
She's been saying Christmas is just too soon for several days now, but today, after Democrats rounded up 60 votes in their own caucus, she made it official. Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) will oppose (and filibuster) health care reform.
"Having been fully immersed in this issue for this entire year and as the only Republican to vote for health reform in the Finance Committee, I deeply regret that I cannot support the pending Senate legislation as it currently stands, given my continued concerns with the measure and an artificial and arbitrary deadline of completing the bill before Christmas that is shortchanging the process on this monumental and trans-generational effort," reads a statement from her office.
The news shouldn't come as a surprise to Democratic leadership, but it does bring home the extent to which the survival of this legislation hangs on a bare thread. In the next several days (and, indeed, for several weeks) Democrats need to keep everybody in the party happy enough, or the bill will not pass.
You can read the entire statement below the fold.
Having been fully immersed in this issue for this entire year and as the only Republican to vote for health reform in the Finance Committee, I deeply regret that I cannot support the pending Senate legislation as it currently stands, given my continued concerns with the measure and an artificial and arbitrary deadline of completing the bill before Christmas that is shortchanging the process on this monumental and trans-generational effort.Only three weeks ago the Senate received a more than 2,000 page bill on one of the most complex issues in our history, and we have since considered fewer than two dozen amendments out of more than 450 filed. A little over 24 hours ago, the Senate received a final, nearly 400 page manager's amendment that cannot be changed or altered, with more than 500 cross references including to other statutes and will be voted on at 1 am Monday morning. It defies logic that we are now expected to vote on the overall, final package before Christmas with no opportunity to amend it so we can adjourn for a three week recess even as the legislation will not fully go into effect until 2014, four years from now.
I remain convinced we must work toward a responsible, common sense solution to reverse the trend of spiraling health care costs -- that will cause one-in-four Americans this year to have either inadequate coverage or none at all, and threatens affordable coverage for millions more Americans in the future. As I pledged to the President in an Oval Office meeting Saturday afternoon, I couldn't agree more that reform is an imperative, and I will continue my constructive efforts to forge effective, common sense health care reform as the process moves into a House-Senate conference.
The reality that the status quo is unacceptable is what originally brought six of us together on the Senate Finance Committee this summer in the only bipartisan effort in any committee of the House or Senate in the so-called Group of Six, convened by Chairman Max Baucus. We met 31 times, week after week for over four months, to debate policy and not politics.
Two months ago, when I voted for the Finance Committee bill, I said that the process moving forward shouldn't be about vote counting, but rather crafting the right policy and that the credibility of the process would determine the credibility of the outcome. So I was troubled that when the Finance bill was melded with the measure reported by the Senate HELP committee it was without the more inclusive, collaborative process I'd participated in up to that point and instead it was done in the shadows, without transparency, just to garner the necessary 60 votes and nothing more.
This bill has taken a dramatically different direction since the Finance Committee bill - it is now 1,200 pages longer and includes a new employer mandate that could annihilate the job growth potential that is so vital to our economic recovery. As the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council has stated, this mandate "will only burden firms with more costs and red tape which means they will not grow, invest, or create jobs."This bill also creates the CLASS Act on long term care insurance, a brand new program which the Medicare Actuary has said is projected to go into the red just five years after it begins paying out benefits. And the legislation requires a $90 billion increase in Medicare payroll taxes - a provision that was not part of the bill I voted for in Finance Committee - that predominately affects the self-employed and the very same small business owners we are counting on to create new jobs and lead us out of this recession. And that's just to name a few of the vital issues.
Furthermore, we still don't have answers to some of the most fundamental questions that people will be asking at their kitchen tables. These are the critical questions relevant to peoples' daily lives, such as, what does this mean for me? How much will my health insurance plan cost? How much will my deductible or my co-pay be? How much am I going to have to pay out of pocket? Not one single member in Congress - Republican or Democrat - can answer those questions, and that is why I wrote to the Congressional Budget Office on December 3rd requesting a complete analysis of these and other key issues as it is imperative that we have those answers before proceeding.
