
In an example of Republican obstructionism rendered beautiful by its simplicity, the GOP yesterday killed a House bill that would increase funding for scientific research and math and science education by forcing Democrats to vote in favor of federal employees viewing pornography.
Rep. Ralph Hall (R-TX), the ranking member of the House science committee, introduced a motion to recommit, a last-ditch effort to change a bill by sending it back to the committee with mandatory instructions.
In this case, Republicans included a provision that would bar the federal government from paying the salaries of employees who've been disciplined for viewing pornography at work.
To proceed with the bill and bring it to a final vote, Democrats would have had to vote against the motion to recommit, and against the porn ban.
But they didn't have the stomach for it, and 121 Democrats jumped ship and voted with Republicans to kill the bill.
"For anyone that is concerned about federal employees watching pornography, they just saw a pornographic movie. It's called; 'Motion to Recommit,'" Rep. Bart Gordon (D-TN) said. "It was a cynical effort to undermine an important bill for my 9-year-old daughter, for your kids and your grandkids."
The bill had passed the committee last month with bipartisan support, in a vote of 29 to 8.
"If at any point during the 48 hearings we've held on this bill, the Minority brought up their concerns with isolated incidents of federal employees viewing pornography, or if they had made an amendment in order during any of the three Subcommittee markups, the Full Committee Markup, or the Floor Consideration, I would have been happy to vote for that amendment," Gordon said in a press release after the vote.
"We're all opposed to federal employees watching pornography. That is not a question; but that's not what this was about," he went on. "The Motion to Recommit was about gutting funding for our science agencies."
Democrats pulled the bill off the floor after the motion passed and promised to introduce it again next week.
The bill -- a re-authorization of the 2007 COMPETES Act -- has been supported by interests usually seen as aligned with Republicans, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Hall did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Powkat
May 14, 2010 11:40 AM
So now both sides will exchange brickbats: Democrats are in favor of pornography, Republicans hate kids. The obstructionists win again, and the distrust of government grows. What the Republican party is doing in Congress is disgusting. But these days disgusting and Republican are synonyms.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Rick Jones
May 14, 2010 12:06 PM in reply to Powkat
This move is total bullshit.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ugg the Repug
May 14, 2010 1:15 PM in reply to Powkat
Hall have face only Ugg's hammer could love. Har har har.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Water
May 14, 2010 1:43 PM in reply to Ugg the Repug
Ugg the Repug you are wonderful. Your comments always make me laugh and are so funny. keep it up!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ugg the Repug
May 14, 2010 1:46 PM in reply to Water
Call me Ug for short. Har har har.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
markg8
May 14, 2010 1:24 PM in reply to Powkat
This isn't about kids, it's about the future, basic research that will keep us first class in tech and science or relegate us to hasbeen status.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
tonigo
May 14, 2010 1:32 PM in reply to markg8
and yet Hall is the ranking Republican on the House Science Committee. You can tell he really cares about science - zoology, biology, physiology, pornography - they all sound the same.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AZskeptic
May 14, 2010 2:11 PM in reply to tonigo
You forgot alchemy, phrenology and creationism, important issues for the good senator.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AZskeptic
May 14, 2010 2:12 PM in reply to AZskeptic
urps, congresscritter rather.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ryansh
May 14, 2010 7:19 PM in reply to AZskeptic
Is anyone else concerned that the ranking member of the House Science committee is a fucking Republican from Texas?! I'm amazed the house isn't sending up bills providing funding for alchemy and witch detection.
The Democrats should be plastering this kind of shit all over the media: "Republicans vote down job creating bill when unemployment is at 9%!!!!". But we all know they don't have the wherewithal to do that so they'll meekly reintroduce this next week and hope the Republicans kindly let them pass it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dnegri
May 15, 2010 1:16 PM in reply to ryansh
Except for that asterisk: 121 Democrats supported the recommit.
