Open thread: House to vote on Reid’s debt bill — before he offers it; Update: 43 GOP senators sign letter opposing Reid’s bill; Update: House defeats Reid’s bill, 173/246 — with Democratic help

posted at 1:41 pm on July 30, 2011 by Allahpundit

The vote’s set for 2:15 p.m. ET or shortly thereafter. With the outcome assured, why bother going through the motions and formally administering the coup de grace? Simple: Reid’s going to call a cloture vote on something at around 1 a.m. ET tonight (he has to do so for procedural reasons in order to beat the clock on Tuesday), and if he can’t hammer out a deal with McConnell before then, he might be tempted to call Senate Republicans’ bluff by offering his own bill as it currently stands and daring them to filibuster it. Boehner wants to discourage that by killing that bill now and forcing him, at the very least, to present something tonight that’s more favorable to Republicans.

Per the last link, an intriguing hint that Senate Dems might cave at the last second:

Reid, a canny legislative infighter, appears to be leaving himself a safety valve, however: The Democratic leader has set an evening Senate vote that essentially would leave Boehner’s bill on parliamentary life support — leaving Senate leaders the option of revive it at the last minute if no other deal to raise the debt ceiling is reached.

I assume that means they might strip out the BBA and pass the rest of Boehner’s bill as is, and then hope that Boehner can get a few Democrats to join him next time in passing that through the House. Meanwhile, what happens if Reid’s bill fails tonight? Well, then things get messy: “Even if a bipartisan accord is reached when the Senate is in the cloture process, Reid would need unanimous consent to swap in any compromise measure, an unlikely scenario given the passions in the fight.” I.e. DeMint or Rand Paul could block any new compromise bill before Tuesday on their own, which means it’s now or never. No wonder veteran lawmakers are starting to think they won’t make the deadline. We’ll know more soon: Reid’s called a presser for 3 p.m. ET, no doubt to whine about the House shooting his own bill down.

It’s going to be a long day, so here’s your thread. Stand by for updates, and if you missed Ed’s post this morning about Reid’s new and “improved” bill, read that for essential background. In fact, it’s even less improved than you think: According to CBO, the total savings in the new bill are the same as the savings in the previous version. Exit question: Would DeMint or Paul really hold out on their own and make Treasury hit the ceiling if a bipartisan deal’s been brokered? I’m guessing they’d force Reid to grant them some sort of vote, maybe on a balanced-budget amendment, as their price for relenting.

Update: Another exit question for you. How long will it be today before we hear the first whispers about a two- or three-day debt-ceiling hike in order to keep negotiations going? If Reid’s deadline for passing something really is 1 a.m., he’d better have a bill to that effect ready to go.

Update: Via John McCormack, Senate Republicans have sent a letter to Reid urging him not to waste his time with the current bill. But there’s a hitch:

43 GOP senators sign bill saying they oppose Reid bill. Brown, Collins, Snowe, Murkowski didn’t sign it.

Last I heard, Joe Manchin is still a no so Reid is stuck at 56. Anyone think Manchin will hold out, though, if Reid can get to 59 with Republicans?

Update: That’s that. Reid’s bill burns in the House, 173/246 — with 11 Democrats voting no. Not sure who they are yet; probably liberals who were unhappy with his cuts-only approach, but we’ll see when the roll comes out. A curious detail: Two Republicans initially voted yes before changing their votes. Stand by while we wait to find out who they are.

Update: Reid and Pelosi are on their way to the White House for a huddle with The One.

Update: Here’s the House roll. The 11 Democrats who voted no: Barrow, Boren, Braley, Loebsack, Matheson, McIntyre, Peterson, Ross (AR), Schrader, Visclosky, and, er, David Wu. So it wasn’t just liberals in opposition.

Update: Hmmmmm:

McConnell says he’s now “fully engaged” with POTUS; the dance is done. The dealing has begun

Update: As of 4 p.m. ET, things are starting to move:

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, said Saturday afternoon that he had talked to President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden “within the last hour” and is “confident and optimistic” that there will be an “agreement within the very near future.”

A national default “is not going to happen,” McConnell said.

Update: Late-afternoon news from Politico: Republican moderates are warning Boehner that they don’t intend to take this plunge alone.

“House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) met Saturday with a group of two or three dozen moderates, who told him they want a debt-limit deal that attracts a broad swath of Republicans, not just Democrats and a handful of centrists.

