December 16, 2010

"Republicans will paralyze the Senate floor for 50 hours by forcing clerks to read every single paragraph of the 1,924-page, $1.1 trillion omnibus spending bill."

"Senate clerks are expected to read the massive bill in rotating shifts around the clock — taking breaks to drink water and pop throat lozenges — to keep legislative business on track, according to a Democratic leadership aide."

Oh, big deal. It will only take them a day or 2, as Senator DeMint admits. "Again, we’re trying to run out the clock. They should not be able to pass this kind of legislation in a lame-duck Congress."

Should the GOP demand the reading of the bill?
No. It's pointless. The Dems will do what they want on Saturday.
Yes. It's worthwhile theatrics that might affect the outcome.
No. It's wrong to perform stunts like this.
Yes. It's morally good to do what they can even knowing it won't work.
Yes. It might work to do one thing and then another to run out the clock.

  
pollcode.com free polls

UPDATE: Reid pulls the bill "after Republicans rebelled against its $1.2 trillion cost and the inclusion of nearly 7,000 line-item projects for individual lawmakers."

170 comments:

donttread2010 said...

Good. Lets actually read this sucker. And, I'm all for the Blamer-In-Chief to 'prove' that it will be the end of his 'Excellency' if the tax bill abomination doesn't pass in this session.

Lem said...

You cannot be serious..

I don't like any of the poll choices.

Triangle Man said...

Sounds like a waste of time and resources.

How much of that funding is heading for biomedical research?

LarsPorsena said...

This should provide the material for some good Youtube videos.

kent said...

And, I'm all for the Blamer-In-Chief to 'prove' that it will be the end of his 'Excellency' if the tax bill abomination doesn't pass in this session.

That's not a "bug"; that's a feature.

Scott M said...

Yes...because it just might work.

jamboree said...

I think it's a good idea just so someone will have read the bill.

Maybe it should be a requirement.

Cedarford said...

Part of this is Republicans wish to tie up Dems on the two most important matters - the Obama "tax cuts for the rich in return for Dem pork" bill and START Treaty.
In hopes of running out the clock and not giving gays a moral societal endorsement by repealing DADT, and the Dream Act for illegals.

Few of the gays, progressive Jews, and hardcore liberals and feminists behind gay rights have any interest whatsoever in joining the military. But rhetorically, open gays in the military is invaluable in getting them to what they really want - "Good enough to fight and die for their country, that makes them good enough for gay marriage and full access to your boys in places like the Scouts." Getting rid of DADT has almost nothing to do with serving in the military - it is just a necessary step to getting what the gay agenda really wants - full moral acceptance, ability to get access and recruit children.
Dream Act - if it passes, it sets up another 30 million 3rd Worlders swarming in for "Dream Act II".

achmafooma said...

Personally, I think every single bill should be read in its entirety with at least a majority of legislators present before it can proceed to a vote.

If it's too big to read and understand in a reasonable period of time, it's too big to be law.

donttread2010 said...

@kent

Ahh yes, that pesky bug-feature response again...

Chip Ahoy said...

Once I heard this guy on the teevee refer to Congress as the 'greatest of all deliberative bodies on the planet."

Hahahahaha that kills me. Now get to deliberating, you bastards.

Lincolntf said...

According to National Review, they also snuck civilian trials for Al Qaeda into the Omnibus.
What a bunch of worms.

Scott M said...

If it's too big to read and understand in a reasonable period of time, it's too big to be law.

HOWARD JOHNSON IS RIGHT!!!

Rialby said...

Krauthammer said last night that he thinks this will only serve to make Republicans look bad.

MadisonMan said...

I was listening to NPR this morning (I know, I know) and they were talking to Thune about the pork in the Spending bill, that he decried, until they mentioned the money he put in for South Dakota. Well, those were for projects he believed in. Of course. Who knew you could hear squirming on radio? So it would be interesting to hear all inserted earmarks.

It's laughable that Senators complain about having to work around Christmas. Welcome to the real world, where people actually have to do that.

rdkraus said...

Could they set it on fire to keep some homeless people warm?

We sent them there to paralyze the current crooks.

Then they can be the new crooks.

Ooooo. I am cynical.

Quaestor said...

Sounds like a waste of time and resources.

What? Reading the bill (ought to be SOP) or spending 1.1 x 10^12 dollars?

traditionalguy said...

The most repeated mantra these days says that sunshine is the best disinfectant in politics. So even a clerk mumbling the provisions at 3 AM is way more sunshine than the Reid-o-crats were planing to allow for their secret bill. Where is wikileaks when we need them? We may even get a Face Book comment or two out of Alaska if the information is revealed at 3 AM.

blake said...

I'm glad NPR's making Thune squirm, even if they'll only do it with a (R).

They all need to squirm.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

YES!! They should read every word of the bills. All of the bills.

THEN.....they should be obligated to take a test to make sure they were listening and not playing poker on their laptops or napping.

If they don't get a passing grade, they read it again. and again and again until they know what the hell they are voting on.

blake said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
blake said...

From Twitter:

@Sissy Willis
RT @memeorandumFH: BREAKG: House Dem leaders pull the tax bill from House floor (Fhardingj / CNN) link.

HDHouse said...

brillant.

.....An idea whose time has come......

blake said...

One more time with that link: here.

Take that, Krauthammer.

wv: pasmsmac

(I'd like to.)

rdkraus said...

If only we could paralyze Congress indefinitely. Think of the money we'd save if we paid each of them one million dollars per year to stay home and do nothing.

Scott M said...