Ultimately, there is absolutely no reason to be hurtling headlong to a Christmas deadline on monumental legislation affecting every American, when it doesn't even fully go into effect until 2014. When 51 percent of the American people in a recent survey have said they do not approve of what we are doing, they understand what Congress does not -- and that is, that time is not our enemy, it is our friend. Therefore, we must take a time out from this legislative game of "beat the clock", reconvene in January - instead of taking a three week recess - and spend the time necessary to get this right. Legislation affecting more than 300 million Americans deserves better than midnight votes on a bill that cannot be further amended and that no one has had the opportunity to fully consider - and the Senate must step up to its responsibility as the world's greatest deliberative body on behalf of the American people.
Michael A
December 20, 2009 4:38 PM
Gee, what a shock.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
December 20, 2009 4:59 PM in reply to Michael A
1-800-FLOWERS. That's the number to send her a bouquet of roses since you agree with her.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Walter Mitty
December 20, 2009 4:49 PM
And it's still too quick. Let's face it, she was nothing but a tease - to offer Obama his bi-partisanship and see if he'd go for the bait. The bill is going to pass and her vote could have kept Sen. Nelson's abortion language out of it. Pro-Choice Olympia Snowe is no more pro-choice than Sen. Nelson is.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Raven
December 20, 2009 4:57 PM
I'd like to see her change her name to "Lucy" and start carrying a football.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
acf_ma
December 20, 2009 5:08 PM
I'm not surprised, at all, about this announcement. I never believed she was anything more than a ploy to extend the debate to provide more opportunities to weaken or kill it. What I do find shameful is going from 'I'm negotiating, I might support it', to not only won't she support it, but will actively participate in filibustering it. Republican, through and through.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JohnW1141
December 20, 2009 5:14 PM
Olympia Lieberman.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
tonigo
December 20, 2009 6:09 PM in reply to JohnW1141
Nope, at least she's supporting her party, unlike Lieberman.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fkaZk0sm0
December 20, 2009 8:25 PM in reply to tonigo
lieberman IS supporting his party. he's just not supporting his caucus.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AhTrini1
December 20, 2009 5:17 PM
Whoa, what a big freakin' surprise a republican is lying and using excuses to cover the no, no, no of the rest of the Party of No's platform, I am shocked, shocked, shocked I tell you!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mophan
December 21, 2009 12:56 AM in reply to AhTrini1
I like it! Just a small hint of sarcasm to bring out the truth. And the truth shall set us free.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
i said GOOD DAY sir
December 20, 2009 5:18 PM
She's just trying to pre-save her ass for the next GOP primary in Maine.
Too late, Olympia. Too bleepin' late.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
geofu54
December 20, 2009 5:27 PM in reply to i said GOOD DAY sir
I hope she will get teabagged in the primary. We have our good chances in that blue state, especially against another wingnut buffoon like Hoffman.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bluestatedon
December 20, 2009 5:25 PM
This just confirms yet again that there is nothing on this earth more useless and illusory than the tantalizingly close but perpetually unreachable "moderate" Republican. The only good Republican is a defeated Republican.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jcd
December 21, 2009 12:59 AM in reply to bluestatedon
hear hear.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bluestatedon
December 20, 2009 5:28 PM
"Playing here is so much fun!... asswipe."
Ooooooh, internet tough guy!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mophan
December 21, 2009 1:00 AM in reply to bluestatedon
I've heard about those... they live under a rock in the real world. They suffer from paranoia and are nefarious prevaricators. Some have been known to have symptoms of dementia as well.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ohyeathatsright
December 20, 2009 5:30 PM
For all the ranting they do about the economy, I wish Congress would treat our country more like a business.
It's called a deadline Olympia. Get back to work. Read the damn bill, consider the opportunity and the alternatives (none really) and make your decision one way or the other. Don't hide behind a timeline and use it as an excuse. It's so cowardly.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
gotalife
December 20, 2009 5:36 PM
Looks like a done deal.
Congrats.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Rich in NJ
December 20, 2009 5:38 PM
She's probably the biggest phony in the US Senate, and that's saying a lot.
I could understand if she wanted to vote no on the merits, but the bill is so close to what she has supported, voting to maintain the filibuster is borderline insane.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Michael A
December 20, 2009 5:43 PM in reply to Rich in NJ
Nah, it's standard repuke tactics. Tease and drag it out until the next election cycle and then point fingers claiming dems have got nothing done.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Rich in NJ
December 20, 2009 6:21 PM in reply to Michael A
repuke = Republican?