According to participants, Boehner agreed with the premise: It’s not tenable for him to move forward on a bill that only gets support from a small portion of the Republican Conference.”

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 3

AUH2O on July 30, 2011 at 4:09 PM

(but we still think they’re right about the social issues?)

hawkdriver on July 30, 2011 at 4:10 PM

fire all of these people. well, most of them.

ted c on July 30, 2011 at 4:12 PM

it looks like the “balanced” approach was to kill harry reid’s bill. ah well—whatever happens, happens.

ted c on July 30, 2011 at 4:13 PM

The transparency is stunning.

Hening on July 30, 2011 at 4:14 PM

It is incomprehensible to actually consider raising the debt ceiling an unprecedented $2.4 trillion, from the current $14.3 trillion, without massive spending cuts, before the nation is bankrupt.

The current interest payment is a staggering $300 billion a year; and this money has to be borrowed each month; borrowing to pay interest on the debt; and the Dems want to borrow another $2.4 trillion and cut virtually nothing. The Reps are not much better, as Boehner’s bill was only going to cut, at most, $100 billion a year for 10 years.

Massive cuts need to start immediately. They need to cut at least $2.4 trillion as a part of any deal to increase the debt ceiling by $2.4 trillion; and cut at least $1 trillion a year for the next 10 years as a part of a solution to this financial crisis before it is too late, and the nation cannot recover, and is reduced to bankruptcy.

SheetAnchor on July 30, 2011 at 4:14 PM

McConnell says he’s now “fully engaged” with POTUS; the dance is done. The dealing has begun.

The dealing has been going on for a week while the Kabuki went on.

According to WaPo, Reid and McConnell staffers wrote the latest Boehner 2.0 bill (minus the BBA amendment).

When Senate staffers write a bill for the Speaker of the House, you know the Ruling Party had the fix in all along. It was just persuading the sheeple, I mean, Hobbits.

Wethal on July 30, 2011 at 4:15 PM

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, said Saturday afternoon that he had talked to President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden “within the last hour” and is “confident and optimistic” that there will be an “agreement within the very near future.”

Funny, but I have zero confidence in whatever agreement is cobbled together.

changer1701 on July 30, 2011 at 4:18 PM

Rand Paul is up calling on Zero to quit talking about default.

Brat4life on July 30, 2011 at 4:18 PM

McConnell says he’s now “fully engaged” with POTUS.

Well we knew that already. Why doesn’t he just change parties and save us all the trouble of primarying him?

flytier on July 30, 2011 at 4:19 PM

Hey, why does it look like this road end off that cliff right up yonder?

SouthernGent on July 30, 2011 at 4:20 PM

Wethal on July 30, 2011 at 4:15 PM

That’s how I see it.

Erick Erickson passed along these words from someone he called a “very wise conservative sage” (emphasis added):

John Boehner’s flailing performance may actually have a silver lining to conservatives’ advantage. When his plan and the end game blow up in the House Republicans’ face as it surely will, a lot of the new conservatives who decided to get on the team, get their asses in line, and side with the Speaker will be permanently against him and for conservatism.

Let’s not forget that one young congressmen stood up for the team and loyalty and voted for No Child Left Behind to help his President. Then when he realized he’d been betrayed and NCLB stank as bad as conservatives had said it would, Jim DeMint left his old ways and became the champion of the right.

Boehner should have remembered his history. Or at least Barry Jackson should have. It’s part of his legacy.

INC on July 30, 2011 at 4:20 PM

McConnell so has to go….

sandee on July 30, 2011 at 4:20 PM

The President would cave if the Republicans ever had any intestinal fortitude.

SheetAnchor on July 30, 2011 at 4:03 PM

I’m really beginning to think you are right. I’m watching this play out and looking at his poll numbers. He is a desperate man right now and he needs this behind him in the worst way.

JohnInCA on July 30, 2011 at 4:22 PM

Rand offeringa amendment to the Reid Bill. Says Zero is to busy with his birthday and campaigning. Asking to put the Balanced Budget amendment it was rejected by the dems.

Brat4life on July 30, 2011 at 4:22 PM

Rand Paul, Jim DeMint, and Mike Lee – America’s last line of defense!

AUH2O on July 30, 2011 at 4:09 PM

I hate to tell you, but those men are all pro-life.