What's the matter, HD? Give up on defending communism over on the other thread?

donttread2010 said...

@Rialby

"Krauthammer said last night that he thinks this will only serve to make Republicans look bad."

LOL, no matter what the hapless R's do they look weak. You would too if you had the D's, the MSM, Hollywood, the unions (I am purposely leaving the rest out due to disgust) hating on you all the time. I say READ THE BILL and every fricking bill the dems want. Screw 'em.

AllenS said...

Then, after they read every single paragraph of this bill, I'd have them read all of jr565's posts for added misery.

Roger J. said...

Hey HDHouse--I thought you said you were out of this blog and now your back on and pimping your own sorry piece of shit blog.

have some integrity man.

Scott M said...

I'd have them read all of jr565's posts for added misery.

Such is likely the cause of all the zombie outbreaks in all the zombie movies that ever have been made or ever will be made.

Jay said...

Remember,

In 2009 Obama grudgingly signed a $410 billion omnibus spending bill filled with earmarks but vowed, “This piece of legislation must mark an end to the old way of doing business and the beginning of a new era of responsibility and accountability that the American people have every right to expect and demand.”

[Note to leftists: The FY '09 budget is Obama's at that point]

Well, was he lying?

I'm willing to bet, yes. Yes he was...

Jay said...

HDHouse said...

brillant.

.....An idea whose time has come......


I love how you link to your own silly blog instead of commenting.

Loser.

Richard Dolan said...

Like any good fable intended to scare the children, it is best when read out loud, and preferably when it's dark and late.

Sounds just like what's about to happen.

ricpic said...

The more time they spend on this the less time they'll have to pass their accursed Dream Act.

Original Mike said...

Couln't find the answer I support:

Yes. It must be read and the Senators must be present to hear it.

Why is that not the procedure for passing a law? As it is, they have no idea what they're voting on.

Coketown said...

Quick! Hire the stuttering retard from Pan's Labyrinth as a clerk! It'll take him twice as long to read it.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

So what exactly are the rules regarding reading the bill on the Senate floor? Must it be read serially, or could they bring in 100 staffers, each reading 20 pages, all at the same time? If so, they could be done in well under an hour.

Or maybe they could just use this guy

Scott M said...

Quick! Hire the stuttering retard from Pan's Labyrinth as a clerk! It'll take him twice as long to read it.

Thread winner.

ricpic said...

Teddy's Borking of America speech: that's their filthy legacy.

Scott M said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Titus said...

Jim Demint for President-it's our only way out of this madness!

Thank you and good day.

Skyler said...

What's with the senate clerks? Why aren't our senators doing the reading? Even when they have the chance to do it publicly, they still let the clerks do it. Do our senators ever read anything? What do they do all day?

ricpic said...

Titus let go of the nearest hog long enough to stumble into the truth!

ricpic said...

What do they do all day?

It's all about the pages.

Larry J said...

Yeah, how dare the Republicans actually want a piece of legislation read before it's voted on? How absurd is that? Don't we know that "we have to pass the bill to learn what's in it" is now congressional precedent?

Actually, if I were them, I'd have Republican members rotate in the session and demand the clerks to repeat the reading of selected pages. Reading nearly 2000 pages in 50 hours means reading almost 40 pages an hour, or one page every 90 seconds. Either there isn't much on a page or they're going to have to read very fast.

kent said...

Quick! Hire the stuttering retard from Pan's Labyrinth as a clerk!

Congressional rules, I believe, forbid Senator Franken from holding the position of "page" or "clerk" simultaneously with his current office.

MadisonMan said...

Why aren't our senators doing the reading?

Can they actually read?

Roger J. said...

Madison Man--only the checks from their campaign supporters--fortunately they only have to look at the number and not any of that, you know, other writing.

victoria said...

Considering that most of the 5 billion in pork is for republican's that they have been trying to get through for the last 2 years. Krauthamer is right, it will succeed in making the Republicans look bad. Hmmm maybe that is a good thing, make them look like they really are, pork hungry only when it comes to what they "believe in". Bull. They are just as bad as the democrats only they are "faux" honest with the "American Public" and are concerned with our welfare. Another bull.

Pass it,dudes. It's what you fought for and won. It will taste bitter and will likely cost you more elections, but you won.


Vicki from Pasadena

victoria said...

Seriously, Titus, DeMint? Get off those drugs.


Vicki

former law student said...

Paralyze the Senate for 50 hours?!? Doesn't Jim DeMint know it's Christmas?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stNGHiscETo

kent said...

it will succeed in making the Republicans look bad.

Pffffftt. Blessed with an opposition as reliably (and suicidally) brain dead as this: I doubt that's much of a concern, really, just at the moment.

deborah said...

Read it before voting? The Devil, you say!

Quaestor said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
tim maguire said...

Why is it controversial that somebody will actually read the bill before it gets voted on? Shouldn't that be assumed? Expected? Automatic?

garage mahal said...

"Senate clerks are expected to read the massive bill in rotating shifts around the clock — taking breaks to drink water and pop throat lozenges — to keep legislative business on track, according to a Democratic leadership aide."

Good thing the ADULTS will be back in charge!

Original Mike said...

"Good thing the ADULTS will be back in charge!"

HOWARD JOHNSON IS RIGHT!

HDHouse said...

tim maguire said...
Why is it controversial that somebody will actually read the bill before it gets voted on?"

I think the distinction we hope to make tim is that when all these republicans were elected that they could read on their own rather than having to resort to having things read to them.

