Top House Dem warns: If Brown wins, reconciliation is on the table

posted at 7:29 pm on January 15, 2010 by Allahpundit

You don’t have the balls, champ.

That procedure requires 51 votes rather than the 60 needed to prevent Republicans from blocking votes on President Barack Obama’s top legislative priorities. That supermajority is at risk as the Massachusetts race has tightened.

“Even before Massachusetts and that race was on the radar screen, we prepared for the process of using reconciliation,” Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said…

Should Democrats take that route, the legislation would have to be scaled back because of Senate rules.

Lefty poll analyst Nate Silver tackled this question in mid-December, when the idea of the GOP blowing up Massachusetts was just a glint in Scott Brown’s eye. Worth quoting:

The Bush tax cuts were popular; health care is not. Moreover, the filibuster actually polls well, so use of the procedure itself would be unpopular. If you intersect an unpopular policy with an unpopular process, I don’t know what you’re going to get, but the downside risk would seem to be fairly profound — as in, I’d take even money at that point that the Democrats would lose the House.

Also, tax cuts are a relatively straightforward application of the reconciliation process — health care is not, and the resulting procedural debate would last weeks if not months, giving the public plenty of time to stew over it.

He’s not even sure the Dems would have 51 votes guaranteed given that Blue Dogs like Nelson and Lincoln would certainly use the new threshold as their opportunity to bail on the plan. But never mind that: Considering the panic among vulnerable Democrats about the process dragging on much longer, Silver’s second stated reason is more compelling than his first. Factor in the new optics — i.e., Democrats short-circuiting normal Senate procedures to obstruct a guy who’d just been elected for the specific purpose of blocking the bill — and it’s a recipe for disaster. Frankly, I wouldn’t be surprised to see the caucus fracture over it. Barney Frank and Ed Schultz are exaggerating slightly for electoral effect in saying that a Brown win means the end of ObamaCare — but only slightly. As Lowry explains, it probably does mean the end, unless Nelson et al. have much sturdier spines than we’ve given them credit for.

While you mull, here’s some input from a guy who once enjoyed lecturing people about taking a hint when public support for their policies hits 35 percent.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

If Brown wins, ObamaCare won’t even clear the House. They only had, what, a 3-vote margin last time? There have to be at least a dozen more Democrats in vulnerable districts (which then would include almost all districts not represented by the CBC) who aren’t ready to retire yet.

notropis on January 15, 2010 at 8:21 PM

The other thing I’m hearing is that people think the Feds are like “Crack Whores.”

I never heard things like that before. But, you know what? Our neighborhoods have been dragged so low. Crime is on the rise. We’ve had two murders in the last year. Why? Well, we have all these new “home owners,” and they’re all these lovely Section 8 folks who couldn’t give a rat’s ass about owning a home. They just wanted to live in a better neighborhood. So kewl, right? It’s just that a couple of people were murdered, and we never had that kind of thing before. I guess “diversity” is fine for my neighborhood, but not Barney Franks’, right?

Bambi’s idea of “redistributing wealth” works far and wide. I worked like the dickens to pay off my mortgage, but with the influx of new home owners in my modest place crime is ratcheting up. And the property values plummet as former renters think that making repairs on their homes are the responsibility of someone else.

The bottom line for me is that the actions of Congress are nothing short of criminal.

I absolutely despise this government, everyone involved with it, and I will do everything I can to get them voted out of office…. All of them.

Cody1991 on January 15, 2010 at 8:21 PM

My understanding of the reconciliation process is that is designed to deal with budget issues…I don’t see how a big fat bill like this will work with that process.

Terrye on January 15, 2010 at 7:44 PM

Easy. ObamaCare will destroy the US budget for the next 100 years.

angryed on January 15, 2010 at 8:22 PM

PLEASE SEND SCOTT BROWN $$$$$$$$$$$$$

OmahaConservative on January 15, 2010 at 7:35 PM

lease don’t take this the wrong way OmahaConservative, however at this point does he really need any more money to finish out the election?

I think a better message would be to urge people to help by volunteering via a phone bank or GOTV effort etc.

just saying

F15mech

F15Mech on January 15, 2010 at 7:56 PM

True, Scott and that other-woman-who-shall-not-be-named have pretty much purchased ALL of the advertising spots in the Boston media market (oh! I never thought I would miss the GEICO gecko!) but I think that the money will still be needed as I anticipate the need for plenty of lawyers in the coming days.

If not, then Scott should have enough money to buy a solid gold nightstick.

BOOM! Taste it ************!

turfmann on January 15, 2010 at 8:22 PM

OK. Am I the only one that noticed that Obama the Senator used the same motion of his hand as Obama the President. He was showing his contempt for others when he was a Senator, so it is not surprising that he would do it as President. It is ingrained behavior. Or am I beating a dead horse?

AgCOtter on January 15, 2010 at 8:23 PM

All hands to your Battle Stations… All Pilots man your Planes! This is not a drill, this is not a drill. We are a ship of War and we will be going into Harms Way. Stand-by to launch Aircraft.

ronnyraygun on January 15, 2010 at 8:14 PM

ronnyraygun: While were cooking in the engine room,care to
tell the rest of us,whats on the radar!!
(i kid):)

canopfor on January 15, 2010 at 8:23 PM

I wonder, if they try reconciliation, what percentage of American’s would consider it tantamount to a coup attempt….

FloatingRock on January 15, 2010 at 8:24 PM

DerKrieger on January 15, 2010 at 7:56 PM

If they pursue the confiscation of wealth (IRA’s, 401K’s etc) and the health care fiasco your last choice will probably come true.

chemman on January 15, 2010 at 8:25 PM

Is there any limit to their vileness?

rrpjr on January 15, 2010 at 8:25 PM

I wonder, if they try reconciliation, what percentage of American’s would consider it tantamount to a coup attempt….

FloatingRock on January 15, 2010 at 8:24 PM

They didn’t when the Republicans did it and most liely American Idol will be on.

harry on January 15, 2010 at 8:26 PM

You win by out-preparing the enemy.

TXUS on January 15, 2010 at 8:09 PM

If not, then Scott should have enough money to buy a solid gold nightstick.

BOOM! Taste it ************!

turfmann on January 15, 2010 at 8:22 PM

OK that is language I understand

Donate to Scott Brown

F15Mech on January 15, 2010 at 8:27 PM

Well if Coakley wins they still have 60. At least if the go the 51 route then Republicans can do it later if they need to.

cadams on January 15, 2010 at 8:28 PM

DerKrieger on January 15, 2010 at 7:52 PM

Date and place please?

chemman on January 15, 2010 at 8:28 PM

They didn’t when the Republicans did it and most liely American Idol will be on.

harry on January 15, 2010 at 8:26 PM

Big difference between passing a package meant to boost the economy, which voters wanted, and a Hellcare bill that most don’t want.

ICBM on January 15, 2010 at 8:29 PM

HornetSting on January 15, 2010 at 8:04 PM
You realize that putting stick people back together is hard.

But what about bacon flavored mayo?

upinak on January 15, 2010 at 8:07 PM

Heart attack in a bottle. :)

HornetSting on January 15, 2010 at 8:33 PM

I wonder, if they try reconciliation, what percentage of American’s would consider it tantamount to a coup attempt….

FloatingRock on January 15, 2010 at 8:24 PM

They didn’t when the Republicans did it and most liely American Idol will be on.

harry on January 15, 2010 at 8:26 PM

Tax cuts are generally more popular than ObamaCare is. Reconciliation was used by Republicans to bypass obstruction; it’s contemplated by Democrats because they can’t get enough of their own members on board for an unpopular bill.

ddrintn on January 15, 2010 at 8:33 PM

harry on January 15, 2010 at 8:26 PM

You are quite the carrion bird~picking at the corpse.
I’ll bet you are a riot at parties.
Need a torch?

HornetSting on January 15, 2010 at 8:35 PM

We will de-fund it, or repeal it by reconciliation also, and the Dems will have committed generational suicide….

See http://repealit.org

Movement to have candidates take a pledge to repeal the bill if it passes. They already have 50 candidates, and they only just started. They will get many more. Even if half of them renege after they get elected it’s still a healthy chunk of the legislature.

YehuditTX on January 15, 2010 at 8:38 PM

You are quite the carrion bird~picking at the corpse.
I’ll bet you are a riot at parties.
Need a torch?

HornetSting on January 15, 2010 at 8:35 PM

Reality sucks. However, if you don’t prepare for what will happen you are gonna get hit. You can live in your “little happy land”, but us adults have better things to do.

harry on January 15, 2010 at 8:39 PM

Reconciliation is for BUDGETS of which Health Care is not.

Why Allahpundit didn’t do the slightest bit of research into what reconciliation is, rather than do the typical HE SAID SHE SAID faux journalism, doesn’t surprise me anymore.

from Wikipedia on reconciliation… first words:

Reconciliation is a legislative process of the United States Senate intended to allow a contentious budget bill to be considered without being subject to filibuster.

Danzo on January 15, 2010 at 8:40 PM

I’ll see you a “51″ Allah and raise you a “5150″.
Cause that’s what they are.

B Man on January 15, 2010 at 8:45 PM

Danzo on January 15, 2010 at 8:40 PM
If they go Reconciliation the new “hanging chad” will be “germaneness” and the Senate Parlimentarian will be the man of the hour.

txmomof6 on January 15, 2010 at 8:45 PM

Reconciliation is for BUDGETS of which Health Care is not.

Why Allahpundit didn’t do the slightest bit of research into what reconciliation is, rather than do the typical HE SAID SHE SAID faux journalism, doesn’t surprise me anymore.

from Wikipedia on reconciliation… first words:

Reconciliation is a legislative process of the United States Senate intended to allow a contentious budget bill to be considered without being subject to filibuster.

Danzo on January 15, 2010 at 8:40 PM

Good Lord.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/09/29/2082655.aspx

Increasingly, liberals and progressives pushing for a public option in any health-care reform want to use a tool called budget reconciliation, so reform could be passed by just 51 Senate votes instead of the filibuster-proof 60 (requiring conservative Democrats and maybe even a moderate Republican like Olympia Snowe).

Putting aside the political debate about reconciliation — and whether or not Democrats should use it — the bottom line is this: Reconciliation can be used and has been used by both parties. It’s written into law

harry on January 15, 2010 at 8:46 PM

Easy. ObamaCare will destroy the US budget for the next 100 years.

angryed on January 15, 2010 at 8:22 PM

FIFY.

Dominion on January 15, 2010 at 8:47 PM

He’s not even sure the Dems would have 51 votes guaranteed given that Blue Dogs like Nelson and Lincoln would certainly use the new threshold as their opportunity to bail on the plan.

Don’t hitch your wagon to a falling star
Or your voters will remind you who you are
Wake up and start heading
If you push too far you’re going to be bleeding

MB4 on January 15, 2010 at 8:48 PM

harry on January 15, 2010 at 8:46 PM

From that eminently impartial and knowledgable authority, MSNBC. As you said, Good Lord.

ddrintn on January 15, 2010 at 8:53 PM

the bottom line is this: Reconciliation can be used and has been used by both parties. It’s written into law

harry on January 15, 2010 at 8:46 PM

That reconciliation exists and has been utilized in the past is not equivelent to an unconstitutional abuse of power thwarting the will of the people and stealing their liberty.

That’s like saying, “The bottom line is this: you can drive your car 60 MPH on the freeway and people do it all the time.” But that doesn’t give anybody the right to drive 120 MPH and mow down pedestrians.

FloatingRock on January 15, 2010 at 8:56 PM

You need to pipe down on the celebrations, harry.

Still, reconciliation would pose so many practical problems — for a bill that is plenty complex already — that even staunch backers of health care reform are wary. Because of germaneness rules that would allow votes only on measures that change budget outlays or revenues, key insurance market reforms, for example, would have to be stripped out and considered under regular order. …

Democrats “would be taking a leap into the procedural void, there’s no question about it,” … “But when you’re in politics, the question is always: Compared to what? I mean, compared to having the whole thing go down in the Senate, after the amount of political capital that Democrats have invested in this?”

With virtually all Senate Republicans opposed and some moderate Democrats still skeptical, health reform advocates may find themselves forced to fall back on Plan B. That leaves reconciliation, warts and all, still squarely on the table. And it thrusts the emotional health care debate to the brink of an even more complex, controversial phase.

“If they’re faced with a choice between reconciliation or defeat, I think they’ll choose reconciliation,” Galston said of the Democrats. But, he added, they make the choice “without any guarantee that reconciliation will lead to victory.”

Here.

ddrintn on January 15, 2010 at 8:59 PM

HornetSting on January 15, 2010 at 8:35 PM
Reality sucks. However, if you don’t prepare for what will happen you are gonna get hit. You can live in your “little happy land”, but us adults have better things to do.

harry on January 15, 2010 at 8:39 PM

Are you like an adult, as in, the adults are in charge?
I was actually just yanking your chain, but whatever.
Your arrival at the party goes over like a turd in a punch bowl.

HornetSting on January 15, 2010 at 8:59 PM

From that eminently impartial and knowledgable authority, MSNBC. As you said, Good Lord.

ddrintn on January 15, 2010 at 8:53 PM

Actually they are spot on in this case. The deficit neutral issue Obama brings up all the time is key.

It’s a budget issue.

harry on January 15, 2010 at 9:00 PM

“You don’t have the balls, champ.”

Uhhmm, maybe.

At this point the Dhim’s are so “all-in” it is beyond anything I recall seeing in American politics, ever.
Really it may come down to be too scared to walk away. Think about it a minute.

1 year in and is there a costituency left out there that they have not insulted, denigrated, demonized or disappointed, backstabbed or thrown to the wolves? Depending on which ideological side your on.

They have no friends at all now, which puts their backs against the wall. When you’re isolated, you get paranoid(in this case rightfully so)ande you get desperate. Desperation often results in irrational behavior.

Carville said that this was to be a 40yr Dhim reign, if not more. He meant it, and thats because he knows exactly who Hilly lost to. They’re radical absolutist authoritarians that grew out of the 60′s leftist communists that ran under the banner of the Students for a Democratic Society/Wheather Underground. And they openly stated they were ready to use Stalinist measures to accomplish their goals.(see FBI Agt. Grathwohl’s interview)

While press down played Bill Ayers & Bernadine Dorhn, they absolutely ignored the rest of these looney tunes that made up the base of Obama’s campaign and may of which are in the papers and boob tube now walking in & out of the White House.

Don’t beleive me? Google the names or better yet use David Horowitz’s site with the Bio’s and history of the far left in America. Andy Stern, Paul Booth, Marilyn Katz, Todd Gitlin, Mark Rudd, Carl Davidson, Tom Hayden, Steve Tappis, Howie Machtlinger, Jeff Jones, Jim Jacobs, Wade rathke, Dale Rathke, David Fenton… and thats just off the top of my head! Its a veritable who’s, who of Obama’s career, campaign and advisors now.

All of the above(and more)are full fledged former members of the SDS/Weathermen. I once got in arguement with Carl Davidson who said some of were not part of the violence of the Weathermen, but absolving the SDS’ers from the WM is like saying Sinn Fein was seperate from the IRA. One is a “political” arm, the other the “action” arm. Their stated agenda was identical, the overthrow of the republic, the forcible introduction of communism and gulags for those that resisted.

Puts Obama’s call(Colorado Springs Speech during primaries) for National Civillian Security Force in a whole new light doesn’t it?

Then there is the the remarkable confluence of Obama, Axelrod and Jarrett. The disciples of 3 communist big-wigs outta Chicago that were hatching long term plans as taught by their mentor, Saul Alinsky. Frank Marshall Davis begat Barack Obama, Don Rose begat David Axelrod, Vernon Jarrett(Father inlaw)begat Valerie Jarrett.

These people are (and have been) after absolute power with the intent to weild it ruthlessly without concern of possibly having to kill 25 million Americans( again see Grathwohl’s Interview) to accomplish their goals.

Don’t underestimate these people, they have the balls!

Archimedes on January 15, 2010 at 9:02 PM

You’re right. It is for budget issues, which means if they go this route, they’ll have to carve up the bill to isolate the budget related items, which in turn will only make it easier to repeal, only needing 51 votes to do so. Also, whatever they pass using reconciliation will “sunset” in 5 years (like the Bush tax cuts).

parteagirl on January 15, 2010 at 8:17 PM

So the tax exempt status for cadillac plans would fall under this? They promised them that preferred status til 2017 and they wouldn’t be able to deliver.

Wouldn’t be able to deliver. Hmmmmmmmm. Go for reconciliation then.

journeyintothewhirlwind on January 15, 2010 at 9:03 PM

From that eminently impartial and knowledgable authority, MSNBC. As you said, Good Lord.

ddrintn on January 15, 2010 at 8:53 PM
Actually they are spot on in this case. The deficit neutral issue Obama brings up all the time is key.

It’s a budget issue.

harry on January 15, 2010 at 9:00 PM

No it isn’t; otherwise, germaneness woudn’t be an issue.

ddrintn on January 15, 2010 at 9:03 PM

Archimedes on January 15, 2010 at 9:02 PM

I always enjoy your thoughtful posts Archimedes

Firefly_76 on January 15, 2010 at 9:04 PM

Barry has to much ME invested in ObamaCare to back out now. And people call him “intelligent”. WHY?

GarandFan on January 15, 2010 at 9:08 PM

When should we write the post, “Give it up already!”?

Jay on January 15, 2010 at 9:08 PM

The man never takes good advice … or even his own.

Ricohoc on January 15, 2010 at 9:09 PM

It’s a budget issue.

harry on January 15, 2010 at 9:00 PM

Nationalizing a major portion of the private sector is not a budget issue. Neither is stealing the American peoples liberty. This not only affects peoples livelihoods, it affects their very persons, lives and property.

It’s most certainly not a “budget issue”. It’s we the people who decide whether or not it is, and we overwhelmingly appose this.

Make no mistake, if the Democrats do this it will be viewed as a violation.

FloatingRock on January 15, 2010 at 9:09 PM

Don’t underestimate these people, they have the balls!

Archimedes on January 15, 2010 at 9:02 PM

Well put sir, yet few will pay attention and fewer realize how close to the actual truth you are.

thomasaur on January 15, 2010 at 9:12 PM

Make no mistake, if the Democrats do this it will be viewed as a violation.

FloatingRock on January 15, 2010 at 9:09 PM

If the Democrats do this, it’s suicide. But they’ve been waiting for this for so long, they’ll do it.

ddrintn on January 15, 2010 at 9:12 PM

Barney Frank and Ed Schultz are exaggerating slightly for electoral effect in saying that a Brown win means the end of ObamaCare — but only slightly. As Lowry explains, it probably does mean the end, unless Nelson et al. have much sturdier spines than we’ve given them credit for.

This is assuming that the Senate doesn’t contain at least one or two additional civic leaders who would sell their soul for a few pieces of silver if the price was right.

What are the odds on that?

Socratease on January 15, 2010 at 9:22 PM

It’s a budget issue.

harry on January 15, 2010 at 9:00 PM
Nationalizing a major portion of the private sector is not a budget issue. Neither is stealing the American peoples liberty. This not only affects peoples livelihoods, it affects their very persons, lives and property.

It’s most certainly not a “budget issue”. It’s we the people who decide whether or not it is, and we overwhelmingly appose this.

Make no mistake, if the Democrats do this it will be viewed as a violation.

FloatingRock on January 15, 2010 at 9:09 PM

My point is they can do it. All denials here are just hot air….

harry on January 15, 2010 at 9:25 PM

Watch em tack it on to an Aid to Haiti bill.

lonestar1 on January 15, 2010 at 9:26 PM

They (THE LIBS, MARXISTS, SOCIALISTS, RINOS) in Congress are trying to Destroy this country and put the serfs back in their villages.

Funny, hundreds of years pass by and the Powerful still try and put the people in their places.


Dems…..bring it DESTROY YOUR PARTY!!!!

PappyD61 on January 15, 2010 at 9:28 PM

In other news, Bill Clinton tells National Review Online electing Coakley means ‘good governance’ that benefits Haiti

Can’t argue with that logic, right? Good God, this is hard to keep up with!

lukespapa on January 15, 2010 at 9:28 PM

I wonder, if they try reconciliation, what percentage of American’s would consider it tantamount to a coup attempt….

FloatingRock on January 15, 2010 at 8:24 PM

A couple days ago, on Hannity, Gingrich said that he doubted the Dems would delay seating Brown in order to pass Obamacare, because the public would become so angry they would be ungovernable.

At this point, using reconciliation might have a similar result. The deal with the unions over the Cadillac plans is something of an incitement.

This whole last year has felt like a slow-motion coup to me. I guess each of us has to decide where our line is, and what we can or will do when they cross it.

Rallies, tea parties, town halls, and gazillions of phone calls, emails, letters – none of this has impressed them. I hope somebody is thinking about the next step, maybe a national strike would get their attention.

jodetoad on January 15, 2010 at 9:30 PM

DEMS IN D.C. TO AMERICAN PEOPLE….

******insert graphic of raised middle finger here******

PappyD61 on January 15, 2010 at 9:34 PM

Archimedes on January 15, 2010 at 9:02 PM

Agreed. I worry about the hardcore group alot.

My comment that followed yours was just thinking about what would happen if they took the reconciliation route which everyone says is for budget items. If the unions have no faith that 5 or 7 years down the road that this agreement will stand, I don’t see how they support it, especially if they worry about 2010 and 2012 and the possibility of a Republican takeover. The union support being stripped away would take the weak underbelly of the Dems- something we should always be looking to strike. Achille’s heels are devasting, a belly wound, well, that can be quite fatal.

journeyintothewhirlwind on January 15, 2010 at 9:37 PM

My point is they can do it. All denials here are just hot air….

harry on January 15, 2010 at 9:25 PM

Sure they could. They could also nationalize the entire economy and imprison their political enemies, too, but they wouldn’t be governing with the consent of the people.

FloatingRock on January 15, 2010 at 9:43 PM

but they wouldn’t be governing with the consent of the people.

In other words, in both cases the government would be illegitimate.

FloatingRock on January 15, 2010 at 9:52 PM

The President wants to have a debate about health care, yet he don’t allow the worlds greatest debating society, to debate it. Instead, they have closed door meetings, without Republicans, and get cloture votes with bribes. If this bill is so great, he should have 75 votes for.

I hope the voters in Massachusetts are prepared to send the Democrats and Obama a big message on Tuesday. Having lived there for many years, I have my doubts whether they really have it in them, but right now there’s hope.

If Massachusetts does the right thing and sends Brown to the Senate, perhaps the Democrats can be saved from certain destruction. If Coakley wins and the Democrats pass this bill, the rest of the country will do what Massachusetts refused to do.

bflat879 on January 15, 2010 at 9:54 PM

journeyintothewhirlwind on January 15, 2010 at 9:37 PM

If you look at the methodoly of passing ObamaCare now without its effects being realized till after the ’12 elections, I think it reveals their strategy in regards to your point about union support.

By the end Obama’s 2nd term I think he means to have cemented absolute power. Some dolt congressman has already submitted a bill to repeal the 20th(or is it the 22nd?)amendment limiting the president to 2 terms. The cadillac plans provision is to be revisted in I beleive ’17, if only the proposals they have floated to date were implemented their stranglehold over the economic levers of power would leave them free to either backstab the unions, renig to US public, or both.

I was re-reading Rand’s “Atlas” & “Fountainhead” in the first months of the administration, it was truly freaky to be reading the predictions of, and hearing it happen real-time in the backround with 24hrs news on. I have come to fully appreciate Confucious’ curse of “may you live in interesting times.”

Archimedes on January 15, 2010 at 9:54 PM

Is it my imagination, or are there a lot fewer Progressive trolls on HotAir lately? Where did those bastards go and what do you suppose they’re up to?

JDPerren on January 15, 2010 at 10:15 PM

Remember those clips that show Obama giving the finger to Hilary (in one) and some other person (in another clip). Well I think we can safely say it is either a physical “tic” or he is giving his wife the finger (@1:14 into the clip here).

GardenGnome on January 15, 2010 at 10:36 PM

reconciliation is exactly the kind of out crapweasel Nelson is hoping for. That way he can vote “no” knowing his vote isn’t needed and hope the voters of Nebraska give him credit. Too bad for him everyone who votes in Nebraska knows a phony ploy when they see it.

Nelson’s carrer in politics is over. He made sure of that with his original yes vote. Nothing will put the genie back in the bottle and he knows it. He just hasn’t accepted that fact yet

Niteowl45 on January 15, 2010 at 10:40 PM

My point is they can do it. All denials here are just hot air….

harry on January 15, 2010 at 9:25 PM

No one’s denying that they CAN. The question is, will they?

ddrintn on January 15, 2010 at 10:50 PM

take the idle threat for what its worth. an idle threat meant to cause people to vote coakley because Dems won’t need her vote using this threat so why vote for brown. Refresher for you all:

Alinsky’s rule

Rule 1: Power is not only what you have, but what an opponent thinks you have.

Rule 8: Keep the pressure on. Use different tactics and actions and use all events of the period for your purpose.

Rule 9: The threat is more terrifying than the thing itself.

Niteowl45 on January 15, 2010 at 11:07 PM

My point is they can do it. All denials here are just hot air….

harry on January 15, 2010 at 9:25 PM
Sure they could. They could also nationalize the entire economy and imprison their political enemies, too, but they wouldn’t be governing with the consent of the people.

FloatingRock on January 15, 2010 at 9:43 PM

51 IS a majority just not a super majority

harry on January 15, 2010 at 11:24 PM

My point is they can do it. All denials here are just hot air….

harry on January 15, 2010 at 9:25 PM
No one’s denying that they CAN. The question is, will they?

ddrintn on January 15, 2010 at 10:50 PM

Of course they are, where have you been for the last couple of hours. I’ve had to post links and everything just to prove they can.

harry on January 15, 2010 at 11:26 PM

My point is they can do it. All denials here are just hot air….

harry on January 15, 2010 at 9:25 PM
No one’s denying that they CAN. The question is, will they?

ddrintn on January 15, 2010 at 10:50 PM

And yes the answer is they will. I’d do it and then I would introduce the second 60 vote bill. The bill that would make the Republicans support the insurance industry just so that they kill some of the bill. I’d do it and I’d win out against nearly every Republican in 2010 and totally win in 2012.

Hasn’t anyone been watching, Obama may not know how to run the country but his team is awesome at winning elections.

They’ll destroy the Republicans if they keep playing this “ooohhhhooohhhoohhh we may win a seat!!!!!!!!”

LOL The man will let you have the crappy seat and then he’ll win the war.

harry on January 15, 2010 at 11:33 PM

In a year where the stupidity of the democrats knows no bounds, the can and will attempt it.

There is so much that surprises them though – look at the headlines “unexpected” unemployment, “unexpected” opposition. Unexpected means unprepared.

They thought they could put this over. They were wrong.

Carolina Kat on January 15, 2010 at 11:42 PM

In a year where the stupidity of the democrats knows no bounds, the can and will attempt it.

There is so much that surprises them though – look at the headlines “unexpected” unemployment, “unexpected” opposition. Unexpected means unprepared.

They thought they could put this over. They were wrong.

Carolina Kat on January 15, 2010 at 11:42 PM

Three words

It’s Bush’s Fault

And yes that will win

harry on January 15, 2010 at 11:54 PM

Of course when the democrats were not in the majority…..reconciliation was “Bush is a dictator”….”the Neo-Cons are tearing up the Constitution”:

Liberals can try and spin the differences between reconciliation and the nuclear option,but the NY Times itself shows the intent by the democrats in putting this in the stimulus bill is one and the same:

With Health Care Talks Uncertain, Democrats Consider a Last Resort

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/02/us/politics/02hulse.html?_r=3&partner=rss&emc=rss

With bipartisan health care negotiations teetering, Democrats are talking reluctantly — and very, very quietly — about exploiting a procedural loophole they planted in this year’s budget to skirt Republican filibusters against a health care overhaul.


AHHHHHHHHHHHHH,
remember the good ol’ days when pushing legislation through without debate signaled the end of democracy and the start of Bush’s dictatorship.

Here is one of the many liberals talking about “the end or our Governmental checks and balances” like so many lying,hypocritical liberals echoed on the Hill:

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/2531/ira_chernus_on_wielding_the_nuclear_option
And with good reason.

No other term captures so perfectly the magnitude of the destruction GOP senators plan to wreak on our governmental system of checks and balances. For two centuries, the right to filibuster has protected the minority from majority efforts to run roughshod over the Senate. If the Republicans get their way, the majority would, for the first time, be able to stop debate and force a vote as soon as they know they have enough votes to win. The minority would lose their only real bargaining chip for forcing compromise.

To extend the metaphor a bit, it seems that we Americans are all about to become “downwinders.” (People who were downwind of the aboveground nuclear tests of the 1950s and early 60s received an extra dose of fallout.) For the nuclear option and its attendant imagery is, as Ira Chernus explains below, a more than apt metaphor for the moment — not least because of the nature of the Senate grab for power by so-called conservatives. (By the way, isn’t there some sort of expiration date on the use of the term “conservative,” especially when what’s being considered is radical indeed — getting rid of a traditional political instrument whose history extends back to the early 1800s?) The wiping out of the filibuster could, in fact, represent the sort of great leap downhill (no slippery slide here) in the direction of a one-party state that many fear. After all, the accruing of unprecedented power to a majority party in the Senate will in reasonably short order lead to unprecedented control over the nation’s judiciary. Just remind me, what’s actually left after that?

As the NY Times described above, reconciliation and the nuclear options are pretty much one and the same.

Of course now that democrats want to use this power move…it’s all okay….no “destruction of checks and balances”….no “destroying the rights of the minority”.

Just like now War IS the answer…


Just like making backroom deals with lobbyist is now okay…


Just like using Rendition
…….indefinite detention……NSA wiretapping….bombing villages and killing civilians….Patriot Act….signing statements…..executive orders…..is now okay….


Just like making back room deals with pharmaceuticals companies,insurance companies,and unions is now okay….

Just like using our tax money for the democrats “pay to play” schemes is now okay……


Just like covering for lying,corrupt democratic leadership like Rangel,Geithner,Dodd,and Barney Frank is now okay…

All the whining by liberals about lying,corruption,war crimes,rights of the minority,and “cleaning up the swamp” now mean nothing and all of this is okay because it’s all done in the name of the liberal agenda.

Could liberals be any more pathetic and full of sh!t!!!

Baxter Greene on January 16, 2010 at 12:01 AM

It seems Mr Gruber has been left alone by AP and Ed since the revelation about his being paid by HHS. I was trying to find out how much this guy influenced the debate and

1)He was an architect of the Mass healthcare plan
2) some of his sponsors have been the Robert Woods Foundation and BC/BS – RW is thanked in Maine Dirigo plan.
3) ever hear of http://www.smallbusinessmajority.com ? I hadn’t either but they polled small businesses in various states – key states in my mind about healthcare and small business. Smallbusinessmajority.com used Mr Grubers macrosimulation but I didn’t see any disclaimer about his work for HHS, just that he is an MIT economics and healthcare guru. And I didn’t see any mention of him analysing the Republican plan.

The best way to find out how specific reform proposals will affect small business is to use reliable economic modeling.

Small Business Majority turned to MIT economist Dr. Jonathan Gruber to project the effects of three different healthcare reform scenarios on small business profits, jobs and wages. The analysis found that compared with no reform, the scenarios would dramatically improve the situation for small businesses—holding down healthcare cost increases, saving jobs, preserving wages and bolstering profits.

I haven’t researched in UAW used Mr Gruber’s work or not- if they did and we could punch holes in it then we could weaken any small business support that remains and union support.

journeyintothewhirlwind on January 16, 2010 at 12:06 AM

And we’re working with groups in:
Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Iowa, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin

Where http://www.smallbusinessmajority.com polled small business owners.

journeyintothewhirlwind on January 16, 2010 at 12:10 AM

Hasn’t anyone been watching, Obama may not know how to run the country but his team is awesome at winning elections.

They’ll destroy the Republicans if they keep playing this “ooohhhhooohhhoohhh we may win a seat!!!!!!!!”

LOL The man will let you have the crappy seat and then he’ll win the war.

harry on January 15, 2010 at 11:33 PM

He loses enough “crappy seats” and he loses the war. Your logic’s breaking down. This isn’t January 2009 anymore.

ddrintn on January 16, 2010 at 12:15 AM

LOL The man will let you have the crappy seat and then he’ll win the war.

harry on January 15, 2010 at 11:33 PM

Oh yea….this is a real genius plan…

let’s give up the governorship of the blue state of NJ.


Let’s get our asses whipped in Virginia that Obama won easily in the Presidential election.


Let’s lose one of the safest,bluest seats in the democratic senate.


Let’s have to pay off democratic Senators with hundreds of billions of dollars for their votes for all the Nation to see.


Let’s have all the negotiations behind closed doors and shut out all Republicans…going totally against what Obama campaigned on with his “I will televise these negotiations on C-span”,”we will reach out to the other side”,” change is coming…there will be no more back room deals”

Let’s do back room deals with the pharmaceuticals and unions to buy their support for all the nation to see.


Let’s continue to push a Health Care Bill that only has about a 35% approval rating with the American public while the economy tanks and jobs keep disappearing.


Let’s watch Obama’s approval ratings fall faster than any President in History.

yea…lets show how totally inept and corrupt we are to the people of this Nation because according to super smart harry…none of this will matter because democrats will try to tie the GOP to the insurance companies and it will ride them to Victory in 2010 and 2012……

harry….I hope every democrat is stupid enough to follow such idiocy because it will just multiply the failure you and your “adults” own with your moronic rhetoric and failed policies.

Come to think of it…the Coakley campaign has been run pretty much in line with the idiocy you are spouting off here.
harry is an absolute genius in his own mind…which is the only place any of these stupid ideas will actually work.

Baxter Greene on January 16, 2010 at 12:18 AM

And yes the answer is they will. I’d do it and then I would introduce the second 60 vote bill. The bill that would make the Republicans support the insurance industry just so that they kill some of the bill. I’d do it and I’d win out against nearly every Republican in 2010 and totally win in 2012.

harry on January 15, 2010 at 11:33 PM

The public at large doesn’t quite share the lib hatred of the insurance industry. Republicans supporting the insuarnce industry versus a steaming pile of dung from the bowels of Congress? LOL The Dems know this thing is an unpopular crap sandwich, which is why they haven’t pulled any reconciliation moves to this point.

ddrintn on January 16, 2010 at 12:19 AM

Is there any limit to their vileness?

rrpjr on January 15, 2010 at 8:25 PM

Nope.
Leftists are absolutely the most vile creatures on earth.
They will do anything and everything to achieve their ends.
And their ends are as abhorrent as their means.

justltl on January 16, 2010 at 12:27 AM

Three words

It’s Bush’s Fault

And yes that will win

harry on January 15, 2010 at 11:54 PM

Oh man…is this idiot the best Axelrod can do.

The democrats have failed so badly that they think they can run on whining about Bush 2 YEARS INTO OBAMA’S PRESIDENCY.

yea genius…another great strategy:


Change… Obama Now More Loathed Than Bush at End of His Second Term

Tuesday, December 22, 2009, 6:59 PM
Jim Hoft
http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2009/12/change-obama-now-more-hated-than-bush-at-end-of-his-second-term/

A Good Solid B+

Barack Obama’s approval index number dropped to a new low today.

Rasmussen reported:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 25% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-six percent (46%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -21 That’s the lowest Approval Index rating yet recorded for this President (see trends).

At the end of his second term President George W. Bush had a 43% disapproval rating.

In less than one year Barack Obama managed to pi$$ off more people than George W. Bush.
Nice work, Barack.

We know. It must be Bush’s fault.

Yes harry…please run on “it’s Bush’s fault” in 2010.