Just where are those Rs who are libs on social issues?

INC on July 30, 2011 at 4:22 PM

So it wasn’t just liberals in opposition.

Liberals?

MrX on July 30, 2011 at 4:23 PM

INC on July 30, 2011 at 4:20 PM

I read that this morning and almost cried, since DeMint said that he won’t run again. While I believe in term limits, DeMint is that rarest of exceptions who I would be more than happy for him to be there for as long as he wanted. DeMint and Sessions, they don’t get any better than that in the Senate, although Rand Paul is right behind them.

TxAnn56 on July 30, 2011 at 4:25 PM

So, McConnell and Boehner have been talking with Obama. Now Reid and Pelosi are in with Obama. McConnell and Boehner just had a press conference in which Boehner said he was confident that the right people were in the room and a deal would get done, AND asked where was the President’s plan.

So here’s my guess: Boehner and McConnell have a deal with Obama. It’s strong for the GOP (relative to any form of compromise) with the only concession removal of the BBA vote requirement. Barry is allowed to present it as his plan. He’s now begging and pleading with Nancy to accept it. Reid is in there simply to keep Nancy from bludgeoning Barry to a pulp.

BKeyser on July 30, 2011 at 4:25 PM

I’d rather have a D.

Scott H on July 30, 2011 at 4:04 PM

I’d rather have control of the senate.

stvnscott on July 30, 2011 at 4:26 PM

I like when there is a time reference to an individual update. It’s especially helpful with these very fluid situations. Any chance we could get a time stamp on future updates, Allah?

DrStock on July 30, 2011 at 4:29 PM

According to WaPo, Reid and McConnell staffers wrote the latest Boehner 2.0 bill (minus the BBA amendment).

When Senate staffers write a bill for the Speaker of the House, you know the Ruling Party had the fix in all along. It was just persuading the sheeple, I mean, Hobbits.

Wethal on July 30, 2011 at 4:15 PM

Link?

Vince on July 30, 2011 at 4:29 PM

BKeyser on July 30, 2011 at 4:25 PM

I agree with you on everything but the removal of the BBA. I think the change will be the “deal” will extend through the election. BBA stays in.

gophergirl on July 30, 2011 at 4:32 PM

AUH2O on July 30, 2011 at 4:09 PM

(but we still think they’re right about the social issues?)

hawkdriver on July 30, 2011 at 4:10 PM

Thank you, hawkdriver!

Libertarians have a logic gap about less government. They want government for their protection and to be free to do whatever they want to do (defense and economics), but they forget and deny any role of government in promoting the health and future of society (pro-life and the preservation of marriage).

Jonah Goldberg has an interesting column right after the 2008 election:

This is not to say that one can’t be a moderate on this issue or that and be a Republican. But the idea that social liberalism and economic conservatism can coexist easily is not well supported by the evidence. For example, in Congress and in state legislatures, the more pro-life you are, the more likely you are to be a free-market, low-tax conservative. The more pro-choice you are, the more likely it is that you will be remarkably generous with other people’s money.

INC on July 30, 2011 at 4:33 PM

2012. Counting down and looking forward.

rrpjr on July 30, 2011 at 4:33 PM

I hate to tell you, but those men are all pro-life.

Just where are those Rs who are libs on social issues?

INC on July 30, 2011 at 4:22 PM

I’m pro-life, too. Government’s job is to protect our right to life and liberty.

It’s things like the drug war where I think some conservatives are terribly wrong. But that’s a topic for another thread.

AUH2O on July 30, 2011 at 4:35 PM

There isn’t a link Vince.
He pulled that out of his ass

ArmyAunt on July 30, 2011 at 4:35 PM

2012. Counting down and looking forward.

rrpjr on July 30, 2011 at 4:33 PM

That’s still a lot of time for Obama to do lots more damage. I honestly don’t know if we’ll make it that long…

Yakko77 on July 30, 2011 at 4:36 PM

I read that this morning and almost cried, since DeMint said that he won’t run again. While I believe in term limits, DeMint is that rarest of exceptions who I would be more than happy for him to be there for as long as he wanted. DeMint and Sessions, they don’t get any better than that in the Senate, although Rand Paul is right behind them.

TxAnn56 on July 30, 2011 at 4:25 PM

Oh, no, I didn’t know that. He was re-elected in 2010. I guess he figures four more years to fight after the 2012 elections–either to help right the ship or to keep scuttling Obama & the Dems.