HDHouse said...

hey...i read that the bill contains earmarks submitted by Thune and Kyl - $100 million worth ---

did I read enough of the bill?

blake said...

HD--

Nope. It all needs to be read out, and the porkers thoroughly shamed.

Start with the (R)s if it makes you happy, but get to the (D)s, too. (And for the Rs themselves, I suggest they start by cleaning house, too.)

This is not a partisan thing.

garage mahal said...

hey...i read that the bill contains earmarks submitted by Thune and Kyl - $100 million worth ---

That earmark ban didn't last long did it? I'm sure we'll see the Tea Party staging protests around the country a-n-y minute now. Suckers

Scott M said...

The earmark ban never fully got instituted did it? We're still cleaning out the closet, so to speak, starting the the biggest offenders on our side. Thune will try to argue that these were applied for up to two years go, but I'd say it's still bye-bye to the nomination unless he dumps them en masse...which he will not do.

Do make the mistake that just because you are, others are ideologues. You not specifically referring to you, Pig Rider (lol, jk)

dbp said...

The liberals posting here are opposed to the reading-out of the spending bill because such reading will make Republicans look bad?

What kind dears.

victoria said...

Why should they start reading bills now?
You and I think it's a good idea but congress and the senate haven't completely read a bill since the Nixon Administration, if then.

Pork knows no party, they are all guilty. I just think it's funny that the republicans who whine the loudest about the pork, those who are "morally opposed" to the pork are the first to complain about it being there.

First off, there is no "morals" in either the senate or the congress. Anyone who actually thinks that these people are looking out for us is plain delusional and needs some serious meds. And, it they thing that these new people coming in are any better, they are more than delusional. When I look at just the Californians who are going to be in power come January, Daryl Issa, David Drier, please. Nuff said.


Vicki from Pasadena

Original Mike said...

"hey...i read that the bill contains earmarks submitted by Thune and Kyl - $100 million worth"

And your point is?

victoria said...

Hey listening to NPR isn't all bad. Those of you who think that they are some commie left wing group do not actually listen. I know you don't.

Vicki

AllenS said...

The only way to stop the pork, would be to find a way for states not to send so much money to Washington in the first place. Let the states keep more of the money that is collected in taxes, then the politicians from the 57 states wouldn't have to try to pry the moneys back out from the government in Washington. It's too simple to ever work.

edutcher said...

Anything that Dingy Harry doesn't like is a good start. but, yes, by all means, actually read the damned bill before you sign it.

Rialby said...

Krauthammer said last night that he thinks this will only serve to make Republicans look bad.

He also thinks the original deal The Zero and McConnell cut will cut taxes to the tune of $1 trillion. A big part of voter outrage was over "We have to pass the bill to see what's in it". I think this will be seen by a lot of people as a step in the right direction. Besides, didn't Bernie Sanders just hold up the Senate floor for 8 hours?

I used to think Krauthammer was a pretty astute guy, but I'm starting to wonder.

HDHouse said...

hey...i read that the bill contains earmarks submitted by Thune and Kyl - $100 million worth ---

did I read enough of the bill?


I thought HD would love that part - and we can compare it to how much the Demos want to waste. Kyl is up for re-election in '12, so he'll probably get more heat from this than HD would be willing to give any Demos.

victoria said...

Why should they start reading bills now?

Because the Demos have been spending us into insolvency?

Seriously, Titus, DeMint? Get off those drugs.

Another reason I like the idea of a DeMint candidacy.

Roger J. said...

Listened to NPR for 30 years and even donated--until the last couple of years when they fact checked everybody except Obama and Biden

Agree with Victoria about the Senate--the only senators I can respect are the very few that didnt use earmarks--most republicans and all democrats are hypocrits on the earmark issue--and I will most enthusiastically go after a lying republican as fast as I would a lying democrat. Its just that lying democrats are an even more target rich environment.

JAL said...

We have had a near completely unaccountable irresponsible bunch of arrogant, power hungry, (some soon to be retired thank goodness) crooks and liars in DC.

Yes. Read the bill.

And you guys leftover? DO NOT EVER vote on a bill you can't understand and explain.

I also think there should be not garbage pail bills.

You want something? Pass a bill for That.One.Thing.

Hagar said...

"Earmark" only means that the legislation appropriates money for a specific purpose or project, and is not a privilege that Congress had ought to give up.

What they should do is tighten up the rules so that "earmarks" can only be inserted after being publicly debated and receiving majority approval in committee, i.e., no more en masse last minute insertions by the Speaker or Majority Leader for their favorites in order to buy votes for poor legislation.

(In fact, I understand that in the infamous 2700 page "health care act," there were penciled insertions that no one now knows who wrote them!)

Revenant said...

I vote for "whatever works". Pull the fire alarm, call in a bomb scare, whatever.

Revenant said...

Krauthammer said last night that he thinks this will only serve to make Republicans look bad.

It turns out that sometimes the political interests of the Republican Party do not perfectly align with what's best for America. Who'da thunk it?

Synova said...

I want a poll choice that says that *all* bills should be read out in their final form. Every. Last. One.

This will be law... every word of the 1,924 pages.

Forever.

garage mahal said...

Yes. Read the bill.

If DeMint read the bill, why does he need a clerk to read it?

This is nothing but throwing the tea party rubes a bone.

kent said...

KERRY: 'Why Would We Have To Read Something?'

[::facepalm::]

BJM said...

@C4

DREAM my ass, it's a fucking nightmare.

Have you read Hanson's piece on the Central Valley? "Two Californias"

I'm also from the valley and have family bitterly clinging to their farms, orchards and nurseries...some have been in the family since the 1840's.