Maybe but she did vote for the Senate Finance Committee version which is pretty similar.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Michael A
December 20, 2009 6:52 PM in reply to Rich in NJ
True. Somebody else had a take on this which was that she was protecting her right in a primary. If traitor joe wasn't on board then maybe she would vote for it. Now there is no reason to do so.
Also, the reason is bull. The bill is rushed? We've been screwing around with "reform" for 15 years and 59 years if you want to go back to truman. Rushed? Not even close.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Old-Style Progressive
December 20, 2009 5:42 PM
This makes absolutely no logical sense. Maine NEEDS healthcare reform/coverage expansion badly, most of the state leans liberal, she's mind-bogglingly moderate by Republican standards, and she's got one of the safest seats around. Fundamentally, much of the bill that she approved in the Finance Committee is still intact...unless she'd prefer that the HELP Committee roll over and die. But wait-doesn't the H in HELP stand for Health? A committee that is supposed to determine spending shouldn't even have been running the show on a healthcare bill. Either someone pressured her to the breaking point, or somehow-incredibly-she's gone and lost her mind. The primary has nothing to do with it-Mainers won't kick her out. Although, now that she's opposing it...
Also, she's complaining now about the cost now? In round 2 of many? Olympia, if you want to be on the conference, VOTE FOR THE BILL. I once heard a Canadian professor describe the length of the bill that brought them single-payer coverage...EIGHT PAGES. They worked out the details later, and aren't complaining now. 2,000 pages is simply to make sure that it fits into existing law, so don't use it as a scare tactic. And if you're that much in favor of getting some form of healthcare insurance coverage reform, VOTE FOR THE BILL.
Olympia, what are you doing? Certainly not what Mainers would want.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Darrius
December 20, 2009 6:09 PM in reply to Old-Style Progressive
I think that she is taking cover because Reid doesn't need her vote. So she is avoiding a primary challenge.
I think Olympia really was in play. Had they needed her vote she would have come around to supporting the bill after she got whatever concession she wanted. Obama won her state by 15 points, and healthcare reform is popular in her state. She can not afford to be seen as an unreasonable conservative like the rest of the Republicans.
Because she is in Maine, she would be vulnerable from the left if she was the one that killed HCR. However, being the lone Republican to give Obama what he wants exposes her from the right in the primary. Since they did not need her vote. She gets to defend her right without exposing her left.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Old-Style Progressive
December 20, 2009 6:16 PM in reply to Darrius
Fair assessment. I just don't see her being unseated in a primary. Maine doesn't have that strong a core group of Tea-Baggers, etc. if I remember correctly. And maybe Obama told her at their meeting that he could understand letting this vote go if, perhaps, there was a new compromise down the road that could get her and a few more moderate/retiring Republicans to sign on. But I am optimistic about that one.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
geofu54
December 20, 2009 6:57 PM in reply to Old-Style Progressive
Then again, Maine has a closed primary, and if recent polls are any indications, she is potentially vulnerable if challenged; a plurality of the Repugs prefer a conservative challenge against her. We will see, but I think Darrius is right on. She is trying to have it both ways.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CityGuy
December 20, 2009 9:32 PM in reply to geofu54
As a man born in Greece, let me just tell you that Olympia has no frassos. Surprised?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mophan
December 21, 2009 1:06 AM in reply to geofu54
I agree with the general assessment of her trying to cover her right, but whatever happened to standing up for what is RIGHT? This whole health care debate is all about principle, and that is where this Congress has it all wrong.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Overreach THIS!
December 20, 2009 5:45 PM
I once was between jobs and did environmental fundraising. I had like 3 or 4 hours each evening and needed to knock on a whole lot of doors. Once in a great while you'd meet somebody who wanted to talk about the issues a whole lot and you realized after a while they weren't going to give you the $10 or $20, but they also didn't want you to go running along either, and finally you had to be rude. This is reminiscent.