INC on July 30, 2011 at 4:37 PM

But that’s a topic for another thread.

AUH2O on July 30, 2011 at 4:35 PM

If you bring it up here, then you have to be ready for a response.

INC on July 30, 2011 at 4:38 PM

There isn’t a link Vince.
He pulled that out of his ass

ArmyAunt on July 30, 2011 at 4:35 PM

She just provided a link.

Wethal on July 30, 2011 at 4:38 PM

So they’re going to ask everyone at last minute to pass a deal to find out whats in it? Again? I hate these mofos.

El_Terrible on July 30, 2011 at 4:38 PM

Libertarians have a logic gap about less government. They want government for their protection and to be free to do whatever they want to do (defense and economics), but they forget and deny any role of government in promoting the health and future of society (pro-life and the preservation of marriage).

Like I said, I’m pro-life. Gov’t should have limited but important goals. Protecting life, insuring contracts and property rights are upheld. Providing a basic police force and military. Etc.

As for dictating what people put in their body or what they do in the bedroom – that’s none of the government’s business.

But let’s not side track this thread. I was just responding to a comment that caught my eye.

AUH2O on July 30, 2011 at 4:40 PM

There isn’t a link Vince.
He pulled that out of his ass

ArmyAunt on July 30, 2011 at 4:35 PM

Yep! That’s why I asked.

Vince on July 30, 2011 at 4:40 PM

There isn’t a link Vince.
He pulled that out of his ass

ArmyAunt on July 30, 2011 at 4:35 PM
Yep! That’s why I asked.

Vince on July 30, 2011 at 4:40 PM

I just posted the link. See above.

Wethal on July 30, 2011 at 4:41 PM

gophergirl on July 30, 2011 at 4:32 PM

Good point. Could be.

BKeyser on July 30, 2011 at 4:43 PM

I just saw the vote is at 1am – WTF. Do the Democrats think we aren’t paying attention by doing this. They did this with ObamaCare too.

Hate them – HATE THEM!

gophergirl on July 30, 2011 at 4:45 PM

There isn’t a link Vince.
He pulled that out of his ass

ArmyAunt on July 30, 2011 at 4:35 PM
Yep! That’s why I asked.

Vince on July 30, 2011 at 4:40 PM
I just posted the link. See above.

Wethal on July 30, 2011 at 4:41 PM

That’s not WaPo, That’s Red State and Erik Erickson’s ass you pulled that out of.

Vince on July 30, 2011 at 4:45 PM

So here’s my guess: Boehner and McConnell have a deal with Obama. It’s strong for the GOP (relative to any form of compromise) with the only concession removal of the BBA vote requirement. Barry is allowed to present it as his plan. He’s now begging and pleading with Nancy to accept it. Reid is in there simply to keep Nancy from bludgeoning Barry to a pulp.

BKeyser on July 30, 2011 at 4:25 PM

Why would they allow Barry to take credit? To hand him the next election?

neuquenguy on July 30, 2011 at 4:47 PM

That’s not WaPo, That’s Red State and Erik Erickson’s ass you pulled that out of.

Vince on July 30, 2011 at 4:45 PM

She did post it. Here it is unvarnished!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/house-gop-tries-to-rescue-debt-limit-plan-obama-to-make-statement/2011/07/29/gIQAH527gI_print.html

Go read it!

The late-night jousting in the Senate followed a vote on House Speaker John A. Boehner’s debt-limit measure, which would extend the Treasury’s borrowing power until early next year and force another economy-rattling fistfight within a few months.

Drafted largely by aides to Reid and McConnell last weekend, the measure was originally designed to appeal to the more centrist Senate. But Boehner (R-Ohio) could not rally enough support from his tea-party-influenced caucus and had to rewrite it at the 11th hour to add a provision that would compel Congress to adopt a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced federal budget.

INC on July 30, 2011 at 4:48 PM

That’s not WaPo, That’s Red State and Erik Erickson’s ass you pulled that out of.

Vince on July 30, 2011 at 4:45 PM

I’m not a big fan of Erik Erickson. Too hysterical…

sandee on July 30, 2011 at 4:48 PM

Wethal on July 30, 2011 at 4:48 PM

Go Wethal!!!!!!!!!

