TPMDC
Republicans Relent, Will Let Debate Begin
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
Share
Send to a friend!
Senate Republicans announced this afternoon that they will allow financial reform legislation onto the chamber floor for a debate after bipartisan talks hit an impasse.
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL), ranking member of the Senate Banking Committee who has been in bipartisan negotiations with chairman Chris Dodd, released a statement announcing talks could go no further.
"We have been unable, however, to make any meaningful progress on other important components of the legislation. It is now my belief that further negotiations will not produce additional results," Shelby wrote.
Shelby said he had gotten assurances from Dodd that "he will address a number of concerns" about ending taxpayer-funded bailouts. Those assurances, however, aren't enough for Shelby to support bringing the bill to the floor.
"I thank my Republican colleagues for their support and defer to their individual judgments on whether the Senate begins a floor debate on this bill," he wrote.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell announced shortly thereafter that the bill would move forward.
"Now that those bipartisan negotiations have ended, it is my hope that the majority's avowed interest in improving this legislation on the Senate floor is genuine and the partisan gamesmanship is over," he said in a statement. (Emphasis is ours.)
McConnell maintained that the three-times-over Republican block of the bill gave them enough time to get important assurances from Dodd. He even praised Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE), who voted with Republicans to block the legislation, by name.
"The time afforded by my Republican colleagues and Sen. Ben Nelson was instrumental in gaining assurances from the Chairman that changes will be made to end taxpayer bailouts and the dangerous notion that certain financial institutions are too big to fail."
Comments (80) | Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
Most Popular
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2010 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Walter Mitty
April 28, 2010 4:02 PM
McConnell didn't want to miss the Kentucky Derby this weekend. Priorities...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Apphouse50
April 28, 2010 4:26 PM in reply to Walter Mitty
Why am I not shocked, shocked I tell you, that the ability to debate such important legislation fell and rose on the ability of Rethugs to attend a horse race (complete with funny hats for the girls and drinks that taste like pond water)?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hussein Stemper
April 28, 2010 4:03 PM
Is there any record of any mainstream media reporter asking McConnell why -- if he is so opposed to taxpayer bailouts -- he voted for Bush's bailout bill in 2008?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hobbes83
April 28, 2010 4:10 PM in reply to Hussein Stemper
Not at all because IOKIYAR.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
agio
April 28, 2010 4:16 PM in reply to Hussein Stemper
Any mainstream reporter who asked a question like that would not be a mainstream reporter much longer. Softballs for access is the rule.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ABrod
April 28, 2010 4:03 PM
Help me out here, does this mean that bill can now go forward for a simple majority vote, or does it still require 60 or more votes?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hobbes83
April 28, 2010 4:08 PM in reply to ABrod
They would still need another 60 senators to end debate on the bill. After that, it's a simply majority.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hobbes83
April 28, 2010 4:09 PM in reply to Hobbes83
*simple*
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
tamiasmin
April 28, 2010 4:42 PM in reply to Hobbes83
So Republicans can be against starting debate and against ending debate. Sounds about right.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hobbes83
April 28, 2010 8:12 PM in reply to tamiasmin
I know, it's an arcane method of legislating by the Senate. I think Sen. Byrd (please correct me if I'm wrong) established the 60 vote measure, and it's one of the main reasons the Senate is so broken. Republicans talk about how democratic they are when they block legislation, but in essence their actions are a direct contradiction to the idea of democracy. All you should need to do anything is a simply majority or plurality to move forward.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
superfly
April 28, 2010 4:08 PM in reply to ABrod
They will still need to get 60 to end debate, then, if they do, they can vote and the majority will rule.
I know, ridiculous.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Redshift
April 28, 2010 4:10 PM in reply to ABrod
Unless the GOP demands a vote, it can proceed by unanimous consent. (And they won't, since there's no advantage for them to having a bipartisan vote in favor on the record.)
Though I suppose it's possible that crazy Jim Bunning could object and force a vote for no rational reason...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
April 28, 2010 4:11 PM in reply to ABrod
All it means is that the bill can be introduced for debate. Passing it is another matter. The R's can, if they so choose, filibuster that. Whether they will or not remains to be seen. If they do, it takes 60 votes to overcome the filibuster. If not, then it moves to a vote where 51 is all they need.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
readerOfTeaLeaves
April 28, 2010 4:20 PM in reply to mans_best_friend
After the way that the Senate committee revealed the predatory insolence of Goldman Sachs yesterday (and both Dems and Rep's asked good questions), it didn't make any sense at all for the GOP to continue the filibuster.