Then you liberals can explain to the American people how Bush “inherited” the al-qaeda war from Clinton and the Clinton administration is now responsible for 9/11 since it happened only 8 months into Bush’s term.

harry…I am sure your mother is going to find out at any moment that you are not playing Halo like you told her, but instead are really on parts of the internet that she thought she had you locked out of…..
….so be careful genius….we would not want you to get grounded or have your mother take your toy light saber away.

Baxter Greene on January 16, 2010 at 12:31 AM

Let’s see if I have this right,
a member of the House
is setting procedure in the Senate.

mrt721 on January 16, 2010 at 12:32 AM

51 IS a majority just not a super majority

harry on January 15, 2010 at 11:24 PM

Brilliant, so you’re saying that there are only 100 of “we the people” in this nation? (rolls eyes)

Do you understand what “consent of the governed” means?

FloatingRock on January 16, 2010 at 12:39 AM

Do you understand what “consent of the governed” means?

Never mind—obviously you don’t.

Look it up. Read the Declaration of Independence and Constitution.

FloatingRock on January 16, 2010 at 12:40 AM

Of course they are, where have you been for the last couple of hours. I’ve had to post links and everything just to prove they can.

harry on January 15, 2010 at 11:26 PM

And somebody “can” rob a bank, too, but it doesn’t mean it’ll be tolerated.

FloatingRock on January 16, 2010 at 12:42 AM

I’d do it and I’d win out against nearly every Republican in 2010 and totally win in 2012.

harry on January 15, 2010 at 11:33 PM

Shhhhh…. Don’t anybody say anything, let them keep thinking that.

FloatingRock on January 16, 2010 at 12:44 AM

If Brown wins, reconciliation is on the table

Or, in other words:

If Brown wins we’re going to crap in a bag, set it on the doorstep of every voter in America, and light it on fire. – Democrats

Really? Does anyone see this playing out well in the November elections? Anyone? I mean tone deaf politicians is one thing, but blind, deaf, stupid, drunk and high is no way to plan a political move guys.

gekkobear on January 16, 2010 at 12:45 AM

Unexpected means unprepared.

Carolina Kat on January 15, 2010 at 11:42 PM

True, but in this case I think it means, “Don’t worry, everything is fine in spite of the bad news. Really, we haven’t been lying to you all this time.”

Which is itself a lie because they have been lying.

They figure that most people won’t notice that nearly every update is bad news and virtually every time it’s an “unexpected” anomaly from the overwhelming (read: nonexistent) good news.

FloatingRock on January 16, 2010 at 12:49 AM

I’d do it and I’d win out against nearly every Republican in 2010 and totally win in 2012.

harry on January 15, 2010 at 11:33 PM

It’s Bush’s Fault

And yes that will win

harry on January 15, 2010 at 11:54 PM

Well, Obama has been blaming Bush for the past year for all the Democrat’s woes, how has that been working? Where’s the generic nationwide ballot at?

The latest national telephone survey shows that 45% now would vote for their district’s Republican congressional candidate while 36% would opt for his or her Democratic opponent.

+9 Republican.

Yep, its a winning strategy… for the Republicans. If you want a Republican victory, there is what you should encourage the Democrats to do.

If you think the Democrats haven’t been blaming Bush enough, and should do more of it.. go ahead and try. But the “previous administration” blame comments from the President have been in every speech since he took office; I’m not sure how he fits more of them in there…

gekkobear on January 16, 2010 at 12:49 AM

Of course they are, where have you been for the last couple of hours. I’ve had to post links and everything just to prove they can.

harry on January 15, 2010 at 11:26 PM
And somebody “can” rob a bank, too, but it doesn’t mean it’ll be tolerated.

FloatingRock on January 16, 2010 at 12:42 AM

O.K. I’ve never seen denial like this. Either you all get serious or stay home.

Whine…he can’t do that
Whine…you must be a Dem because you are telling us factual stuff we don’t like
Whine….you are on the other side because you tell nothing but lies, I want ponies.

etc etc etc.

harry on January 16, 2010 at 12:49 AM

Here you go, rrpjr. The following pretty much characterizes leftists:

Read this.

The psychopath is one of the most fascinating and distressing problems of human experience. For the most part, a psychopath never remains attached to anyone or anything. They live a “predatory” lifestyle. They feel little or no regret, and little or no remorse – except when they are caught. They need relationships, but see people as obstacles to overcome and be eliminated. If not, they see people in terms of how they can be used. They use people for stimulation, to build their self-esteem and they invariably value people in terms of their material value (money, property, etc..).

A psychopath can have high verbal intelligence, but they typically lack “emotional intelligence”. They can be expert in manipulating others by playing to their emotions. There is a shallow quality to the emotional aspect of their stories (i.e., how they felt, why they felt that way, or how others may have felt and why). The lack of emotional intelligence is the first good sign you may be dealing with a psychopath. A history of criminal behavior in which they do not seem to learn from their experience, but merely think about ways to not get caught is the second best sign.

The following is a list of items based on the research of Robert Hare, Ph.D. which is derived from the “The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised, .1991, Toronto: Multi-Health Systems.” These are the most highly researched and recognized characteristics of psychopathic personality and behavior.

glibness/superficial charm
grandiose sense of self worth
need for stimulation/prone to boredom
pathological lying
conning/manipulative
lack of remorse or guilt
shallow emotional response
callous/lack of empathy
parasitic lifestyle
poor behavioral controls
promiscuous sexual behavior
early behavioral problems
lack of realistic long term goals
impulsivity
irresponsibility
failure to accept responsibility for their own actions
many short term relationships
juvenile delinquency
revocation of conditional release
criminal versatility

There is no actual diagnosis of Psychopathy in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV), but it is a highly studied area. A psychopath is not the same as an antisocial personality. Antisocial personalities may or may not be psychopathic. The antisocial personality is primarily a problem involving a failure to respect the right of individuals, the law and rules of society. Psychopathy involves poor emotional intelligence, the lack of conscience, and an inability to feel attached to people except in terms of their value as a source of stimulation or new possessions. There are many expressions and forms of psychopathy. For instance, a sexual psychopath is one form of a psychopath.