INC on July 30, 2011 at 4:49 PM

Wethal on July 30, 2011 at 4:50 PM

You can always tell those who don’t bother to read links.

INC on July 30, 2011 at 4:53 PM

So read WaPo

Wethal on July 30, 2011 at 4:50 PM

I’m not a fan of the WaPo either…

sandee on July 30, 2011 at 4:54 PM

So read WaPo

Wethal on July 30, 2011 at 4:50 PM

I’m not a fan of the WaPo either…

sandee on July 30, 2011 at 4:54 PM

Me, neither, but it does have a lot of info on inside goings on in DC.

Wethal on July 30, 2011 at 4:57 PM

neuquenguy on July 30, 2011 at 4:47 PM

Because that would then be his contribution. It’s the only way to make it seem like compromise since he’s had no real roll in the process.

Again, just a guess.

BKeyser on July 30, 2011 at 4:57 PM

sandee on July 30, 2011 at 4:54 PM

Well, neither am I of their opinions and bias.

But on this they’re reporting it as fact–so they’re either lying through their teeth or it happened.

INC on July 30, 2011 at 4:57 PM

Go Wethal!!!!!!!!!

INC on July 30, 2011 at 4:49 PM

My apologies. I did read it but in reading the whole thing, increased my doubts about the veracity of the story. The article was slanted.

However, my apologies for not checking your link more closely and a thank you to INC for the link as well.

Vince on July 30, 2011 at 4:58 PM

The article was slanted.

Vince on July 30, 2011 at 4:58 PM

WaPo is so slanted it’s a wonder the building just hasn’t tipped over to the left. But it generally has reliable gossip, scuttlebutt, whatever.

Wethal on July 30, 2011 at 5:01 PM

Vince on July 30, 2011 at 4:58 PM

You’re welcome.

His post was almost entirely the WaPo quote. An introductory sentence of 4 words and two sentences of this commentary following the quote:

Everything we’ve gone through this week was elaborate theater to get us ultimately to an even worse conclusion. At least 22 Republicans didn’t fall for it.

INC on July 30, 2011 at 5:01 PM

Keep hearing all this BS about “compromise” from Dems. What have they compromised on? By all accounts they look to get debt ceiling hike and deferral of issue past 2012, in exchange for toothless baloney. Where’s the damn compromise?

Why is GOP allowing this talking point to go unchallenged?

Purple Fury on July 30, 2011 at 5:02 PM

Vince on July 30, 2011 at 4:58 PM

If you’re talking about WaPo’s bias, then I agree–that’s a given.

INC on July 30, 2011 at 5:03 PM

Wow all the dems are doing are talking about how the republicans are not compromsing. Wow these dems are nuts. They are all saying the same thing the Republicans don’t want compromise and they all want the US to go into default. Then call the Republicans names and offer no solutions. The Dems are taking no resposibility for anything. It’s all the Republicans fault since Bush. They are nuts.

Brat4life on July 30, 2011 at 5:03 PM

Purple Fury on July 30, 2011 at 5:02 PM

Looking at the way to polls are going this week, I think the Dems are losing the PR game. If we watch it and aren’t fooled, then I expect many others who are tuning in aren’t fooled as well. They’re just not here commenting.

Whatever they pass, the wool is so think now it’s not doing much good when they try to pull it over people’s eyes.

INC on July 30, 2011 at 5:06 PM

Whatever they pass–the Dems–not others who are watching this. I wasn’t clear.

INC on July 30, 2011 at 5:06 PM

I just saw the vote is at 1am – WTF. Do the Democrats think we aren’t paying attention by doing this. They did this with ObamaCare too.

Hate them – HATE THEM!

gophergirl on July 30, 2011 at 4:45 PM

Will they have it on CSPAN? He!!, I’ll get up to watch it if so….anyone know?

sicoit on July 30, 2011 at 5:06 PM

sicoit on July 30, 2011 at 5:06 PM

Doesn’t have to be? If not it should be on Fox one would think.

Brat4life on July 30, 2011 at 5:08 PM

Doesn’t have to be? If not it should be on Fox one would think.

Brat4life on July 30, 2011 at 5:08 PM

One would HOPE it’s on some channel so we, the people, can watch. LOL

sicoit on July 30, 2011 at 5:09 PM

sicoit on July 30, 2011 at 5:09 PM

Transparency at it’s finest.