Thus killing any postive traction.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ZeraLee
May 15, 2010 12:31 AM in reply to tonigo
Astrology, cosmetology, gastronomy...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mJJ
May 15, 2010 11:52 AM in reply to markg8
As a Republican, I shall hold these guys responsible for pushing porn and for standing in the way of much needced legislation. So much for the Bible Belt Republicans and family values. So remember guys, next time you want a bill passed and when the Democrats block our party this way, well, remember your claim that "fair is fair" and just suck it in and take the abuse. What a Godless way to kill a bill is all I can say!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Slack
May 14, 2010 4:32 PM in reply to Powkat
As a Democrat, I'd somewhat agree. But the fact that 121 of my colleagues jumped ship over this because, in essence they think the voters are too stupid to get the nuance (and they may be right), is just as disgusting.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cliff Hendroval
May 15, 2010 9:48 AM in reply to Slack
Voters *are* too stupid to get the nuance, unfortunately.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
john1513
May 18, 2010 2:05 PM in reply to Cliff Hendroval
You are the voters.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Captain Dan
May 16, 2010 8:38 AM in reply to Slack
Voters (too many) are too stupid to understand!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kirk
May 19, 2010 8:25 AM in reply to Slack
Okay - explain the nuance to me. I want science education. I want it a lot. Why then do we reflexively gag over the micro-grandstanding over federal employee behavior? This behavior is already a firing offense where I work. The IT department either blocks the sites or I get walked out the door for viewing it on a company computer or on company networks.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Barry Champlain
May 14, 2010 5:18 PM in reply to Powkat
Don't give us this "both sides" shit.
There is ONE cynical side that has harmed the country. ONE.
The Republicans.
What the Dems say in retort is NOT AN ISSUE.
I am so sick of this "pox on both their houses" meme, every single goddamned time the 'thugs are caught with their hands in the cookie jar, their weenies out in the airport restroom, or just being anti-populist assholes in general, and it becomes clear there is simply no defending their acts.
Then it's always "a pox on both their houses".
NO IT'S NOT. KNOCK IT OFF.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
May 18, 2010 12:14 AM in reply to Barry Champlain
AMEN!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hollywood
May 18, 2010 1:18 PM in reply to Barry Champlain
I agree 100% !! Rethuglicans NEVER STOP with the cynical bullshit and somehow always seem to get away with it because it gets passed off as politics as usual. It is not the same on both sides at all. Dems try in every way to move forward and solve problems and rethugs stall and lie and try to get sweetheart deals for their rich friends. It really really is two different things, TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THINGS!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mJJ
May 15, 2010 8:48 PM in reply to Powkat
Actually, the Republicans can never expect another vote from me, a 77 yr. old Republican since I was 21. This filthy approach to stopping legislation is so unGodly that all House Republicans need to be run out of town. I have never been so ashamed of the Party in my life as I am now. If my Mother were alive, she would say "their mouths need to be washed out with a BUNCH of soap".
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
May 14, 2010 11:53 AM
Or you could just grow a set and vote it down.
Wusses.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
George C
May 14, 2010 12:50 PM in reply to mans_best_friend
Exactly. The only reason these ploys work is because the Dems don't have the cojones to take the vote that should be taken. I mean really . . .
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jdb316
May 14, 2010 1:23 PM in reply to George C
Because it will get held over their head the next time they run for re-election, and the public won't want to hear (even if it could understand) their defense based on House procedures. The Republican attack is much simpler to understand and, for most of America, plays to its pre-existing stereotypes of both parties.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
May 14, 2010 1:31 PM in reply to jdb316
If they can't figure out how to manage their message any better than that they deserve to lose.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Rick Jones
May 14, 2010 2:57 PM in reply to mans_best_friend
"The Republicans tried to use a dirty political trick to keep your children from learning math and science. But we didn't let them." Or something just as simple.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Prefabfan
May 14, 2010 4:13 PM in reply to Rick Jones
Obama should be on TV tonight, with a PowerPoint presentation showing how Americas children need funds for science, how we are no longer #1 in science, and exactly how the Republicans tacked this on to defeat the bill. O should explain how the Repubs threatened to run ads in November saying "Dems vote to authorize porn on duty for Postal workers".
Obama shoud show the US how it worked, and ask them to drop their Republican allegiance, just like they turn off bad TV.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lizskin
May 14, 2010 8:26 PM in reply to jdb316
So why is it that despite the very public pornographic behavior of Ensign, Sanford, Vitter, RNC recruiters, Foley, and on and on, the Democrats will still be perceived as the ones who are soft (so to speak) on pornography????
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jdb316
May 16, 2010 4:06 PM in reply to Lizskin
Because the Republicans are far better at messaging and framing issues than the Democrats. And the Republicans have framed themselves as the family values party and the Democrats as the sinful, immoral party in the eyes of Middle America.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hewhohasnoname
May 14, 2010 1:22 PM in reply to mans_best_friend
That would work if we were a nation of informed voters. We're not.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cal Soldier
May 14, 2010 10:29 PM in reply to hewhohasnoname
2nd.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
EastWest
May 14, 2010 2:33 PM in reply to mans_best_friend
Bingo.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
synchronicity
May 14, 2010 12:00 PM
Why isn't this a front page story? Not scandalous enough?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
synchronicity
May 14, 2010 12:02 PM in reply to synchronicity
(It is on the front page of TPM but I was referring to elsewhere...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
VictorLH
May 14, 2010 12:11 PM
Ok, resubmit the bill and have the Rules Committee set it up so this shit can't happen again. While they are at it put something in the new bill to F@#$ this Congressmans district. Like a tax break for strip joints to locate there (Texas loves StripJoints and Whore Houses).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CityGuy
May 14, 2010 4:58 PM in reply to VictorLH
Agree. Play hardball back at the bastards. And besides, it's not like the Dems control Congress and could have prevented these motions huh? Oh wait, they DO control both houses of Congress! It's so easy to forget sometimes.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hot Hand
May 15, 2010 9:14 PM in reply to VictorLH
Excellent!!!!
Of course they won't do it quite like that but they should.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
erwin
May 14, 2010 12:46 PM
What a proud day for Mr. Hall! If he's not slandering teen sex slaves at the behest of Jack Abramoff (link), he's undermining science, jobs, and science education here in America. Well done!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Given Up
May 14, 2010 3:53 PM in reply to erwin
You can't be serious, one of these days my suspicion that every republican is a slimy corrupt a**hole may be proven wrong, but I'm not gonna hold my breath.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bibimimi
May 14, 2010 6:16 PM in reply to erwin
I bet Jack got Ralph laid more than once. I get a sustained 'dirty ol' man' vibe from his pic.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
destor23
May 14, 2010 12:54 PM
This kind of thing only works because the Democrats let it. Vote the porn thing down and tell the person who added it to feel free to introduce it into the proper committee as a standalone bill. Then pass the issue at hand. It's easy. If every time they attach the "kill and eat puppies" rider onto something we want to pass, they will always attach the rider.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dustbunny44
May 14, 2010 12:59 PM
If any group understands the effects of non-traditional sexual activity in the community, including porn, that group is elected GOP representatives.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Jaycal
May 14, 2010 1:15 PM in reply to dustbunny44
"It's unconsionable we'd pay a federal employee to browse porn while on the public payroll. If that's what they want to do, we have new openings in the RNC."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
johnnydoughey
May 14, 2010 1:08 PM
Notice that BOTH mobs enjoy the ability to do this exact action.
Neither mob has made an attempt to limit amendments and changes to include only connected items.... because they are MOBSTERS! IMHO
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
benintn
May 14, 2010 1:11 PM
And thank you Destor for showing your vast wisdom about politics.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
pmccoy
May 14, 2010 1:11 PM
What was their beef with this bill, which appears to have had broad bipartisan support?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
May 14, 2010 5:25 PM in reply to pmccoy
You're assuming there had to be a beef with the bill rather than just a desire to make it impossible for the Democratic majority to govern.
In any event, this may shed some light on some of what they were trying to do (from http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/05/13/us/politics/AP-US-Congress-Porn-Ploy.html -- my bolding):
Or maybe the answer is just that they are obsessed with sex:
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
benintn
May 14, 2010 1:14 PM
Interesting side note - Ralph Hall was a Democrat until 2004, when he switched parties to keep his seat after redistricting in 2003.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hobbes83
May 14, 2010 1:14 PM
Makes sense when you think about it. Republicans have to keep the American people stupid to secure their voting base.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cwnidog
May 14, 2010 2:40 PM in reply to Hobbes83
Critical thought is to the GOP what garlic is to a vampire.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
maya89
May 14, 2010 1:39 PM
does that include Congressfolks and their staffers?
ha ha..
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cleo
May 14, 2010 1:40 PM
I don't know if I'm correct, but doesn't the President have the ability to do a line item veto?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
May 14, 2010 1:46 PM in reply to Cleo
No.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
expat46
May 14, 2010 2:18 PM in reply to Cleo
Is that a joke?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AZskeptic
May 14, 2010 2:19 PM in reply to Cleo
Don't we wish........
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
big jonny
May 14, 2010 3:23 PM in reply to AZskeptic
No line item. Unconstitutional. Clinton v. New York (1998). Wiki here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_v._City_of_New_York
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
pmb50
May 14, 2010 1:41 PM
Rep Hall I am more concerned that every industrial country is beating our asses in math and science. The republicans must keep our nation dumb; it’s their voting block and their base. Let them whack it
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
neurodoc
May 14, 2010 1:48 PM
So this means the repubs are anti-science, anti-jobs, and pro-porn? Always good for America.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
human
May 14, 2010 1:50 PM
"Democrats pulled the bill off the floor after the motion passed and promised to introduce it again next week. "
waiting an extra week is hardly killing the bill. Another big headline unsupported by the facts.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bayroad22
May 14, 2010 1:53 PM
another fine example of the repugs "Country first" promise....
guess that's destroy "Country first" then the World!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CVille Dem
May 14, 2010 1:57 PM
How many jobs could they get out of Creation "Science?" Talk about pornography!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ejg3
May 14, 2010 1:59 PM
This gives a whole new definition for dirty tricks. Out of curiosity I wonder if the debate included any reference to one of the ongoing themes and songs in Avenue Q.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
May 14, 2010 2:05 PM
I'm sorry, I absolutely must agree with the GOP on this one.
There was a story in the NYT about three weeks ago about folks in the SEC who apparently spent more time watching flix than watching AIG, BofA, etc. Although a few were fined, none were fired...
If we are to fire/arrest the leadership of the big banks and hedge funds that got in this mess, then we absolutely must go after the people in the SEC... The Dems are already looking to have a tough November, and through no fault of the GOP just dug themselves a much deeper hole.
As I said, it was a brilliant move by the GOP, and it will quite rightly make the Dems look like the of Vivid and Jenna and immorality. Most Americans, I think, will agree with this sentiment.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Economides
May 14, 2010 2:17 PM in reply to R
Those folks you are talking about in the SEC were doing this during the Bush administration.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
May 14, 2010 3:04 PM in reply to Economides
And many of them, it appears, are still there.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
May 14, 2010 2:26 PM in reply to R
Boy I want some of what your smokin!!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
May 14, 2010 2:27 PM in reply to chameleon
That was supposed to be a reply to R Miguel(whatever). Sorry about that.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
May 14, 2010 3:06 PM in reply to chameleon
I'm sorry, I don't understand what that means...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
May 14, 2010 3:41 PM in reply to R
Me neither - I am having a very bad day today..... but my comment still stands.. your referring to the GOP's brilliant move. I disagree
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SchrodingersCat
May 14, 2010 2:32 PM in reply to R
Wha???????
I don't think anyone here is arguing that federal employees should be allowed to sit around all day watching porn. The outrage is over the fact that this issue was used to torpedo funding for science agencies.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
May 14, 2010 3:08 PM in reply to SchrodingersCat
No, the NYT and myself are focused on the specific fact that people in the SEC (not the DOE, NSF, etc) got their jollies instead of keeping an eye on Wall Street. They all got off the hook.
The GOP rightly wanted to (publicly) punish these individuals, and the Dems flinched.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. The Dems will regret this vote.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
May 14, 2010 4:13 PM in reply to R
Boy are you ever dumb. This has nothing to do with keeping federal employees from viewing porn. If it was they could easily have introduced that as a separate amendment. This is about using a lame-assed procedural tactic to kill a math and science bill for no reason other than being obstructionist. Wake up and smell the coffee, dude.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nova voter
May 14, 2010 5:05 PM in reply to R
seriously, moron, you should at least inform yourself on a subject before you try to talk about it.
you got almost NONE of that right.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nova voter
May 14, 2010 5:03 PM in reply to R
wow, are you ever a stupid one. whew.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
truth > spin
May 14, 2010 2:07 PM
What everyone here is missing is that the Speaker lost control of the floor. There are very few specific powers invested in the Speaker, but controlling the schedule and order of process through committee and to full dispensation is one of them. In effect, the minority party assumed that control.
This happens almost never in the House. Such a procedural vote loss happened once I can think of during the 12 years of GOP control and one other time through a discharge petition (on BICRA).
The time it happened before that, was the summer of 1994. Gingrich has pointed to that procedural win as when he really thought that the GOP had a shot of winning in November and the party doubled down on talking with Dems who might flip, running hard at older members who might still retire, etc.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shlalaw
May 14, 2010 2:07 PM
Grand Old Porn?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
May 14, 2010 2:10 PM
One wonders what these gentlemen are viewing on their own computers...
http://www.facebook.com/campaigncorner
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fred17
May 14, 2010 2:16 PM
if any one is an expert on porn it would be the republican "law makers" whether they are senators, congressmen or governors
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
TexasSkeptic
May 14, 2010 2:28 PM
Well, I live in this guy's district. What a proud moment! How much worse could it be? Well, directly to the south is Louie Gohmert. And before I moved to Hall's district, my Congresscritter was Ted Poe. Two former judges that would get even more attention for their batsh*t-crazy ideas but for Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin, Steve King and a few others. Heck, Ralph is a veritable fount of sensibility compared to what else you find in the Texas GOP.
One of the biggest employers in the district went belly-up a couple years ago, has "downsized" about 15,000 jobs and just had its bankruptcy court-approved sale to a foreign company approved. And the guy that founded and guided the company for decades is a big right-wing Bible-thumping GOP supporter. So to follow up on VictorLH's comment, go ahead and send those strip joints to Ralph's district; they'd probably thrive because we know the fundamentalists here in the Bible Belt are so good at practicing what they preach . . . .
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
May 14, 2010 5:32 PM in reply to TexasSkeptic
This is when I miss Molly Ivins the most. She was always at her finest when relating the antics of Texas politicians!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Unionman
May 14, 2010 2:44 PM
What purpose do these conservatives republicans and blue dog democrats serve other than to act in ways that offer only negativism for the overwhelming majority of american citizens? This republican cretin has demonstrated the depth of their obstructionism by including this inane provision as a single means to stop the passage of a bill that would increase financing to our teaching and research of math and sciences. Why? Well its a known fact that conservatives abhor the thought of an objective education for our citizens, especially one which prepares individuals to deal with the tripe of creationism, etc. There is no deeper fear than that of a conservative facing a rational, learned and objective person who questions their facts, efforts etc.
Now that this republican obstruction has been placed before the legislation process, I fear that President Obama may have a notion of bipartisanship concern and attempt to persuade the democratic leadership to reconsider the republican provision and find a way to include its intent on the next proposal. God knows Obama is more than glad to assuage the feelings and thoughts of conservatives than he is to being loyal to his own party's efforts.
What has happened to the candidate Obama and his platform now that he is President Obama/
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
georgecs
May 14, 2010 2:49 PM
I'm lost. Vote for the fucking amendment. Is there rampant porn-watching going on in the federal government? How many people would actually be affected? If it's bullshit then no one is affected. This is so fucking stupid it hurts each and every neuron in my brain individually.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
pjm
May 14, 2010 3:37 PM in reply to georgecs
FWIW, it wasn't an amendment. It was a motion to recommit which, at least in this case, is another way of saying "no, no, _no_, NO, NO!, na-na-na-na, I can't hear you! We're not gonna play until you let us call the shots."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
May 14, 2010 5:43 PM in reply to georgecs
The measure passed; the problem is that it didn't just mandate the firing of anyone caught viewing pornography; it also stripped the funding for all new programs and freeze the funding for existing ones at the current level. That pretty much guts the bill, so the Democrats pulled it rather than dilute it into ineffectiveness.
The Republicans aren't all that concerned with making sure that anyone whose eyes are touched by porn is fired; they just included that as a way of forcing Democrats in hotly contested races to vote in favor of their other changes.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ThirdSection
May 14, 2010 3:05 PM
The Dems should have called "Off Topic!" and been done with the silliness.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Bribes
May 14, 2010 3:35 PM
May I suggest a new article title? "Science funding scuttled by Republicans using porn maneuver."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
May 14, 2010 4:15 PM in reply to Bribes
Tea bagging, by any chance?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Bullsmith
May 14, 2010 3:38 PM
Nice to see your government wasting everyone's time. Republicans must be especially proud today, at keeping more Americans less educated.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wye
May 14, 2010 3:41 PM
That the Repubs would do it shows their incredible obstruction and dishonesty.
That the Dems would not just mow it down and vote for the bill anyway shows how spineless they are as a party (with some exceptions).
That this sort of asshole maneuver is even technically possible shows that our gov't is severely broken.
That front page pic of Cantor and Boehner is perfect(ly contemptible).
Disgusting at every turn.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cal Damage
May 14, 2010 4:03 PM in reply to wye
"That front page pic of Cantor and Boehner is perfect(ly contemptible). "
Notice the microphone's position? That's because, just before they sat down, these two were talking out their asses.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Galactus
May 14, 2010 3:54 PM
PITIFUL HUMANS! IT WAS I, GALACTUS, WHO ENGINEERED THE DEMISE OF THIS DIRECTIVE IN ORDER TO DENY REED RICHARDS SUFFICIENT FUNDING TO COMPLETE HIS NEURO-TACHYON NET PROJECTOR THAT MIGHT HAVE SAVED YOUR PLANET FROM DESTRUCTION TO SATISFY MY ETERNAL HUNGER, NOT THAT RICHARDS COULD HAVE COMPLETED SUCH AN AMBITIOUS PROJECT, ACTUALLY, HE'S QUITE OVER-RATED, AND NOT THAT I, GALACTUS, COULD NOT HAVE OVERCOME IT, BUT IT IS BETTER TO BE SAFE THAN SORRY, NOT THAT I, GALACTUS, AM CONCERNED ABOUT SAFETY OR SORRY-TY, IT WILL JUST MAKE IT THAT MUCH EASIER FOR ME TO CONSUME YOUR PLANET INCLUDING THE UNWITTING MYRMIDONS YOU CALL "REPUBLICANS" THAT I, GALACTUS, HAVE ONCE AGAIN SO SKILLFULLY MANIPULATED.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Publishermike
May 16, 2010 12:03 AM in reply to Galactus
Classic
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
starfightersimon
May 14, 2010 4:15 PM
This isn't 'republican obstructionism'. This is just obstructionism. Democrats and Republicans alike use these dodgy tactics to their advantage all the time. This is the soul of our political theater and the business of expediency.
On the other hand, Republicans are the party of 'no' these days, the obstructionists. But lets not pretend Dems don't do it either. I can remember multiple times the health care struggle was helped through cheap moves like this one.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
May 14, 2010 5:48 PM in reply to starfightersimon
Oh, yeah, I really remember all the times the Democrats pulled this tactic to keep Bush from starting an unnecessary war, or trampling on the Fourth Amendment. NOT!
I really wish Democrats had done this sort of thing during Bush's time in office. But however much the GOP accused them of it, they were not obstructionist in the least.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
pdxer
May 14, 2010 4:28 PM
How was it that Tom DeLay ran Congress for years and basically did whatever he wanted? And our side can't even vote on a jobs bill?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Nightflyer23
May 14, 2010 9:21 PM in reply to pdxer
Simple. Our guys aren't cutthroat enough. Guys like Delay will knock out your teeth with a crowbar, then when you're down, keep stomping on your balls until there's nothing left.
And then he'll say, "What's all the fuss? Quit whining!"
Metaphorically speaking, of course (probably).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bill
May 14, 2010 4:41 PM
The pornographic movie could well have been made of one of the Republican Senators or Representatives diddling with one of their concubines or pages. This is just another example of Republican Puritanism - The fear that someone, some where at some time may be watching them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
crazycarnypoptart
May 14, 2010 4:49 PM
has anyone else noticed that the republicans have been going after education? one of the provisions in hcr reconciliation package was take the money we saved on student loans and dispense it as pell grants but the GOP pointed out that this didn't affect the budget so it was removed. Newt gingrich said that high school students should drop out and join the workforce. Glenn Beck said kids should be homeschooled. This seems to be a trend by the GOP lately and this is something that will forever keep me from ever voting for the GOP. Not even Mehgan McCain, and she is my favorite republican
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
beeper
May 15, 2010 8:10 PM in reply to crazycarnypoptart
One thing that struck me about this revolting maneuver that I haven't noticed in other comments is that it's not just anti-education, it's overtly anti-RESEARCH. The GOP is after all the party of corporate power par excellence, and a lot of that corporate power ultimately derives from industrial products that can pose serious health and environmental hazards. When that's the case, who finds out? And who informs the public, and the regulatory agencies? Federally funded scientists, that's who. Because industry scientists are required to bury or distort unflattering data, when it's even collected. Public funding is about as independent as you can get.
I have seen the GOP hack away at public education for many years now. And I've seen them encourage the promotion of superstition over reason for many years. But I don't recall seeing them take such a direct step against the funding of basic scientific research before. And I can't help noticing that the last year or so has been the time when the ubiquitous and profitable BPA finally gained public recognition as a serious public health issue. Thanks to the work of... federally funded scientists. Who also brought us our awareness of climate change and a whole host of other problems.
I could see independent science as the enemy. If I were one of the wealthy industrialists who comprise the GOP's clientele. Just sayin'.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
sherifffruitfly
May 14, 2010 4:59 PM
Why were they allowed to tack on the poison pill in the first place?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
May 14, 2010 5:54 PM in reply to sherifffruitfly
It was a "motion to recommit," which is the one shot the minority party has at changing a bill before it goes to a final vote. See http://www.rules.house.gov/archives/recommit_mot.htm
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
neesy08
May 14, 2010 5:31 PM
the gop sure are twisted. they have sex on the brain. they mustnot be doin it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bibimimi
May 14, 2010 6:13 PM
'Why eff just one person when u can eff everybody?'
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
May 14, 2010 6:46 PM
Looks like the G-NO-P has a plan for us to fall behind in the 21st century.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CVille Dem
May 14, 2010 7:39 PM
Wait a minute. I am confused. The repubs seem to be on the right side of this:
What is wrong with that? Is it so terrible that repubs want to get rid of people who watch porn at work? Seems like they would only be getting rid of their own, from what I have seen.
I can't believe it, but unless I completely misunderstand this issue, the Dems are wrong and the Republicans are right, and they all should have voted for this bill.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CVille Dem
May 14, 2010 7:53 PM in reply to CVille Dem
The Democrats blew this bill off because Republicans wanted to fire people who watched porn at work? And then blame the bill going down on republicans?
PLEASE! TELL ME I MISUNDERSTOOD THIS WHOLE THING!!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
crazycarnypoptart
May 14, 2010 9:00 PM in reply to CVille Dem
a motion to recommit is basically a motion to send the bill back to committe or to another commitee. To bring the item to the floor for debate and vote, a majority must vote against the motion to recommit. The gop tacked on an amendment that made it political suicide to vote against the motion to recommit. That is basically whats going on
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Barney
May 14, 2010 10:27 PM
Rep. Bart Gordon (D-TN) said. "It was a cynical effort to undermine an important bill for my 9-year-old daughter
Teach your own daughter, you fucking idiot. You're probably just worried that you might have your pay cut for all the porn surfing on the taxpayer dime
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Leftflank
May 14, 2010 10:36 PM
Isn't it much worse that the, clinging on to the last rung, neo-cons introduce this crap in the first place? Call their bluff this time & everytime & proceed in spite of them. Their constituency is too dumb to see any difference & therefore a waste of time & effort. I see that the whole of the right-wing is in the obstruction business & I'm sure the other 75% or so of the nation also gets it.
We can't fix the willingly broken!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
1audiofile
May 15, 2010 9:51 AM
This is another example of the Dems inability to properly stage a point. The headline should be "Republicans support Pornography for government workers".
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dnegri
May 15, 2010 1:15 PM
If you're a Republican, you will never have problems with your Fundamentalist Anti-Science base by pulling this kind of stunt.
After all, "family values" - GOP style - trumps Science. Right?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
J_O_B_S
May 15, 2010 3:04 PM
This is the party of virtues that Palin always talks about? I guess more like Satins' virtues, after all the conservitive right is all about America's cults. It would be so nice if our real religions in America would show some backbone and stand up to these cults! JOBS at - http://auto-parts-mall.net
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
May 15, 2010 4:52 PM
"It bespeaks of one's character when one's best ideas are lies."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
StevenWells
May 15, 2010 5:25 PM
Dems have got to start calling Repub's bluffs on ridiculous amendments like this one. "Bar the federal government from paying the salaries of employees who've been disciplined for viewing pornography at work?"
Doesn't sound like anything that would hold up in court.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
DancingBananas
May 15, 2010 5:49 PM
I suggest a '68 Was Great bill to put all this nonsense to bed forever:
Article I: Sex is ok between consenting adults. Viewing is fine too if that floats your boat.
Article II: The earth is more than 5,000 years old. Get over it.
Article III: If alcohol is ok, then pot is ok too. Drug war? Over.
We live in a strange country indeed for these rather simple points to be matters of such Grave Taboo.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
May 15, 2010 6:44 PM
unfortunately, even on the internet, nobody understands what you are trying to say. america has proven itself to be, on average, too stupid to look beyond the surface of an issue.
question: liberal senator, have you stopped beating your wife? (or similar carefully worded accusatory question)
correct answer: no i haven't, have you?
