I don't understand what the Republicans are doing here - McCain is out saying it's too much spending. If it fails it will be for not spending enough - so what will they be running on in two and four years?

When will America have it's first widespread street protests? I'm betting early May, and it will be a very wild summer.

Could someone explain to me why Democrats can't climb out of their hidey holes and name this the GREAT REPUBLICAN DEPRESSION? Brand them with it now! Time to play hardball. Instead we have these !#$@#$ centrists trying to split the different to the point that what American could even tell what the Democratic Party's agenda is? According to that McCaskill we're for 40% tax cuts and 60% spending give or take a couple of percentage points she says. In other words, we are CLUELESS, can't make up our minds, and splitting the difference because we are gutless wimps. She ought to call herself "McRoadkill" because the only place you'll find a Democrat is being run over by a Republican.

They are running ads to thank these assholes for making the President's stimulus package less effective? What a bunch of dumbass suckers!

"Oh and by the way... Thanks for fucking me and America over! It was so nice of you to do that for us all! Buh bye!"

Perhaps the most interesting part of the whole stimulus fiasco was watching Lindsey Graham nearly crying on the Senate floor.

It's like -- it's just too easy so I wont.

Sanford added that the current economic interventions are "what you see in Russia or Venezuela or Zimbabwe or places like that where it matters not how good your product is to the consumer but what your political connection is to those in power."

Speaking as someone who works for a company where the higher-ups have begun acknowledging that "maintaining quality is not a sufficient argument against job cuts", I think I'd welcome an economic savior right about now. If only I could see one on the horizon...

Oh, and labor should stick to boosting support for Solis. Money better spent.

I don't think the GOP realizes that if this fails, there is going to be massive fallout in the streets all across America. It's already happening in other parts of the world.

There will not be a tax base to give tax cuts too.

The proverbial shit is pretty damn close to hitting the fan. Maybe the GOP thinks they have the guns and Blackwater on retainer.

...daring the Republicans to filibuster while the economy continues its melt down

Are you saying that this bill could have passed just with Democratic votes? If only -- but apparently not. They need Blue Dogs and at least a few Republicans. The compromises suck -- and I wish there had been stronger and more focused PR earlier in the process, so constituents could have pressured some holdouts -- but at least some compromise was necessary to get this bill passed now.

A lot of unpleasant things are being said, among progressives, about Nelon, Specter, Collins, Snowe, and Lieberman (how'd HE get in there???) .... but isn't it important to get the bill, in some form, get passed in the Senate so that it gets to the conference?

As I understand it, the version that comes out of conference is going to be **the** bill: the one that determines what we actually get and the one on which the Legislators are going to have to face their constiuents and the future when deciding their vote. Without enough votes in the Senate to get the best-possible bill passed, it doesn't go to conference and more time is lost - maybe a lot more time. And given the overall position taken by the Republicans (damn them!), Collins, et al. could hardly just say "Okay, we'll vote for it." That would only harden the Reps position of denial and turn the whole fight to pressure on those few rather than on the terms of the bill.

In other words, isn't conference where the real fight is going to be and where the real bill is going to be produced? That's a genuine question - I've forgotten enough of civics to remember what constraints are placed on a conference in creating a combined bill (or whatever the term is). But isn't the most important thing to get to conference with as good a Senate bill as possible ... and, most of all, to get there quickly as possible. If that is the case, then Collins et al. deserve a lot more credit, I think, than they are getting.

On this overall effort, I believe that the big stumbling point was having it "written by" the House, but I'm not sure how that could have been avoided. If Obama and his team had simply produced a bill on their own, he would have been acting as President before he was president; he would have stepped badly on the toes of the House getting their back up, and there might have been a much more prolonged process before it left the House, as each member tried to get something a bit more for their district. But (again my opinion) the trouble was that it wasn't the lean, focused bill that I do believe Obama & Co. would have come up with on their own .. the one the President and administration could back whole-heartedly from the get go.

I *think* from comments Biden and others have made, that the idea was to get *a* bill into conference as soon as possible and - now that Obama IS in office and the vote on the conference version is the one the Legislators will have to live with into the next election -- have the real fight (and the real public education/input/pressure). I think - I hope - that the version that comes out of conference will be something that Obama can put his full weight behind ... and that the Reps will look more foolish for voting against.