I think it will. Zerocare was on c-span at midnight so I am assuming this will be.

Brat4life on July 30, 2011 at 5:13 PM

All, spread this around, like lightening.

Schadenfreude on July 30, 2011 at 5:16 PM

Anyone know how the nutroots are reacting to the real prospect of a deal that Obama agrees to that does not raise taxes?

txmomof6 on July 30, 2011 at 5:17 PM

That’s that. Reid’s bill burns in the House, 173/246 — with 11 Democrats voting no

Thats what you call a bi-partisan ass-kicking.

BobMbx on July 30, 2011 at 5:18 PM

Soooooo, the defeat of Reid’s piece of sh legislation was “bi-partisan”…

Ha

Gohawgs on July 30, 2011 at 5:19 PM

Anyone know how the nutroots are reacting to the real prospect of a deal that Obama agrees to that does not raise taxes?

txmomof6 on July 30, 2011 at 5:17 PM

Boy, aren’t you the optimist, eh?

My guess is they’re working on something like:

$4T raise to the debt ceiling, and a $4T tax increase to pay for it.

BobMbx on July 30, 2011 at 5:21 PM

A national default “is not going to happen,” McConnell said.

1) Never was going to be a “default” regardless of the dem talking points…
2) There was always going to be a “deal”…
3) Our “thought leaders” were always going to find a way to what’s best for us whether we liked it or not
4) Our Gov’t will continue to hurt us, beat us down and make us write bad checks…

Gohawgs on July 30, 2011 at 5:24 PM

BobMbx on July 30, 2011 at 5:21 PM
I didn’t say I was going to like the deal, but there will be a deal, and I don’t think it will include tax hikes, which is primarily what the nutroots wanted.

txmomof6 on July 30, 2011 at 5:30 PM

Everyone should listen to this monologue from Rush yesterday if you have not heard it. It is worth the listen. The link to the page is below.

http://www.therightscoop.com/rush-we-are-all-sarah-palin-now/

SheetAnchor on July 30, 2011 at 5:31 PM

There isn’t a link Vince.
He pulled that out of his ass

ArmyAunt on July 30, 2011 at 4:35 PM

If this is in reference to Hawkdrivers comment, know this.
Hawk doesn’t do that. If he mentions it, he read it. If he read it, he understood it fully, and it’s from a credible source.

massrighty on July 30, 2011 at 5:34 PM

Wow all the dems are doing are talking about how the republicans are not compromsing. Wow these dems are nuts. They are all saying the same thing the Republicans don’t want compromise and they all want the US to go into default. Then call the Republicans names and offer no solutions. The Dems are taking no resposibility for anything. It’s all the Republicans fault since Bush. They are nuts.

Brat4life on July 30, 2011 at 5:03 PM

And this is exactly why the Reps are always on the defensive. The Dems are always on the offensive in the public debate with their rhetoric, and the Reps act like they do not know what the word “offense” or “attack” means. Hence, the Dems win even when they should be losing.

SheetAnchor on July 30, 2011 at 5:38 PM

The Demacrats start a large fire and the Republicans attempt to put it out but—wait!!!-The Democrats (and their MSM enablers) scream “If you try to put the fire out, we’ll blame you guys for starting it in the first place”. So the Republicans say “OK let it continue to burn but, please, not quite so intensely.” This is called “compromise”.

MaiDee on July 30, 2011 at 6:35 PM

I don’t trust this President and I don’t trust the Democrats. Why is he calling up the Democrats, for a little tea and crumpets, before he calls in the Republicans? The President has been doing nothing, nothing, but trying to pin this on the Republicans for over a month so, are they getting their plan together, not for the good of the country, but to pin this on the Republicans?

He should have all the leaders in the room and be saying nothing behind anyone’s back. When you have the level of trust they have now, you really need to be careful, if you want a positive result. That’s the clue, they’re not looking for a positive result, they’re looking for a result that makes them look like the good guys and hangs anything bad to come out of it, on the Republicans.

Vote Republican and only be called a racist one more time.

bflat879 on July 31, 2011 at 7:39 AM

What a Mexican (am not a racist yet) stand-off. The House can vote down Senate proposals; the Senate the votes to turn down any legislation offered up by the House.

Now it is not obvious, the President does not have leadership required to break the loggerhead.

MSGTAS on August 1, 2011 at 9:40 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3