unfortunately, democrats are being kept on the defensive by bullshit like this, because the repubs know that no matter ho duplicitous the remark, a lame answer makes them seem correct.it is a sophomoric trick, but it works. i am a staunch liberal, nay radical leftist, but the dems need to think through their responses to such semantic dishonesty.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
DancingBananas
May 15, 2010 8:02 PM in reply to Mike
It is just ludicrous that this sort of demagoguery gets any traction whatever, let alone that it is as prevalent as it is. But even more annoying is that that there are certain issues that have such knee jerk shock value but behind which there is no substantive policy or rationale. That anything supportive of basic science (or in this economy related employment) would suffer as a result is unfortunate to say the least, and personally I wish Democrats would fight back and expose the absurdities of this sort of posturing rather than rolling over.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
gthog61
May 15, 2010 7:37 PM
Good, what part of "trilion dollar deficits for at least a decade going forward" and "we can't afford every piece of govt spending crap anybody likes" don't you people understand?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
May 15, 2010 9:00 PM in reply to gthog61
As any economist, scientist, CBO employee, or person who is not clinically retarted will tell you, science investment is so effective in stimulating the economy, it is deficit neutral. In fact, it is usually conductive to a budget surplus. $35 billion dollar investments in France, yearly 20% increases in R&D by the Chinese, and conservatives want to undermine our innovative economy yet again?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
GTFOOH
May 15, 2010 9:17 PM
House Republicans Force Porn Vote To Kill Jobs Bill
...Another public screwing by the Pugs!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
May 15, 2010 9:27 PM
And yet nothing will be done about it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bjoh249
May 16, 2010 12:28 AM
The whole problem is that we have too many people in this country with their lips glued to the behinds of political parties. They believe their side is completely right and the other is completely wrong regardless. Wake up people, Both sides are screwing us! These Democrat and Republican politicians in Washington just care about their own interests, not their constituents. The faster people start realizing that instead of picking sides, the better off we will be as a country.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Sailormarlowe
May 16, 2010 9:13 AM
Porn? Is that like...Nancy Pelosi & David Corn?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
1audiofile
May 16, 2010 2:05 PM
You are all wrong. This was not an obstructionist plot by Republicans to kill a science bill by using a pornography clause, they genuinely want government workers to have access to pornography at work. It should be headlined as such.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tosh
May 16, 2010 6:24 PM
I have seen the GOP hack away at public education for many years now. And I've seen them encourage the promotion of superstition over reason for many years. But I don't recall seeing them take such a direct step against the funding of basic scientific research before. And I can't help noticing that the last year or so has been the time when the ubiquitous and profitable BPA finally gained public recognition as a serious public health issue. Thanks to the work of... federally funded scientists. Who also brought us our awareness of climate change and a whole host of other problems.
I could see independent science as the enemy. If I were one of the wealthy industrialists who comprise the GOP's clientele. Just sayin'.
m65 kamagra
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Has the eyes to see
May 17, 2010 1:33 AM
Sigh... why can't we clean up the legislative process so that only matters relevant to the bill at hand can be attached to the bill or something to that effect?? Because this is absurd bullshit in its purest form.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Evelyn_S
May 17, 2010 4:32 PM
People who think Republicans are stupid should heed the breathtaking cunning it took to come up with this one!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Evelyn_S
May 17, 2010 4:56 PM
Oh, and the ploy appears to be dangerous enough enough that I understand why Dems wussed out.
Consider that at least 2 of the people posting here, having presumably just read the article, managed to completely misunderstand it.
Despite the other comments, even!!!
(Damn, read it a little slower, a few more times....)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Rainyday
May 17, 2010 5:42 PM
But wait as head of ebay Meg WHITMAN... she's GOP right...Here is what Poizner's new ad say.
(from another TPM snippet)
State Insurance Commissioner Poizner's new web video -- "Adults only" -- opens with eBay's history of selling guns, fake paintings and pornography. And then it takes on Whitman, who used to run the online auction site.
"Whitman cleaned up the site," the video's narrator says. "No more guns. No more fake paintings. But pornography? Whitman started a separate division that only sells porn."
Under Whitman's leadership the porn site became one of the largest on the internet. That's Meg Whitman. From Goldman Sachs deals to porn. It's all about the money. Meg Whitman. Bad judgment. Wrong values.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Huggibill
May 18, 2010 10:45 AM
Another aspect of this move on Halls part could be the creationist agenda that is really being pushed in Texas right now. It's pretty common now to see political messages between rivals insinuating that the other might not really be a creationist. The recent changes in education structure there to include these teachings in schools would also seem to reflect this. Not trying to say what he did was right, but there are a lot of politics revolving around science vs theology in Texas right now, and this could merely be a taste of whats to come.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?