She'll have time to read it now, though, and it will come back from conference and don't be surprised if Revoltin' Joe pulls some more shit then. When it comes back from conference, it cannot be amended but can be filibustered. Which, if his conscience and/or some illegal collusion that he has set up with insurance robber barons should dictate, the odious swine might just do. So we may need Senator (S)NO(we)once again.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ethan
December 20, 2009 5:51 PM
I guess that statement she made on the Baucus bill and on "history calling" was just a wrong number.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
NobleCommentDecider
December 20, 2009 6:11 PM
Since every George W.Bush Supporting Lying Ass Gerbil Brained Lower Than a Snake's Belly Blaspheming Republican is against this bill, it must be worth passing and be good for the country.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cwnidog
December 20, 2009 6:31 PM in reply to NobleCommentDecider
... George W.Bush Supporting Lying Ass Gerbil Brained Lower Than a Snake's Belly Blaspheming Republican ...
Jeez, I'm impressed. That's a thing of beauty. 10 out of 10 for style.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Len_RI
December 21, 2009 1:39 AM in reply to NobleCommentDecider
Amen, Brother.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ericf
December 20, 2009 6:14 PM
The strategy was never about anything but delaying. If the debate went into January, some change or another would mean it was still too soon. A little further into 2010, and it's too soon with the elections so close. Watch: some republicans are going to plead that this should wait until the voters speak up in the next election. Newsflash: this is what 2008 was about. We did speak.
I say pass the bill as it is warts and all, but then push through the Medicare extension through reconciliation. And please, beltway Democrats, learn a lesson and start with far more than you're going to get instead of starting with a fair compromise. That means try to extend Medicare to anyone, and then "settle" for only going to 55. Maybe we'll got 50, maybe 45. At least try!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Old-Style Progressive
December 20, 2009 6:20 PM in reply to ericf
Yes, yes, yes! This is what I've been trying to say on many posts here. Pass the bill as is, then add the more "controversial" aspects later, i.e. Medicare expansion, public option, etc. This is one of the few times that I will say...it's worked before, maybe it's worth trying again. After all, Medicare was proposed during the New Deal, and got passed in...the 1960s.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
December 21, 2009 12:17 AM in reply to Old-Style Progressive
That's the conclusion I have come to as well. Get something nailed down now, and then go back and continue to improve it as was done with Social Security and Medicare. (Although George Bush's Medicare "improvement" came close to bringing the whole thing tumbling down.)
I was greatly encouraged by the article in the New Yorker a couple of weeks ago on the promise of the myriad pilot projects that this bill sets up.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
RedMolly
December 21, 2009 9:55 AM in reply to slb
The Atul Gawande piece? Yeah, I found that very encouraging too, and I recommend it to anyone who needs to feel a little bit better about the Senate bill: read it here.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
roxsteady
December 20, 2009 6:24 PM
Who cares? Now, Olive Oil can go and get herself a sandwich. I hope the people of Maine will rid themselves of this hagg! She's just another useless Republican. Long may their party remain dead!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
roxsteady
December 20, 2009 6:31 PM
By the way, according to a Research 2000 poll, she's in deep trouble. Perhpas Maine will elect a Democrat since her numbers are tanking with both parties. As for the troll, we Liberals are at least glad that our party has the power to act if not, the will due to some dick heads. As for the Republican party.....they're essentially impotent. They have no power thanks to us. If we can get this bill fixed we'll be kicking your asses again in 2010. Just keep watching because they're isn't a damn thing you or your stupid assed counter parts, the teabaggers can really do except cry about the bill. YOU CAN'T STOP IT! They need some political viagra!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JohnW1141
December 20, 2009 6:41 PM
Snowe should stop coloring her hair with black shoe polish.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Douglas Watts
December 20, 2009 6:43 PM
Shorter Snowe: I haven't read the bill and haven't asked my staff to give me a 5 page synopsis.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
EastWest
December 20, 2009 7:40 PM in reply to Douglas Watts
Even shorter Snowe: "Psych!"
The problem isn't that Snowe was just stringing Reid and Obama along. The problem is that neither one of them had the brains to realize it, or the guts to do anything about it even if they had. If Reid had shown some leadership and just gone to reconciliation in the first place, we wouldn't have this abomination - er, I mean "wonderful health reform bill."
