed securities whose value has plummeted…

“We’re very pleased with the progress made tonight,” said White House spokesman Tony Fratto…

The Bush Junta’s White House is “very pleased.” If that doesn’t have your mental alarm bells ringing, how about this next part?

It was not immediately clear how many House Republicans might vote for the measure. With the election five weeks away, Democrats have said they would not push a plan that appeared sharply partisan in nature.

And THAT is the bloody problem, isn’t it? The plan SHOULD be partisan, and the partisan angle should be steeply leftward. Instead, the Democratic Party has embraced Obama’s idiotic centrist stance — and the only way to stay in the center is to STAY. IN. THE. CENTER.

Can’t make much leftward progress if you refuse to move left, can you?

(Link via Talk Left)

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »