Category Archives: Congress

Texas Republicans: Shut the Hell Up!

24 Thursday Jun 2010

Posted by in BP, Congress, Conservatives, Gulf Oil Spill, Politics, Republicans

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

If I had a magic lamp with a genie inside, my first (and maybe my only) wish would be that the Texas Republican delegation in Congress shut the hell up. Every time one of these morons opens his mouth the image of my state drops another couple of notches. If it’s not Joe Barton apologizing to BP, it’s Screwy Louie Gohmert making another of the GOP’s endless Obama–Hitler comparisons.

On the floor of the House Tuesday night Gohmert quoted from Thomas Sowell’s ridiculous op-ed in the Jewish World Review in which Sowell wrote that the $20 billion fund to compensate victims of the Gulf oil spill was akin to dictatorial powers given to Adolf Hitler by the German Reichstag during the Great Depression, and a sign that “American democracy is being dismantled, piece by piece, before our very eyes.” From Political Correction:

A little analysis, if I may. Louie led off with this:

“There’s a brilliant man named Thomas Sowell.  And, um, I didn’t vote for Barack Obama in 2008, but I sure would have voted for Thomas Sowell.”

Translation: I’d vote for him because he’s one of the good ones, not like that uppity arrogant Obama feller. And after all, some of my best friends are……

Gohmert continued, quoting Sowell:

“…leading up to his [Hitler’s] taking power in the 1930s, he deliberately sought to activate people who did not normally pay much attention to politics.

Such people were a valuable addition to his political base, since they were particularly susceptible to Hitler’s rhetoric and had far less basis for questioning his assumptions or his conclusions.”

“Useful idiots” was the term supposedly coined by V.I. Lenin to describe similarly unthinking supporters of his dictatorship in the Soviet Union.”

Hitler wasn’t enough, so we double down with a Lenin reference. And that description, activating “people who did not normally pay much attention to politics?” A “valuable addition” to the “political base?” “Susceptible to rhetoric?” “Unthinking supporters?” Sounds a lot like a typical Tea Partyer to me.

Gohmert went on:

“And this isn’t in the article — this is my comment — but we do have useful idiots today, who are heard to say, “Wow, what we really need is for the president to be a dictator for a little while.” They know not what they say.”

Who the hell is saying the president needs to be a dictator for a little while, Louie? But Rep. Gohmert is right about one thing, we do have useful idiots today. Well, maybe not useful, but glance in the nearest mirror, Lou, you’ll see the other half of that phrase.

Senate Turns Down Extension of Unemployment Benefits

17 Thursday Jun 2010

Posted by in budget, Congress, Democrats, economy, Politics, Republicans

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Republicrats in the Senate gave a big middle finger to the long-term unemployed yesterday, as 12 Democrats joined all the Republicans in voting down the extension of unemployment benefits, citing their hypocritical concerns about increasing the deficit as the reason:

“I’ve said all along that we have to be able to pay for what we’re spending,” said Sen. Ben Nelson, a Nebraska Democrat who voted against the bill. “$77 billion or more of this is not paid for and that translates into deficit spending and adding to the debt, and the American people are right: We’ve got to stop doing that.”

Funny, Sen. Nelson didn’t have any problem with deficit spending when he voted for $165 billion to fund operations in Iraq and Afghanistan for 2008 and 2009.

Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA) also voted again the extension over her concerns that unemployment benefits are so generous that they encourage people to not look for a job:

“We have 99 weeks of unemployment insurance,” Feinstein said. “The question comes, how long do you continue before people just don’t want to go back to work at all?”

Right DiFi, the unemployed are getting fat and happy living on benefits that are about one-third of their previous wages. This coming from the ninth richest member of Congress whose assets in 2005 were estimated at $40 million. And oh by the way, whose husband, Richard Blum, just happens to own two defense contractors that benefitted greatly from Sen. Feinstein’s time as chairman of the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee.

Feinstein was echoing what Congressman John Linder (R-GA) said last week:

“Georgia Republican Rep. John Linder suggested Thursday that extended unemployment benefits keep people from looking for work…”[N]early two years of unemployment benefits are too much of an allure for some,” said Linder.”

OK, Rep. Linder, let’s apply your logic to the Pentagon. Since you also voted for the $165 billion in funding for Iraq and Afghanistan, isn’t that “too much of an allure” for the continuation of both wars? Let’s cut off their funding and end their addiction.

Last but not least, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) turned up the stoopid yesterday with his proposal that the unemployed undergo drug tests in order to receive benefits. Right, Orrin. The 46% of the unemployed who have been out of work for more than 6 months, the highest number since the Labor Department started keeping that statistic in 1948, would rather sit around the house, get high and watch the tube than go to work. Idiot.

I propose that members of Congress undergo drug testing. Or maybe more appropriately, brain scans.

Another Republican For Bailouts

10 Thursday Jun 2010

Posted by in bailout, BP, Congress, Gulf Oil Spill, Politics, Republicans

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

From TPMDC:

“In response to a question from TPMDC, House Minority Leader John Boehner backed Tom Donohue, President of the Chamber of Commerce, in saying taxpayers should help pick up the tab.

“I think the people responsible in the oil spill–BP and the federal government–should take full responsibility for what’s happening there,” Boehner said at his weekly press conference this morning.

On Friday, Donohue made clear that he opposes efforts to stick BP, a member of the Chamber, with the bill. “It is generally not the practice of this country to change the laws after the game,” he said. “Everybody is going to contribute to this clean up. We are all going to have to do it. We are going to have to get the money from the government and from the companies and we will figure out a way to do that.”

So I asked Boehner, “do you agree with Tom Donohue of the Chamber that the government and taxpayers should pitch in to clean up the oil spill?” The shorter answer is “yes”.

“I could while away the hours, conferrin’ with the flowers
Consultin’ with the rain.
And my head I’d be scratchin’ while
my thoughts were busy hatchin’
If I only had a brain.”

Frank and Dodd Set to Serve Their Corporate Masters

10 Thursday Jun 2010

Posted by in Congress, Democrats, economy, financial reform, financial regulation, Obama administration, Politics, special interests, Wall Street

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

With the conference committee set to start meeting today to come up with a final version of financial reform legislation, the finance industry whores on the committee (aka Barney Frank and Chris Dodd) are doing their best to backpedal on Blanche Lincoln’s provision to force the big banks to spin off their derivatives operations.

“Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd [$3.1 million from Finance Industry PACs], a skeptic on the Lincoln plan, called it a “strong provision” and said she “was on the right track.” He did not, however, agree with his Democratic colleagues Wednesday who said Lincoln’s election win would make it harder to eliminate the provision.

And Frank [$2.3 million], who is chairing the conference committee, gave no indication Wednesday of where he intended to steer the House-Senate conference on the issue.”

No big surprise here either:

“The plan faces opposition from the administration, the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve.”

Change you can believe in.

“Audacity” is the New “Uppity”

26 Wednesday May 2010

Posted by in Congress, financial reform, health care, Obama, Politics, Republicans

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

President Obama held a meeting with Senate Republicans yesterday–no cameras present. I would assume GOP senators learned a lesson from the dressing-down their House counterparts took in January with cameras rolling and insisted on that. Afterward, Bob Corker of Tennessee and Pat Roberts of Kansas gave their versions of what transpired, and what they allegedly said to the president.

Corker spoke with Greg Sargent of The Plum Line:

“He got all uppity I felt like there was a degree of audacity in him being there today, after passing his third large partisan bill,” Corker told me, insisting Republicans had been stiff-armed by the White House on financial reform, health care, and the stimulus.

“I told him I felt like a prop afer the actions they had taken regarding bipartisanship,” Corker said. “It hit a nerve.” Corker added that Obama came back at him with “quite a lengthy response,” but he declined to share what, precisely, the president said.”

(Memo to President Obama: Limit your responses to Republican questions to short catchy phrases and words of no more than 2 syllables, they’re used to listening to Palin and get easily confused).

Hit a nerve, Bob? I can’t imagine why. Probably because you and your colleagues in the Senate have been nothing but road blocks to everything since day one of President Obama’s administration. (Latest case in point, Sen. Inhofe blocking the lifting of the liability cap on BP.) The president has taken a lot heat from his base for going too far in accommodating Republicans who in spite of those consolations have, with few exceptions, voted against everything. Yeah, I guess that statement might have “hit a nerve.”

Here’s what hits the GOP’s nerve. Their plan from Inauguration Day in January of 2009 was to block any and all legislation. In spite of their obstructionism, two major pieces  of the president’s agenda have been passed (the stimulus package and health care reform) and another (financial reform) is in conference committee.

What Sen. Roberts had to say is so ridiculous it’s barely worth a mention, but it’s a good example of the pervasive Republican attitude toward the president.

“He needs to take a Valium before he comes in and talks to Republicans,” Sen. Pat Roberts (Kan.) told reporters. “He’s pretty thin-skinned.”

Sen. Roberts, have a little respect please. At least try and fake it when you’re speaking to the national media and not at a Tea Party whinefest rally.

I Read the News Today, Oh Boy

19 Wednesday May 2010

Posted by in Afghanistan, BP, Clinton, Congress, Deepwater Horizon, Energy, Environment, Gulf Oil Spill, Obama administration, oil exploration, Politics

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I read the news today:

Arlen Specter switched parties because he couldn’t win the Republican primary, now he loses the Democratic primary to Joe Sestak. This just in Arlen, it’s not about party this year, the key word is “incumbent.” You’re 80 years old, you’ve been in the Senate for 30 years. Your time is up.

Mitch McConnell’s hand-picked candidate to succeed Jim Bunning got smoked by Tea Party favorite Rand Paul in the Republican senatorial primary in Kentucky. Once again, connections to the party establishment, regardless of which party, is the kiss of death this election season.

The latest example of why the anti-incumbent mood exists. Eight-term Congressman Mark Souder announced his resignation after an affair with one of his staffers was exposed.