There is a significant amount of evidence to suggest that:

there may be a genetic influence that creates a psychopathic personality
adult psychopaths do not benefit from traditional counseling therapy and may in fact offend again and sooner because of it
the brain of a psychopath may function and process information differently from those of non-psychopaths
less intelligent psychopaths end up in prisons (highly intelligent psychopaths can run companies)
psychopathic behavior may have once had a strong genetic “survival of the species” value
psychopathic personalities are much more common than most of us realize.

justltl on January 16, 2010 at 12:50 AM

If I could have, I woulda pasted a pic of Obama somewhere in that list of personality features.

justltl on January 16, 2010 at 12:54 AM

you can

FloatingRock on January 15, 2010 at 8:56 PM

Sure they could….

FloatingRock on January 15, 2010 at 9:43 PM

And somebody “can”

FloatingRock on January 16, 2010 at 12:42 AM

Whine…he can’t do that

harry on January 16, 2010 at 12:49 AM

You should also practice your reading comprehension skills as well, Harry.

FloatingRock on January 16, 2010 at 1:09 AM

Given the dozens of explicit Presidential campaign promises that have been brazenly ignored, and the absolutely unethical behavior of the Congress, can soneone please explain why there are not mobs of outraged citizens in the streets?

Do Americans not hate the feeling of having their elected representatives ignore them, and do they really think that once they have let the Congress ignore them, they can somehow undo it later?

drunyan8315 on January 16, 2010 at 1:40 AM

harry is an absolute genius in his own mind…which is the only place any of these stupid ideas will actually work.

Baxter Greene on January 16, 2010 at 12:18 AM

Some fail, at times, to see that what they view as intellect and balls can easily be just plain old hubris. Many a time the pure arrogance of the opponent has veiled their sight to the extent that has assured their certain defeat to be of the most painful variety.

Yoop on January 16, 2010 at 1:45 AM

FOUR WORDS:

THROW THE BUMS OUT!!!

PappyD61 on January 16, 2010 at 1:49 AM

ooooooooooooooooooookay. yes, i too spend over $1 million dollars to save the seat when planning to use a different process long before it became a close race.

So Chris, please tell us why Dems have broken the bank and ran to Mass to save the seat when “Even before Massachusetts and that race was on the radar screen, we prepared for the process of using reconciliation,” Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said…”

Niteowl45 on January 16, 2010 at 2:08 AM

Yoop on January 16, 2010 at 1:45 AM

Great point…
……….Obama walking into the White House and telling the Republicans at a bi-partisan meeting that “I won” was a good example of arrogance over intellect.

Now Mr. 57 states and his liberal counterparts own all of this failure 100%.

This is why they are still whining about Bush.
They have no successes of their own to brag about…nothing….nada…zilch.

Only ineptitude,broken promises,lies,corruption,and failure.

“Yes We Can!!!!!”

Baxter Greene on January 16, 2010 at 2:33 AM

Mr. Allahpundit Sir…

An ‘I heard it somehow, someway, via Rush’ acknowledgment would be appreciated.

You’re the best Dawg!

russcote on January 16, 2010 at 4:34 AM

Easy. ObamaCare will destroy the US budget for the next 10 0 years.

angryed on January 15, 2010 at 8:22 PM

FIFY

Blacksmith8 on January 16, 2010 at 8:38 AM

I hope that the GOP has enough b*lls to make it clear that if the Dems go that route the party of no will become the party of h*ll no. If the GOP makes enough gains in the next election they should promise to frustrate absolutely every Dem effort for the term.

katiejane on January 16, 2010 at 9:56 AM

***
HI ARCHIMEDES–Good analysis of the “reconciliation” process. Yes–the “democRAT” / liberal / socialist / statist / marxist / communist Comrade Obama (PBUH), SanFranNan, and “dirty” Harry Reid will use this process if needed. After all–they are just “hepping out the little people” at taxpayer expense. And putting in place their dreams of changing the U.S.A. into their new United Socialist States of America.
***
Reconciliation will also allow some RINO, Blue Dog, and Red State Senators and Representatives to get “political cover” for their re-election bids. They can safely vote no without killing this C**P SANDWICH bill.
***
But it will be fun watching the lemmings run over the cliff. They will not be able to hide during the 2010 and 2012 elections. And the Sarah’Cuda knows how to “geld” them politically–it’s not as messy as gelding a moose!
***
John Bibb
***

rocketman on January 16, 2010 at 11:24 AM

Don’t bills passed under reconcilliation automatically sunset in 5 years? If so, wouldn’t that be the best of both worlds for us? The public is angry at the bill and all of the backroom sweet heart deals that went into. Then they are angry at the Democrats for using a backdoor procedure to pass it. They get reamed at the polls.
Then in 5 years, not having a super majority, they fail to pass a reauthorization bill.

MarkTheGreat on January 16, 2010 at 6:02 PM

Let them try reconciliation. Under reconciliation the democraps will only be able to push through the tax increases and medicare cuts and the 40 percent cadillac tax, the sweeteners for Vermont Connecticut Lousiana and North Dakota; but with none of the purported insurance policy ‘benefits’ alleged by the democraps to be in their deform insurance legislation.
Thus the democraps would go into the midterm elections with a 500 billion dollar cut to medicare, a 40 percent tax which exempts unions, the louisiana purchase, the union corrupt bargain, the cornhusker corruption, but with no insurance mandates, no preexisting condition coverage, etc.
I don’t see how that will make the centrist democraps feel any safer from being booted out in November, but the mind of a liberal democrap is a horror show in the best of times.

eaglewingz08 on January 17, 2010 at 12:05 PM

I would prefer they use reconciliation for this for the simple reason that it will then only take 51 votes to repeal it….this is emminently preferable to the 60 it will take if the house simply adopts the senate’s version.

runawayyyy on January 17, 2010 at 12:36 PM

A Brown victory would most definitely mean the Democrats are heading over a cliff pursuing Socialized Medicine. What’s tragically comic is they all believe the solution is to stomp harder on the gas pedal.

olesparkie on January 18, 2010 at 8:42 AM

Comment pages: 1 2