What he says is true, I've seen it myself...the Central Valley is beginning to look like a 3rd world country...with a HSR line carrying nobody, nowhere.

Synova said...

"I just think it's funny that the republicans who whine the loudest about the pork, those who are "morally opposed" to the pork are the first to complain about it being there."

Why? Because it logically follows that someone opposed to something would... oppose it?

Or did you miss a word somewhere and mean something else?

And really... all the Republicans should know better that to stick their special projects in there, but to be honest their constituents want the money too. That's why they need to be held up to public ridicule and held accountable by everyone else.

But honestly! Who could possibly object to efforts to shoe-horn every unrelated bit of wishful thinking into a 1924 page bill that no one will read and certainly no one will winnow? Only partisan hacks and Tea Partiers, no doubt.

Why start now?

Excuse me?

What would be a good time to start then?

Chef Mojo said...

If DeMint read the bill, why does he need a clerk to read it?

Because that's the clerk's job, you moron.

Roger J. said...

Garage: please dont single out deMint when there are 99 other assholes out there--if deMint put in earmarks then he should go--there were damn few senators that had zero earmarks--they are my heroes--the rest? fuck em all.

and on a personal note--hows your daughter doing.

garage mahal said...

Because that's the clerk's job, you moron.

Why does the bill need to be read at all? To appeal to idiots that think this is some sort of defiant and courageous stand against....something? Thanks for the laugh.

Martin L. Shoemaker said...

Jay said...

I love how you link to your own silly blog instead of commenting.

Hey! Don't discourage him! It makes it easier for me to ignore HDHouse's inanities when they're posted over on a blog I don't read. I only wish a few others around here would follow his example...

garage mahal said...

Roger
Daughter doing great, thanks for asking. You been to the doc lately?

Martin L. Shoemaker said...

victoria said...

Hey listening to NPR isn't all bad. Those of you who think that they are some commie left wing group do not actually listen. I know you don't.

Wrong. I stopped listening after the disgraceful way they treated Juan Williams; but prior to that, I was a faithful listener since 1975.

Maybe in the future, instead of mind reading, you might actually read what people write.

AJ Lynch said...

It's the taxpayers vs. the taxeaters and the country is breaking apart politically and culturally. The odd thing is the taxeaters don't even have to fight for their side because they can rely on a large cadre of smug, elitist far left liberals who work primarily in higher education, media, govt and public schools.

Roger J. said...

please dont be too hard on ole HDHouse--hes an abject liar

HDHouse said...

take a cliche pill there AJ

Roger J. said...

Garage--got my psa check coming up next month--wish me luck

garage mahal said...

Good luck on the next PSA buddy.

Roger J. said...

for the commentariat--just so you know Garage and I have been friends on an unrelated level--I lost a bet to him bt he has sent me wisconsin brats and cheese--point being, I think: we dont agree on politics but can still be very good friends--think about it

Eric said...

If it has some chance of keeping this monstrosity from passing I say go for it.

Jay said...

This is nothing but throwing the tea party rubes a bone.

Uh, there is one party with members serious about spending.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has introduced a measure aimed at keeping the federal government funded for a couple more months. McConnell’s continuing resolution would mean that the incoming Congress would be tasked with passing a budget, something lawmakers failed to do this year.

The single-page proposal from the Kentucky Republican is meant to counter a nearly 2,000 page ‘omnibus’ package from Democrats that would fund all twelve of President Obama’s cabinets through the end of the 2011 fiscal year at a cost of over $1 trillion total.



It isn't the one you vote for.

Jay said...

o appeal to idiots that think this is some sort of defiant and courageous stand against....something?

You have no concept about "deficit spending"

Clearly.

Eric said...

Hey listening to NPR isn't all bad. Those of you who think that they are some commie left wing group do not actually listen. I know you don't.

You're wrong about that. I listen to NPR every day, and their treatment of the Tea Party movement is laughably biased. "Some people say they're racist ignorant rednecks, but others believe they're just fat pasty white people who don't realize they're actually parasites."

Eric said...

Uh, there is one party with members serious about spending.

Serious? No, not really. The bill that's probably going to actually pass is larded up with McConnell's earmarks as much as anyone else's. The clean bill is just theater, and if he thought it actually had a chance of passing he would never have introduced it.

kent said...

Why does the bill need to be read at all?

"STOP TUGGING AT THOSE DAMNED COLLARS, YOU UNGRATEFUL WRETCHES! WE'LL LET YOU KNOW WHEN YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO COMPLAIN ABOUT -- !!!"

rhhardin said...

It's not paralyzed. The Senate is differently abled.

edutcher said...

Revenant said...

Krauthammer said last night that he thinks this will only serve to make Republicans look bad.

It turns out that sometimes the political interests of the Republican Party do not perfectly align with what's best for America. Who'da thunk it?


Of course, that's not true for the Democrats, now is it?

The Demos have been borrowing against tomorrow for 80 years and now the bills are due. They've been selling out this country a long time.

WV "nonse" 5/8 of what Revenant tried to say.

Jay said...

Eric,
I think Coburn & DeMint are serious about reducing spending. Hatch, to his credit, withdrew all earmarks after the election.

The Coburn amendment would have led to:
* a 15 percent cut in the budgets for the White House and congressional offices, saving $3.8 billion over five years
* a three-year pay freeze for members of Congress, saving $6 million over five years
* a 10 percent reduction of the federal workforce, saving $13.2 billion over five years
* a 20 percent reduction in the federal motor vehicle fleet, saving $1.5 billion over five years
* a 10 percent reduction in voluntary additional payments to the United Nations, saving $1.5 billion over five years

Chef Mojo said...

