« Nancy Pelosi: Out of Control | Main | Profiles in Countermoonbattery: Michael Crichton »

EVERY TIME you think the left has produced the dumbest asshole alive they pop up another! Has Grayson made Guiness yet?

I simply love this man's ignorance!

This may come as a shock but I agree 100%. It would be absolutely asinine to try to change Senate rules.

Bill Frist tried this and it blew up in the GOP's face, plus would have opened the door for Dems today. It should also be understood that Dems will eventually loose majority.

Even more importantly, the Dems don't need it as they have a 60 majority and can simply (which I think ultimately they will) sidestep the HCR filibuster with a budget reconciliation rule and pass the bill with an up an down vote.

Grayson's request is a boneheaded move.

OF ALL TIME!!!

@ Posted by: andy42302 at December 1, 2009 4:34 PM

Not a shock at all, Andy. I've always thought you were at least honest and even-minded, though we may disagree on some points.

If someone on the perceived right were to pull such a move, I'd say the same exact thing; rules are rules. Good on ya! :)

Posted by: andy42302 at December 1, 2009 4:34 PM

Ye speak true andy. Kinda. That 60 is really 59... and may be less. Or, wishful GOP thinking?

Where's that IINO Lieberman on HCR these dayz? HuffPo is a wee peeved at him and several other conservadems. This is actually an amusing Huff-post with a great image/allusion, for all its subtle earnestness.

Are lefties really nervous about the death of ObamaCare, as this writer would seem to suggest, or simply just secretly cocky, knowing that the Senate hold outs will each ultimately have a price? (Honest question.)

Well, 60 is more like 58 if you include Nelson.

Yes there are nervous Dems. To be honest, a reconciliation vote would actually take Lieberman, Nelson, and several Blue Dogs off the hook and yet still let HCR pass and ultimately be a huge win (vrs a Waterloo) for the Dems.

Even more importantly, the Dems don't need it as they have a 60 majority and can simply (which I think ultimately they will) sidestep the HCR filibuster with a budget reconciliation rule and pass the bill with an up an down vote.

The problem with that is reconciliation is just as much of a procedural play, in the mind of the American people, as is eliminating the filibuster.

The Dems have made the case for HCR based on the claimed mandate, and their supposed ability to overcome a Repubican filibuster.

The logic behind using the filibuster-busting majority as a talking point is that the 60 in their caucus demonstrates the overwhelming support of the American people in favor of this agenda.

If they have to bypass the need for cloture, then Reid's "overwhelming mandate" turns into ordinary partisan politics. The bill will barely make it out of the Senate, and will be unpopular from day one.

If they can't get the votes for cloture, they will also lose some of the moderate support that had sold their votes for pork to further the illusion of full non-Republican support. Reid only needs payola to get to 60, not 50. The truth regarding the Democratic infighting and dissent will make itself apparent if Reid is not forced to make sacrifices and compromises to get to 60.

The Democratic mistake was betting on the supposed ease of 60. Much of the rhetoric supporting such swift and sweeping changes to one sixth of the economy was based on the supposed mandate.

If health care reform passes without cloture, as I believe it will, the independents, who are already overwhelmingly not in favor of the current proposal, will see this as a win by "technicality" and will punish the Dems accordingly in 2010.

HCR will be a Pyrrhic victory for the Dems, quite possibly in more ways than one. They can't afford to abandon this specific bill (let alone HCR entirely) or even delay it, as Obama, Pelosi, and Reid have chosen to make this the defining issue of Obama's first term and the 111th Congress. They also can't afford a losing vote on the floor, because that destroys whatever momentum and illusion of party unity they have left. They also can't afford to be perceived as having moved the goalposts once the plan was already in action.

In the end, the Senate Democrats are being controlled by the far left, and will drop whatever infighting they have over abortion, the public option, or procedural changes to ram this legislation through using as much intimidation, spin, and pork as is necessary. Democratic leadership has taken this party over a cliff. The leadership realizes that independent Americans increasingly see the Democratic party for the far-left institution it is, and will punish it accordingly for several elections to come.

Faced with the loss of power and potential political irrelevance based on damage already done, the far left will not let HCR go, no matter how much further damage might be caused by doubling down on bad and unpopular policy.

Anonymous Countermoonbat, I could dissect your post and address each sentence but at the end of the day, if Dems don't pass HRC, they lose more seats in 2010. How they pass it is realistically irrelevant.
75% of the U.S citizens can't name the 3 branches of government so I'd wager that a similar amount cant spell "filibuster" much less comprehend it's meaning.

I live in constant happiness for the day to come when the state of Florida is no longer associated with this particular congress critter. But it's coming. Unfortunately, the way politics works in Amerika today it's looking more and more likely that he will be a contender for the white house in the near future. If you can't stop a problem, you promote them.

Where should ALAN GRAYSON be sent 1,ELBA II? 2,SPICEMINES OF KESSEL? 3,DEVILS ASTEROID?

ALL THE NUTS ON THE FAR RIGHT ARE HATE-MONGERING FACISTS.
IN 1939 FACISTS SPEAD HATE AND FEAR TO THE PEOPLE OF GERMANY- NOW THE SAME THING IS BEGINNING IN USA.
IF YOU ARE SPEADING HATE AND FEAR, YOU ARE NO BETTER THAN THE GERMANS IN 1939- AND YOU WILL LOSE.
THE WORLD WILL SEE THROUGH YOUR UGLY RHETORIC ABOUT OBAMA FOR WHAT IT REALLY IS- AND THAT IS HATE AND FEAR FACISM.

HITLER WAS A LIBERAL