That Goldman Sachs hearing yesterday marked some kind of 'Tipping Point' in the power nexus, and any elected who takes 'finance' contributions for the short term is going to hear about it from political opponents.
No doubt the GS alumni in and out of government have all the levers of power well-oiled, but they've got a steeper hill to climb than they did on Monday.
Reform has a headwind, and even the GOP had to recognize that fact.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
readerOfTeaLeaves
April 28, 2010 4:21 PM in reply to mans_best_friend
After the way that the Senate committee revealed the predatory insolence of Goldman Sachs yesterday (and both Dems and Rep's asked good questions), it didn't make any sense at all for the GOP to continue the filibuster.
That Goldman Sachs hearing yesterday marked some kind of 'Tipping Point' in the power nexus, and any elected who takes 'finance' contributions for the short term is going to hear about it from political opponents.
No doubt the GS alumni in and out of government have all the levers of power well-oiled, but they've got a steeper hill to climb than they did on Monday.
Reform has a headwind, and even the GOP had to recognize that fact.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
benjoya
April 28, 2010 4:42 PM in reply to readerOfTeaLeaves
i think you mean 'tailwind' , which makes things easier
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Boidster
April 28, 2010 5:27 PM in reply to benjoya
Except when landing. ;-)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mcc
April 28, 2010 4:28 PM in reply to ABrod
There's this vote, the bill goes to the floor, then there are votes on amendments, then there are the votes on the bill. The amendments can be filibustered and so can the final bill.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dickday
April 28, 2010 4:12 PM
This has been a meaningless exercise in one upmanship. I suspect that repubs as a minority are much better at this protocol crap than the dems ever were.
Maybe we learned something to throw back at them if they ever get into power again.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Packerfanchick
April 28, 2010 4:22 PM in reply to dickday
I'm waiting for them to take cues from kindergartners who don't get their way who just fall on the floor kicking and screaming (literally, they already figuratively have) until their mothers relent. I'm the type of mom to just walk away, we shall see what the Dems do...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Jaycal
April 28, 2010 4:35 PM in reply to dickday
Actually, I think the Demo's roadblock of W's federal judicial nominees showed they were on the ball with legislative tactics. The Dems will always have the problem of accommodating a broad range of political philosophies, not just crazy and wingnut, like the GOP.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
willia451
April 28, 2010 4:21 PM
Filibustering Financial Regulatory Reform was a losing hand for the GOP. The image of cots being rolled out at the Capital building in prep for the first of what were probably going to be many all nighters was the last straw.
No way the GOP was going to allow that visual, while they filibustered (siding with Wall Street, etc.), on National TV.
They were about to be completely exposed and flanked; and they knew it.
On to the floor and we’ll see what happens.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 28, 2010 5:34 PM in reply to willia451
They are a party with no leaders and no leadership. The few left in the party like Voinovich know this. There is no way these folks are going to win anything - except maybe a few seats in the house and maybe 2 in the senate. All the dems have to do is keep driving these populist issues home and we will cake walk into 2010. Then the re-election of Obama in 2012.
Now we need to find another serious and viable candidate for 2016 so we can keep the momentum going. We cannot let these goons get back in office. It's going to take several more terms with good liberal democrats running the show before we can right this ship.
Can you imagine if someone like Corey Booker decided to run in 2016? It would drive the white racists insane. I figure if we can elect another black president and lock in the hispanic vote, the racist thugs will probably leave the country.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hobbes83
April 28, 2010 6:50 PM in reply to chameleon
I saw an interview of him on the Rachel Maddow show a couple weeks ago. He seems like he would be ready to take the national stage in 2016.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 28, 2010 6:55 PM in reply to Hobbes83
I think he's more than ready. Another incredibly brilliant guy. Comes from an upper middle class family - went to all the best schools. Could have done anything with his life and made a lot of money but he chose to be a public servant. He rides the streets at night with the cops. Newark celebrated it's first month in 44 months without one murder.
I am very impressed with this guy and..... I would love to drive all the crackers crazy.....