Blame Snowe all you want, but it's a little silly crying crocodile tears when - surprise! - a Republican turns out to be a liar. The Democratic caucus has a 60-vote majority, but "leadership" lacks the balls to use the same parliamentary rules the Repubs used so successfully against them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Moloko+
December 20, 2009 6:45 PM
At least we know that there is no more need to ever listen to any Republican ever again about anything. For some reason Obama felt it was possible to have a discussion with insane billionaires and the stooges who do their bidding. Now - nobody can fault the Democrats for just totally ignoring them. And it's no loss....their last best idea was Freedom Fries.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mcc
December 20, 2009 7:00 PM
Looks like the Democrats will be winning a Senate seat in Maine in 2012.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mophan
December 21, 2009 1:09 AM in reply to mcc
That would be sooo sweet... not holding my breath, though. Would take a lot of momentum in the part of a demoralized left. It's a possibility, but a long shot.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Kuyleh
December 20, 2009 7:02 PM
Is anyone really surprised?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Aunt Sam
December 20, 2009 7:09 PM
It's just more of the same....party lines no matter what the issue for the most part. So much for her representing her constituency (including dems who did and did not support her candidacy) who, according to reports, strongly support public option and HCR. When is she up for re-election?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
GayIthacan
December 20, 2009 7:10 PM
I actually think less of OBAMA for thinking Snowe was in any way worth courting or approaching in the first place.
I knew more about politics in high school.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
DuaneW
December 20, 2009 7:10 PM
Senator Snowe just blew her big moment and just killed the rest of her career. I thought she was more clever than this silliness.
Back when the Bill was in the Finance Committee, she played the bi-partisan card beautifully and even had the POTUS praising her. Now she will go down as an anti-reform flip-flopper negating any political gain she made with moderates but gaining nothing with the rightwing. Shs hated by the GOP base while still liked statewide. Her smartest strategy would be to emulated Jim Jeffers and go Independent on "principle" over this issue. As an Independent she would be a shoo-in in the General Election. As a Republican, she's Primary toast.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bluebell
December 20, 2009 7:25 PM
I love the clarity. It's good to be clear about the fact that Democrats surrendered single-payer, Medicare for all, public option, etc. to themselves. No need to blame Republicans for that at all.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tanjaoui
December 20, 2009 7:41 PM in reply to bluebell
Democratic strategy is clear: they're going for the big money now, adopting corporatist legislation, regulating/protecting industry to beat the Republicans at their own game.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Kevin Sutton
December 20, 2009 7:55 PM
Pretty awful behavior on her part. She lost any reason to oppose the bill based on her own demands, but since she can't take credit for it, she has to protect her right flank.
However, I think this may be sufficient to protect her position, and the Democrats have little reason not to try negotiating with her next time anyway. It's not like this makes her worse than Lieberman in terms of trustworthiness.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jsdc007
December 20, 2009 8:30 PM
Big surprise there. Did anyone expect her to support this bill? No.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
tommyo
December 20, 2009 9:04 PM
Say what you like about her, she certainly made a fool out of all the Democrats who couldn't appease her enough while pursuing her vote. They made her a power broker on HCR.
What chumps.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hobartcat
December 20, 2009 9:28 PM
How about change the bill to Medicare for ALL and push it through with 51 votes.
Just don't force me to ever do business with those bloodsucking leeches in the insurance industry. Car insurance is enough, thankyouverymuch.
Fuck 'em.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Michael A
December 20, 2009 9:40 PM in reply to Hobartcat
Co-sign.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Len_RI
December 21, 2009 1:37 AM
Gee, we've only been trying to enact health insurance reform for just the last fifty years. We really need to slow down. Let's give Snowe another fifty years -- maybe she'll be nice and ready by then.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
willia451
December 21, 2009 5:36 AM
If she could vote "yes" on the bill coming out of the Senate Finance committee, then she should be able to vote for this. Its roughly the same corporatist legislation we had coming out of that committee.
If she can't, then its either corruption, ego, pressure from the Republican Caucus, or all of the above.
Now that the Dems have 60, they don't need her. And Maine gets frozen out. She should have cut a deal when she had the chance.
Now she's whining. Pathetic.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rbe1
December 21, 2009 5:38 AM
A Very Rich, empty-headed bubble head, like the male members of her denomination, the Washington branch of the Church of the Holy Market.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cawleybo
December 21, 2009 7:54 AM
"considered fewer than a dozen of over 450 (mostly delay tactic) amendments filed ..."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cal Damage
December 21, 2009 3:17 PM
Birthers and Tenthers and Mainers, Oh My!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?