Why does the bill need to be read at all?

Pure, crass, bare-knuckle politics is why. So the minority party can maneuver, buy time and hopefully affect the outcome of this monstrosity. Quite simply a parliamentary tactic to force the majority to assent to a continuing resolution bump it down the road into the next congress.

That's why.

wv: uniti - I'm not even going there.

Titus said...

Jim Demint doesn't support teachers who are single people living together or dykie wykies teaching in public schools.

That is change I can believe in.

Eric said...

If the Senate is in session, what was Patrick Leahy (70 years old, 36 in the Senate) doing at Reagan National Airport this afternoon?

Fen said...

It turns out that sometimes the political interests of the Republican Party do not perfectly align with what's best for America.

Lets not forget that the Democrats deliberately pushed the budget vote till after the midterm elections so their guys wouldn't take a greater hit on election day.

Jay said...

appeal to idiots that think this is some sort of defiant and courageous stand against....something?

Um, because Reid just caved!

Speaking now on the Senate floor, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) says he is “sorry and disappointed” to announce that he does not have the votes for the omnibus spending package. Instead, he will work with Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.) to draft a temporary continuing resolution to fund the government into early next year.

Reid says nine Republican senators approached him today to tell him that while they would like to see the bill passed, they could not vote for it. He did not reveal the names of the nine. A top Senate source tells National Review Online that “it looks like Harry Reid buckled under the threat of Republicans reading [the bill] aloud.”


Keep making dumb assertions garage...

Lincolntf said...

Hahahaha... Reid folds! We Win!!!
Suck it, you corrupt, thieving scumbags. We own your asses.

Jay said...

The problem is they are going to move to cloture on DADT Repeal and the Dream Act.

Jason (the commenter) said...

The Democrats just pulled the bill! Obama refused to threaten to veto it, even though it was filled with earmarks. This could have been his first post-election victory, and now it belongs to the Republicans.

bagoh20 said...

I say read every bill. Maybe they won't be 2000 pages a piece in the future. At least it will reduce the number of laws passed, and that's a great thing. Corrupt fools passing laws should be slowed down anyway possible.

mesquito said...

Tea Party wins again

former law student said...

Why is it controversial that somebody will actually read the bill before it gets voted on? Shouldn't that be assumed? Expected? Automatic?

Read the bill, sure. Read the bill ALOUD -- what's the point in the absence of blind senators

garage mahal said...

Hahahaha... Reid folds! We Win!!!
Suck it, you corrupt, thieving scumbags. We own your asses.


Nobody will remember Reid not getting 60 votes for an omnibus bill, that frankly hardly anyone knows what it even is. But they will remember DADT, which appears to be going bye-bye. No thanks to knuckle-dragging, slant-headed neanderthals on your side of the aisle. Well, all except maybe 3-4 that are human. Haha.

AJ Lynch said...

The fossils in the Congress know only one trick and that is having armies of legal staff write bills that are 100's of pages long and spend money and spend money and spend money.

The fossils can't be re-trained so I guess they will have to retire cause the spending game is passe due to Tea Party, our deficit and the power of the internets.

AJ Lynch said...

I bet for most Americans, DADT does not make their Top Ten list.

former law student said...

If the Commodity Futures Modernization Act had not been strapped to the budget bill in Dec 2000 the economic meltdown would not have happened. Read the bills aloud!.

Paul Zrimsek said...

just so you know Garage and I have been friends on an unrelated level

I infer from this that you've found a way to get him to shut up about the fucking trains once in a while. Care to share it with us?

edutcher said...

garage mahal said...

Hahahaha... Reid folds! We Win!!!
Suck it, you corrupt, thieving scumbags. We own your asses.


Nobody will remember Reid not getting 60 votes for an omnibus bill, that frankly hardly anyone knows what it even is. But they will remember DADT, which appears to be going bye-bye. No thanks to knuckle-dragging, slant-headed neanderthals on your side of the aisle. Well, all except maybe 3-4 that are human. Haha.


Ha Ha, yourself. After this don't count on anything. Ron Wyden is gone for surgery, so Dingy Harry is in trouble. And, yes, a lot of people will remember him, and all the little Demos who stood with him, spitting in the face of the American public. This is not a good day for the Demos.

I'm willing to bet he's heard more than a few Senators say they don't want to stay in DC over the holidays. And now we've got similar fights over START, and the House versions of DREAM and the tax bill.

You can also bet all those Americans (all those slant-headed, knuckle-dragging Neanderthals who make this country go, if the damned Democrats and their small c communist supporters will get out of the way) who don't want this country's defense to look like Holland's are going to refocus their energies. It may be hip in some quarters to say one doesn't care, but most Americans are against it.

Synova said...

"Read the bill, sure. Read the bill ALOUD -- what's the point in the absence of blind senators"

In the absence of a test assuring familiarity with the bill, it sort of forces the issue even if the persons who should have read it don't sit in an listen. It illustrates the fact that even the staffers who would be expected to read bills that our elected officials don't bother to read personally, probably haven't read it *either*.

But mostly it illustrates and makes unavoidable the issue of these huge pieces of hodge-podge legislation. A budget or spending bill is probably going to be large in any case, but the Congress oversteps badly when each little pet project is stuck in there and not even counting the "earmarks" that give a state money and then presumes to tell them exactly what they can do with it. *This* project. *That* road. If the governor would spend the money on something else first, then probably those things ought not be funded. Paying favors is very bad government.