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hobbes83
April 28, 2010 10:44 PM in reply to chameleon
I live in Detroit, so I would love to see a mayor that here that has as much commitment do something like that here. We've had to deal with so much voter apathy and corruption here that I decided to move out of state to go to law school.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 29, 2010 1:46 AM in reply to Hobbes83
Detroit has serious issues for sure and Kwame Kilpatrick didn't help it any. Good luck to you with law school.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hobbes83
April 29, 2010 2:49 AM in reply to chameleon
Thanks bro. I just try to educate and keep it moving. I just hope that we pick someone better then Granholm to run this state. she was a great AG but a terrible Gov.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 29, 2010 8:55 AM in reply to Hobbes83
What has she done that has made her a bad governor? The state is replete with so many problems. She hasn't been in office 3 years?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hobbes83
April 29, 2010 1:49 PM in reply to chameleon
She finishing her eighth year right now. The whole government up here is screwed up. Those term-limits that teabaggers love are really biting us in the ass up here. The government can't do anything because of all the gridlock. The Senate Majority Leader (Mike Bishop) is republican and the speaker of the House (Andy Dillon) is a democrat, so you can see how the legislative sausage making up here is so dysfunctional. We relied on the big three for too long and that cost us a lot in terms of diversifying our economy. The best that Gov. Granholm came up with was tax breaks to movie production companies. I know I sound like a cry-baby, but I'm not. I just want what's best for the state.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Spleeny Lutheran
April 28, 2010 6:53 PM in reply to chameleon
My thought in 2008 was Bill Richardson for the huge Hispanic vote out here in the west, but he dropped out after NH. I still think that Latin be good, maybe even more so in 2016. If you make most of the west one big blue blanket, and most of the northeast blue; then they will stuck in the southeast plus maybe WY, Idaho, and N Dakota for a generation or two. Kind of like a reverse of the late 1800s.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 28, 2010 6:59 PM in reply to Spleeny Lutheran
Bill Richardson is a nice guy but he's not the one... not even by a longshot. Definitely not the one.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Spleeny Lutheran
April 28, 2010 7:28 PM in reply to chameleon
What about Janet Napolitano? Latino = big win, Latina = jackpot.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 29, 2010 1:44 AM in reply to Spleeny Lutheran
Janet is Italian not latino but that doesn't matter. She's probably gay so that would eliminate her immediately, unless this country has an epiphany which I doubt is going to happen anytime soon, or until all the racist white folks leave the country, which can't happen soon enough as far as I am concerned.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Spleeny Lutheran
April 28, 2010 7:34 PM in reply to chameleon
...or one of the Sanchez sisters in southern Cal, they've been winning in red districts?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 29, 2010 1:52 AM in reply to Spleeny Lutheran
No way. Loretta is a conservative democrat and she was playing stupid games with her vote on health care so ix nay for Loretta. Her sister is less conservative and although they are latina women, they are not the right latina women for the job and they are not Presidential caliber. I really don't know of any woman out there who I would even consider voting for President. I want someone wicked smart like Obama.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Spleeny Lutheran
April 29, 2010 3:52 AM in reply to chameleon
I'd vote for Cory Booker, but I doubt he would carry my state (Nevada). What we need, imo, is a massive blowout of the GOP in the Senate as well, so they couldn't play games. I don't see that happening with anyone from the east half of the country.
...and yeah, it's Vegas so we probably have the most corrupt mayor in the USA (a mafia lawyer, etc.)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Spleeny Lutheran
April 28, 2010 8:04 PM in reply to chameleon
...especially Loretta S (the elder of the two), having been on the House Armed Services Committee, et cetera.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
indyundecided
April 28, 2010 4:25 PM
When I read a news bit on TPM I often like to jump over to Fox to see their ludicrous spin on the truth. On this major news that financial reform legislation is moving forward they have....nothing??
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
traitorjoe
April 28, 2010 4:26 PM
Here's our compromise - sit back on your fat haunches and watch Democrats pass another bill to help America while you fail your corporate overlords.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Peter Principle
April 28, 2010 5:02 PM in reply to traitorjoe
LOL. Sounds like:
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
traitorjoe
April 28, 2010 6:13 PM in reply to Peter Principle
Hilarious! I would also accept, "you'll get nothing and like it!"
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
picklenoses
April 28, 2010 4:26 PM
Personally I think they caved because they all wanted to go home and get their beauty rest....
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
traitorjoe
April 28, 2010 4:32 PM in reply to picklenoses
How dare you suggest Richard Shelby needs more time to work on his comb-over and Mitch McConnell is considering chin implants from his fully paid Congressional health plan.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 28, 2010 7:00 PM in reply to traitorjoe
Maybe he could comb it over McConnell's face.....
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JoeTheMechanic
April 28, 2010 4:32 PM
Here is my favorite-
Mitch McConnell:
"it is my hope that the ... partisan gamesmanship is over"
hehehe...
The Democrats are partisan gameplayers!
Fly me to the fuckin' moon... who is writing his shit? Is this Luntz?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 28, 2010 5:26 PM in reply to JoeTheMechanic
To borrow a quote from a poster here at TPM...
"McConnell looks like a shellacked turtle in a museum:"
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
miles born
April 28, 2010 6:58 PM in reply to chameleon
I agree. He really does look like an ugly old turtle. "He's ugly, mang!"
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 29, 2010 2:03 AM in reply to miles born
Ugly doesn't even come close to describing McConnell.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AlphaLiberal
April 28, 2010 4:37 PM
YAY!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Mr.E.
April 28, 2010 4:44 PM
The Ds recognition (finally!) that posturing against Wall St. and making the Rs oppose them, and the recognition (much faster) that switching gears on immigration to respond to AZ lunacy is a great way to rally Latino votes in western swing states such as Arizona and Colorado seems to indicate that the Ds may be recognizing that supporting good governance isn't enough, they also need to control the politics and perceptions in the media. My question, looking down the road a bit, is whether the Rs in the senate are going to continue to double down on their pout and stamp their feet strategy, or are they going to admit that the only way to influence new legislation is to really participate in the process.
My guess is that the Rs are too locked in to change direction before 2012, and they are going to continue their self-created slide to long-term minority status and possibly irrelevancy (regardless of any illusory small-gains in 2010).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
April 29, 2010 2:00 AM in reply to Mr.E.
This bill that passed in Arizona has lost 90% of the hispanic vote forever for the republicans, except for some of the die hard conservative hispanics and there are a few of those too - but they may also turn their backs on the thugs for this. Do we really want stupid idiots running our country now that we have had a taste of a smart, forward thinking president. Not me. Dems need to do everything to get out the vote in 2010. Sitting on your duffs is unacceptable.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Darrius
April 28, 2010 4:45 PM
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!
Don't allow debate! Keep filibustering!
Must - force - GOP - to - protect - Wall - Street - bankers - for - a - little - while - longer.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Agateman
April 28, 2010 4:45 PM
I am a long time registered Independent (almost 50 years). I would put McConnell and Ben Nelson into the top 10 all time a$$holes of my elected Hall of Fame. And this is not an easy HOF to get into.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Sir T
April 28, 2010 7:05 PM in reply to Agateman
Would it be presumptuous of me to ask you to provide us the list? :)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CranialRectalLoopback
April 28, 2010 4:50 PM
Why the hell didn't they take this approach with health care? That steaming pile was concocted to achieve what a couple of consecutive cloture votes achieved. The store hasn't even been given away yet.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CranialRectalLoopback
April 28, 2010 4:53 PM in reply to CranialRectalLoopback
Never mind. I guess I didn't grasp the fact that this was a filibuster against starting debate. I guess that means it wasn't a cloture vote?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Sir T
April 28, 2010 7:08 PM in reply to CranialRectalLoopback
The Republicans fairly cleverly agreed to the beginning of the debate on HCR then refused to agree to the ending of debate.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Maritza
April 28, 2010 4:53 PM
Well played, Senator Reid. Well played!!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Peter Principle
April 28, 2010 4:56 PM
This is really a twofer -- agreeing to drop the filibuster will enrage the wingnut base against the elephants, while passing financial reform will help the donkeys.
Win/win all around.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
sullynyc
April 28, 2010 4:58 PM
Raise. Fold. Done. Amazing how long it took for the Senator from Sodom & Gommorah to learn the basics of poker.
sheesh
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
NobleCommentDecider
April 28, 2010 5:12 PM
APPEASEMENT ! MUNICH 1938 !!!
Can't you see Goldman-Sachs and Wall Street were just trying to help poor Americans achieve their dreams ! BAH WAHH WAHH!
These finest of finance, like Fabulous Fab were just doing their jobs to serve the nation's poor to become homeowners even if it meant Goldman going broke doing it....the GOP was courageously standing between them and the pitchforks.
The mortgage meltdown was the fault of illegal strawberry pickers, and poor folks who cruelly outsmarted the philanthropists Wall Street.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AS
April 28, 2010 5:15 PM
Every time I come to TPM, I think of the US Constitution. No censourship here.