I know - perhaps a Pollyanna view of things, but I haven't given up hope yet.

It's pretty clear that Obama didn't anticipate the intransigence of the Republicans, especially in view of the election results. But ............ let's not forget that he has a pretty amazing learning curve (and also that the rat who fights fiercest is the one that's cornered and just about to lose big-time).

Why are the Dems keeping silent on Franken -- just leaving him to twist in the wind? Why can they not even make a point of the delaying tactics that Coleman and his band of creeps are up to?

Why, if they need his vote are they just ignoring him? Is it because they want to lose? That is all I can think of. You better believe that if Coleman was the one with the 200 vote win, the repugs would be all over the airways, gnashing their teeth at the unfairness of Democrats who are just poor losers.

Well, the Dems seem to me to be poor winners!

As to the stimulus. They need to say this:

Wealthy people don't spend money the way the rest of us do, because they already have what they need. Putting more money in their hands will not stimulate anything. They don't invest it in jobs or even in the very businesses that made them wealthy in the first place.

The wealthiest 1% of Americans now has 20% of the money in our country. In the early 1900's they had 9%, and used it to build their own infrastructure -- the auto industry, steel mills, and railroads for example. Even in the late 1970's, the richest people pocketed about 9% of the national income.

Check this out:

The last time their share got up to 20% was in 1928. How did THAT work out for our country? Forget giving them more money with tax breaks -- it is time to redistribute wealth again, but not upward for a change.

After years of ridiculous unregulated deficit spending under Republican control in Congress, how are they allowed to establish themselves as the party that wants to cut spending in a matter of weeks with the new administration.

If its not coming from a freshman Republican, any talk of cutting spending should be lambasted immediately. They should be called on it every time they bring it up.

Coming from Maine, I am well aware that as far as Republican senators go, we could do a lot worse. I have been grateful for the few times they have shown a backbone. But where has their financial responsibility been for the last 8 years?

The deficit clock didn't start back up in the Clinton years or when Obama took office.

I'm not buying this budget exception. I read the link referred to which is vague and does not convince me.I know it is probably frowned on in the blogasphere but humor me and find a msm cite on this so called exception.How does all this differ from the "nuclear option" argument that was held over our heads the last 4 years.Thanks.

Not that I agree with them in ideology, but congress would be a heck of a lot more effective if it had more Repubs like Snowe & Collins instead of the nut jobs on the far right like Vitter & DeMint. At least they are interested in governing as opposed to playing team sports with our future.
As someone said - you go with the congress you have not the one that you wish you had. This bill may not be enough and be sub-par but there is no way the knuckleheads on the right would have passed a larger one and something is better than nothing. Our fault for not ousting more of the jackasses while we had the chance. At least the Snowe, Collins and Specter coalition kept the bill moving. It doesn't mean I agree with their ideology or their cuts but I respect their principals at the moment. I don't say that about republicans much.

Also, something to keep in mind - some of the cuts are just coming out of the stimulus bill but not necessarily being cut. If they should be part of longer term gov't spending, they may wind up as part of the regular budget that they start on next week.

I think people expected to get everything they wanted in one stimulus bill. This is Obama's first bill, not his last. And if the states don't get enough money, they have the clout to come back and get more. You voted for Obama, now give him at least a few months to put his skills to work. If you doubt that Obama got some good things in this bill, then ask yourself why the Republicans looked like they were going to cry. This bill hurt them bad. They are out of power, and while they squawked and made a lot of noise, the media just witnessed how little power the conservative Republicans still have. The fat lady has sung, the witch is dead, it's over.

Two interesting things in the vote this week, besides proving how little power the conservative Republicans really have: The conservative Democrats in the Senate lined up under Obama, and the Republicans have no public face. They had to resort to using grandpa McCain, who lost a national election by embarrassing numbers. Meanwhile, Obama is flying across the country on Air Force One holding townhall meetings and primetime press conferences, and Michelle is becoming the most admired woman in the world. The only chance the Republicans have for a national face is the new GOP chairman, and he looks to be engulfed in a scandal. So that leaves...Palin? I almost feel sorry for the Republicans, ha NOT! :)

That radio ad sounds like the Int'l Brotherhood of GOP Bootlicks. Specter's a pimp, and deserves no credit, certainly not a leadership attribution.