If these things, the add-ons or the ear-marks will stand alone then they should stand alone. If they can not stand alone then they should not stand.

Period.

PETER V. BELLA said...

Remember the last bill the did not read, would not let anyone else read, and boldly, historically, and comprehensively claimed it has to pass before anyone knows what is in it?

No one read it. It passed. It is an almost three thousand page piece of crap. The Health Care Reform Bill that does nothing to reform health care.

Revenant said...

Why does the bill need to be read at all?

It would have the positive effect of eliminating the "I didn't realize that was in the bill" excuse.

garage mahal said...

It would have the positive effect of eliminating the "I didn't realize that was in the bill" excuse.

You can find all these bills in advance, online, available to the public. And it's not like these clerks would be reading them to a full chamber.

Revenant said...

But they will remember DADT, which appears to be going bye-bye.

I doubt it. There aren't many Americans with strong feelings about it *now*, and those numbers are only going to shrink once it is repealed.

It doesn't help that joining the military is widely viewed as a sacrifice rather than an honor or a benefit. "Denying blacks a quality education" pushes buttons that "denying gays the right to get shot at by Arabs" doesn't.

(wv: memes! no shit)

Revenant said...

And it's not like these clerks would be reading them to a full chamber.

Sure, but if they were read aloud in Congress that just leaves Congresscritters with the excuse of "uh, sorry, I wasn't at work the day they told us what was in the bill".

Saint Croix said...

I really like Krauthammer but it's amazing how he's starting to get sucked into the left. "Don't nominate her. Don't fight that."

The political class is like the Borg, I swear. Or Freaks, maybe. "One of us, one of us."

Chef Mojo said...

The Tea Party folks deserve some credit here. They really came through with keeping the pressure on. Remember, it was Republicans keeping Republicans in line. DeMint's threat helped too.

Harry Reid comes out of this debacle looking real bad, not to mention weak and ineffectual. Frankly, he got beaten like a red headed stepchild.

I'm all for DADT being repealed. If it's passage is the "sacrifice" play that torpedoes DREAM and START, then even better. Repeal of DADT will happen eventually anyway. I'm thinking a lot of Republicans would like to remove it as an issue at this point.

Lincolntf said...

Permitting homosexual behavior among enlisted men and women will be disastrous to morale, hygiene and readiness. That's why it needs to be opposed. The fact that Liberals push their little social experiments so far that they end up hurting our soldiers is a crime.
Don't fall for it.


wv: pudpant

vnjagvet said...

I guess the threatened delaying tactics worked. And Mitch and his gang kept the Pubs in line.

former law student said...

If it's passage is the "sacrifice" play that torpedoes DREAM and START, then even better.

I heard a DREAMster make a good point today. Consider that the illegal kids were brought over by their parents, not by their own doing: If a cop pulled a parent over for speeding, would he write the kid in the back seat a ticket?

EnigmatiCore said...

"Read the bill ALOUD -- what's the point in the absence of blind senators"

I would assume the points would be to make sure that someone has read it, and to slow it down enough so that what is in there can be processed enough to debate.

But you know what would be much better than a reading of the bill? A quiz or test. Not on interpretations of the bill, but of actual provisions. Don't get a passing grade on the quiz? Then you cannot vote on the bill.

That would be awesome.

Until them, make them read the bill so it is all public and they can get pressured on the less savory elements before voting.

Chef Mojo said...

@Lincolntf:

Bullshit. These are the same arguments used over 60 years ago to prevent racial integration of the armed forces, and you know it. It was also used when women were allowed to attend the service academies. It's gotten old. The same arguments are churned up time and time again.

It's gonna happen whether you like it or not. May as well get it done. There will indeed be problems with repealing DADT, but they will be addressed and dealt with, because that is what the military does.

I mean, really? What do you really care if some "queer" wants to serve his/her country and get shot at by mujahadeen?

Chef Mojo said...

@FLS:

I heard a DREAMster make a good point today. Consider that the illegal kids were brought over by their parents, not by their own doing: If a cop pulled a parent over for speeding, would he write the kid in the back seat a ticket?

Actually, that's a pretty stupid point, and has no relevance to the issue.

If ICE or Border Patrol captured the illegal with children in the back of a packed truck in the middle of the dessert on the verge of death because the coyotes just left them there with the padlocks on, I would hope the kids wouldn't get a ticket, but I would hope they'd be taken away from their parent(s) for abuse, endangerment and neglect for having put them in that position.

Be that as it may, DREAM is just another way of codifying the new American slave class, and as such, should be taken out back and shot like the sick dog it is.

Jim_J said...

Bullshit. These are the same arguments used over 60 years ago to prevent racial integration of the armed forces, and you know it. It was also used when women were allowed to attend the service academies. It's gotten old. The same arguments are churned up time and time again.

It's gonna happen whether you like it or not. May as well get it done. There will indeed be problems with repealing DADT, but they will be addressed and dealt with, because that is what the military does.

I mean, really? What do you really care if some "queer" wants to serve his/her country and get shot at by mujahadeen?


That's right. Let's make it easier for the PFC. Bradley Mannings to betray their country.

Its not like there isn't precedent; four of the Cambridge Five were homosexuals and British intelligence never recovered from their actions.

Belkys said...

Those opposing the bill can pull a Strom Thurmond . They need only 19 senators and a teleprompter

Belkys said...

Temistocles, Alexander, Julius Caesar and King David were homosexuals

Chef Mojo said...