TPM has big balls, and we love it!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CandyceinAustin
April 28, 2010 5:18 PM
Righteous indignation ends at exactly 5pm.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cornelius
April 28, 2010 5:19 PM
Way to go Harry! Let's talk!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bobosqueakers
April 28, 2010 5:21 PM
I hope Barack brings 'em out again a beats their ass like he did with the HCR.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JoeTheMechanic
April 28, 2010 5:32 PM
It might be better than HRC. HRC got watered down so much for the sake of bipartisanship, which turned out to be zero bipartisanship. No use crying over spilled milk. Get back up on your feet Harry! Jack 'em in the jaw again!
Harry Reid - I beleive he's gonna beat the chicken lady.
Kick ass on Wall Street reform!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Richardxx
April 28, 2010 5:40 PM
Was it that Harry Reid threatened to actually hold the Senators there all night tonight and conduct a real filibuster? Or that McConnell needed to get to his horse race?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
April 28, 2010 6:54 PM in reply to Richardxx
I suspect the arrogant performance of the Goldman Sachs executives on Capitol Hill yesterday did not help things.
But the real difference here is that Democrats could afford to walk away from this one, and that Republicans really couldn't risk being seen as the champions of Wall Street. It meant the Democrats had far more leverage for this reform bill than for HCR.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
April 28, 2010 5:42 PM
If they learned one thing from HCR it should be to keep the bill moving. A stationary target is an easy target, and once you get bogged down it's awfully hard to get momentum going again.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
April 28, 2010 7:00 PM in reply to mans_best_friend
That too, yes. It helped that the House portion of this bill was crafted (and even passed, I think?) while the focus was on HCR.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JoeTheMechanic
April 28, 2010 5:53 PM
Look at that photo of McConnell --
Sure does looks like he got smacked in the mouth with a left cross from Two Fisted Harry.
The sad sound biter McConnell looks awful damn dumbfounded.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
traitorjoe
April 28, 2010 6:16 PM in reply to JoeTheMechanic
Harry done punched out mah chahmpers now I done got to eat corn-pone pie ah'll week long, Maw.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
magurakurin
April 28, 2010 9:49 PM in reply to JoeTheMechanic
yes, and here is a note to TPM. Always post crappy pictures of GOPers and always, always, always post the best most appealing photos of Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama and any other Dem. Those people are on our team. Too often TPM posts absolutely hideous pictures of Speaker Pelosi. Please stop that.
TPM, this is how the game is played- you make our team look good and their team bad. Thanks.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Paul
April 28, 2010 6:06 PM
How come Reid doesn't make them actually fillibuster?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Kevin Sutton
April 28, 2010 6:33 PM in reply to Paul
It's difficult to do that when they are caving.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The ghost of Lenny Bruce
April 29, 2010 11:55 AM
Just want to see if this works.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The ghost of Lenny Bruce
April 29, 2010 12:12 PM
OK, despite all of the procedural inanity occurring, the only reason the GOP remains the party of no is to differentiate themselves from the Democratic Party. It is common knowledge that if the party out of power looks and acts like the party in power, then they will receive a voter beatdown at the polls; i.e., why vote for the in-power party light when one can vote for the in-power party classic? Consequently the GOP must continue to play out their farce. Further, the only reason Ben Nelson is the Democratic senator from Nebraska is because he acts Republican. Note should be taken therefore that Lippmann had a valid reason for considering a "simple" majority of the American public the bewildered herd, of which Sarah Palin is the queen, and neither the GOP or Ben Nelson has given indication they disagree with that assessment. Just as Goldman Sachs, and others of their ilk gamed the stock market, politicians continue their attempt at gaming the American people. (Cue "Wake Up" by Rage Against The Machine)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tosh
June 6, 2010 6:23 AM
They are a party with no leaders and no leadership. The few left in the party like Voinovich know this. There is no way these folks are going to win anything - except maybe a few seats in the house and maybe 2 in the senate. All the dems have to do is keep driving these populist issues home and we will cake walk into 2010. Then the re-election of Obama in 2012.
Now we need to find another serious and viable candidate for 2016 so we can keep the momentum going. We cannot let these goons get back in office. It's going to take several more terms with good liberal democrats running the show before we can right this ship.
Can you imagine if someone like Corey Booker decided to run in 2016? It would drive the white racists insane. I figure if we can elect another black president and lock in the hispanic vote, the racist thugs will probably leave the country.
m65 kamagra
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?