That's right. Let's make it easier for the PFC. Bradley Mannings to betray their country.

So, without PFC Manning having had his Article 32, you're prepared to just get out there and say he was motivated by his homosexuality?

How very "Dreyfus" of you.

As regards the Cambridge Five, how do you feel about Alan Turing, who helped crack Enigma during WW2? Nasty homosexual, eh?

c3 said...

i read that the bill contains earmarks submitted by Thune and Kyl - $100 million worth

I'm a little suspicious of the source. Here's a breakdown of the earmark originators.

With pride I will point out that both of our (AZ) Senators are at the bottom with ZERO

edutcher said...

Belkys said...

Temistocles, Alexander, Julius Caesar and King David were homosexuals

Again, My God, what drivel!!!!

In the Greek culture, it was accepted socially, but a man was expected to grow out of it.

Not sure Julie was, his troops called him The Bald Adulterer and sang a couplet about how husbands should hide their wives when the army came to town.

In any case, armies allowed all sorts of camp followers in those days. We've realized it's a detriment.

PS Notice how only the Lefties here are saying most Americans "don't have strong feelings" about it? Yesterday, it was most Americans were for it. If urban homosexuals were suddenly found to bloc vote Republican, bet there would be a lot less interest in this.

Synova said...

"Bullshit. These are the same arguments used over 60 years ago to prevent racial integration of the armed forces, and you know it. It was also used when women were allowed to attend the service academies. It's gotten old. The same arguments are churned up time and time again."

And yet, when one sees first hand the twisting that the military has to do to integrate women it seems ridiculous in extreme to claim that no twisting will occur to integrate gays.

I'm very much in favor of women serving but I am honest about what that means. It starts on day 1 when the female recruits make beds because there are not enough women arrived yet, and day 2 when female recruits make beds because there are not enough women arrived yet, and day 3 when female recruits make beds because not enough women arrived yet... before the unit is full and basic training begins. Or if not that, then something else. And it really doesn't end. Separate accommodations, privacy, assignments, and different rules. And they are rules that supersede military effectiveness and troop safety. The question is if it's worth it or not.

Likely enough gays should be openly serving, but anyone who thinks its just like sticking people of different races into the same group shower is lying to someone.

Titus said...

I did a guy from the Marines in my car once.

Chef Mojo said...

Man, this is a scream! House votes to extend Bush tax cuts at a greater margin than they did 10 years ago! Sucks to be a Democrat right now. Holding majorities in both the House and Senate, they got brutalized by the Republicans today in so many ways it's hard to know where to start...

Kev said...

Personally, I think every single bill should be read in its entirety with at least a majority of legislators present before it can proceed to a vote.

If it's too big to read and understand in a reasonable period of time, it's too big to be law.


Agreed, and I like the idea about a quiz that someone else stated upthread.

I also think the concept of "riders" should be eliminated; a bill should be about one thing, without a bunch of unrelated items hidden in there. And if this means that Congress passes fewer bills, all the better; they'll spend less of our money that way.

Mark said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mark said...

"But they will remember DADT, which appears to be going bye-bye."

At some point, "vote for this or the <> gets it!" tactic starts looking really silly re: the tool holding the tool.

That point is about now.

former law student said...

The Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 was introduced in the House on December 14, 2000; introduced in the Senate on December 15, 2000, cleared Congress that same day, and was signed into law December 21, 2000.

Then-Congressman DeMint did not complain "They should not be able to pass this kind of legislation in a lame-duck Congress." (The GOP lost their Senate majority that November.)

Mark said...

FLS, can you tell us why the case you submit is an "apples to apples" comparison?

I mean, DeMint was in the House, not the Senate. We have no clue to the scope of the legislation involved. Context applies, of course; was the recent vote a referendum against big government spending?

All in all, a classic drive-by character assassination, which is about all the professional Left has left in its toolkit.

JAL said...

"denying gays the right to get shot at by Arabs" doesn't.

Not to change the subject, but it is not illegal for gays to join the military. So no one is denying gays the right to be shot at by Islamist radicals. (Sub point to note: All Arabs are not Muslims. All Muslims are not Arabs. All Muslims are not Islamist radicals.)

There are gays in the military.

I thought the deal on DADT was that it none of anyone's business what one's sexual preference is, and one is not supposed to ask. Or tell.

One is also supposed to be operate under the rules of the UCMJ while a volunteer member of the US military. (Right?)

So is the problem that John can't have George's picture in his locker or on his desk?

How do the Israelis handle it? (Although a comparatively small military.)

jr565 said...

AllenS wrote:
Then, after they read every single paragraph of this bill, I'd have them read all of jr565's posts for added misery.


That should go without saying.

jr565 said...

Kev wrote:
If it's too big to read and understand in a reasonable period of time, it's too big to be law.


Exactly. Why does every bill have to be an omnibus filled with all this pork noone even knows about. Have aone law that is 3 pages long and deals with one thing.

former law student said...

We have no clue to the scope of the legislation involved.

Conscious decision not to regulate credit default swaps, which ultimately pulled down AIG among other companies. It had been piggybacked to the budget. Nobody knew WTF it meant, other than Phil Gramm thought it would be a good idea. Haven't heard from him lately.

HDHouse said...

Don't let facts get in your way here folks.

1. This could have come up for discussion months ago except for the senate blocking debate - the republicans that is

2. It came out of a bi-partisan senate budget committee

3. it wasn't "sprung" on anyone. This was in the works for months.

4. Wasn't it Thune and Kyl who were going to vote against it because it contained earmarks - nearly 100 of which for over $150million put into the bill by those two alone?

.....An idea whose time has come......

HDHouse said...

c3 said...
"With pride I will point out that both of our (AZ) Senators are at the bottom with ZERO"

to offer?
or rightfully so.

HDHouse said...

And Thune and Kyl admitted it in a press conference when confronted. It is on C-span.

you can do a search. keywords: deer in headlights.

kent said...

Man, this is a scream! House votes to extend Bush tax cuts at a greater margin than they did 10 years ago! Sucks to be a Democrat right now. Holding majorities in both the House and Senate, they got brutalized by the Republicans today in so many ways it's hard to know where to start...

Harry Pulls It

Never have I seen a politician's entire career summarized so succinctly (and accurately) as Drudge has, right here.

HDHouse said...

no...it sucks to be an American..screwed over by 40 republican senators for two years and now that party having even more say.

trust me folks. the reverse will hold true. if you think that anything that originates in the coming house of representatives will see the light of day in the senate....ha! no way.

.....An idea whose time has come......

donttread2010 said...

(Backpat)

OK I've read every post. The theme here is that lefties don't care about reading bills or debating the contents. As long as they win. And if they lose, commence the circular firing squad.

@Coketown gets my vote for thread winner with honorables to @AllenS and @RichardDolan. Made me laugh.

@HDHouse cemented himself further in what my teenage son calls 'Pheighyillville'.

Jay said...

But they will remember DADT, which appears to be going bye-bye. No thanks to knuckle-dragging, slant-headed neanderthals on your side of the aisle.

Yes, because repealing DADT is like so popular!

Nevermind it was signed by a Democratic President.

That stupid hillbilly...

Jay said...

no...it sucks to be an American..screwed over by 40 republican senators for two years and now that party having even more say.

Yes, kind of like the Democrats of 2005 with 45 members fillbustering the Bush judicial nominees (which had never happened before).

You complained then, right?

Oh, you're a silly, lying, hypocrite.

Nevermind.

Jay said...

HDHouse said...

Don't let facts get in your way here folks.


You wouldn't know a fact if it tackled you and tap danced on your head.

Anyway, here is a fun fact for you:

262 votes so far for tax deal. Bush tax cuts passed House in 2001 with 230 votes

Hahahaha!

Good summation of the Omnibust:

“After exposing his party, the White House and himself to an avalanche of bad press and bipartisan criticism over the earmark-stuffed omnibus spending bill, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, in a sort of political Dunkirk moment, gave up and fled. . . . It is also a major win for the opponents of ObamaCare, who halted a billion dollars in funding for the legislation that they aim to repeal. It is also, of course, a defeat for the earmarkers, the business-as-usual crowd and Harry Reid.”

Harry Reid is a loser.

Hoosier Daddy said...

No thanks to knuckle-dragging, slant-headed neanderthals on your side of the aisle. Well, all except maybe 3-4 that are human. Haha.

garage I'm curious. You claimed all your friends are conservative rednecks and you dont' hang out with liberals. What do those guys think of DADT? Are any of them Tea Party folks and what do they think of you believing that they are knuckle-dragging, slant-headed neanderthals?

Ken said...

I'd say that makes "theatrics" -- not what I voted for alas -- the clear winner. And Althouse's what's the use the clear loser.

Original Mike said...

Thank you, Tea Party.

former law student said...

Guy on the radio said the earmarks totalled only $8 billion out of a total 130 times as great. This goes beyond the tail wagging the dog -- this is like a flea driving the elephant.

Original Mike said...

Screw the earmarks. The big problem is they are (were) locking in an approximately 25% increase in the baseline budget. That is real money, and must be rolled back if we are to improve our debt situation.

Lincolntf said...

FLS, you couldn''t be more wrong. Take a peek at the report posted at AoSHQ. Here's a tidbit:

"In the 2011 House budget, the groups found that House Democrats requested 18,189 earmarks, which would cost the taxpayers a total of $51.7 billion, while House Republicans requested just 241 earmarks, for a total of $1 billion."

former law student said...

I must have misheard the report -- I'll wait till they repeat it.

Don't pride yourself on Republican frugality. The first news article I clicked on, from Jackson, Miss, showed that Mississippi's two Republican Senators requested almost a billion in earmarks, all by themselves.

kent said...

no...it sucks to be an American..

What a coincidence. We think it sucks that you're an American, too.

Original Mike said...

"Don't pride yourself on Republican frugality."

Please try and learn the difference between Republicans and conservatives. We all know that the Republicans do it too. Who are the ones the Tea Party did the most damage to? Incumbant Republicans.

blake said...

no...it sucks to be an American..screwed over by 40 republican senators for two years and now that party having even more say.

I'd say, definitionally, that most Americans didn't share that sentiment.

Lincolntf said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
blake said...

Don't pride yourself on Republican frugality. The first news article I clicked on, from Jackson, Miss, showed that Mississippi's two Republican Senators requested almost a billion in earmarks, all by themselves.

In other words, they requested almost all of it.

So you're holding up these two Reps to say "Seeee! Just as bad!!!"

Really?

Dude, trash the Dems. They sold the left down the river just as bad as the Reps sold the right a few years ago. (And plenty of cons/Reps here bitched about it.)

If these dunderheads had fixed on actually repairing the economy, rather than graft and socialism? We'd probably be doing a lot better now, and they'd have two years to do whatever they want, including all the graft and socialism they wanted.

They just couldn't delay gratification for two years.

Original Mike said...

It is possible that Republicans are getting religion.