I defer to the experts on the Gulf oil spill, but this smells like a cover-up to me:

“The Obama administration is actively trying to dismiss media reports that vast plumes of oil lurk beneath the surface of the Gulf of Mexico, unmeasured and uncharted.

But the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, whose job it is to assess and track the damage being caused by the BP oil spill that began four weeks ago, is only monitoring what’s visible — the slick on the Gulf’s surface — and currently does not have a single research vessel taking measurements below.”

As does this:

“BP, the company in charge of the rig that exploded last month in the Gulf of Mexico, hasn’t publicly divulged the results of tests on the extent of workers’ exposure to evaporating oil or from the burning of crude over the gulf, even though researchers say that data is crucial in determining whether the conditions are safe.

Moreover, the company isn’t monitoring the extent of the spill and only reluctantly released videos of the spill site that could give scientists a clue to the amount of the oil in gulf.”

Also on the spill:

“Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano acknowledged Monday that the federal government doesn’t have the resources or expertise to deal with an oil spill 5,000 feet below the sea, and must largely depend on oil companies to deal with an incident of such magnitude.”

So if the government agencies don’t have the “resources or expertise” to deal with the consequences of offshore drilling, why do they permit it to take place and just trust that the oil companies will be to “deal with an incident of such magnitude?” Sounds to me like expecting the arsonist to help put out the fire.

And finally, a grim milestone in Afghanistan.

“On Tuesday, the toll of American dead in Afghanistan passed 1,000, after a suicide bomb in Kabul killed at least five United States service members. Having taken nearly seven years to reach the first 500 dead, the war killed the second 500 in fewer than two.”

This following General McChrystal’s assessment that “nobody is winning” in Afghanistan and Secretary of State Clinton’s pledge to Hamid Karzai of “a long-term U.S. commitment” there.

Oh boy.

Senate Votes on Financial Regulation Amendments

12 Wednesday May 2010

Posted by in bailout, Congress, Democrats, economy, financial reform, financial regulation, lobbyists, McCain, Politics, Progressives, too big to fail, Wall Street

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Any time anything passes in the Senate by a vote of 96–0 I’m suspicious. Those numbers are usually reserved for meaningless proclamations declaring ‘National Be Kind to Puppies and Kitties Day.’ But such a vote took place yesterday on Sen. Bernie Sanders’ amendment to audit the Federal Reserve.

Sanders’ original amendment would have required the Fed to submit to regular audits, but the watered-down version passed yesterday is for a one-time audit with a specific scope and time frame. This only adds to my suspicion that the newer version is more than likely toothless:

“A Fed spokeswoman declined to comment on the Senate action, but Fed leaders, who previously have objected to broader efforts to review monetary policy, have not opposed the most recent version of Sanders’s proposal.”

A more accurate gauge of where the Senate stands on REAL financial reform can be found in other amendments taken up yesterday, like the one proposed by David Vitter which called for the stronger provisions contained in Sanders’ original proposal. It was voted down 62 to 37 with only 6 Democrats voting “Yea”—Cantwell, Dorgan, Feingold, Lincoln, Webb, and Wyden.

Another amendment, proposed by Sen. McCain, called for a time frame for winding down and eventually ending the government’s conservatorship of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That failed by a vote of 56 to 43 with only 2 Democrats–Bayh and Feingold–voting “Yea.” An alternative to the McCain amendment, proposed by Chris Dodd, called for “the Secretary of the Treasury to conduct a study on ending the conservatorship of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.” That passed by a margin of 63–36. Russ Feingold (I detect a pattern here) was the lone Democrat voting “Nay.”

Credit where credit is due, Sen. Shelby is right on the money (so to speak):

“Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were at the heart of the financial crisis,” Shelby said Tuesday. “How we can have basic regulatory reform, financial reform, if we’re not going to include Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?”

Also set for a vote this week is Sen. Lincoln’s amendment which would place strong restrictions on derivative trading. Needless to say, Wall Street is going all out to kill this:

“…the five [largest] banks together have mustered more than 130 registered lobbyists, including 40 former Senate staff members and one retired senator, Trent Lott. The list includes former staff members for the Senate majority and minority leaders, the chairmen and ranking members of the banking and finance committees, and more than 15 other senators. In the first quarter, the banks spent $6.1 million on lobbying.”

Why are the banksters fighting so hard to stop it? Follow the money:

“The change could cost the industry a lot of money. Banks reported $22.6 billion in derivatives revenue in 2009..”

Six Senators “Abstain” on Brown–Kaufman Amendment

08 Saturday May 2010

Posted by in Congress, financial reform, financial regulation, Politics

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

The gutlessness of our elected representatives never ceases to amaze. In Thursday night’s vote on the Brown–Kaufman amendment to limit the size of the big banks, 6 Senators voted “abstain”:

* Sen. Robert Bennett [R, UT]
* Sen. Jim Bunning [R, KY]
* Sen. Robert Byrd [D, WV]
* Sen. Jim DeMint [R, SC]
* Sen. Richard Lugar [R, IN]
* Sen. David Vitter [R, LA]

Profiles in cowardice.

Alan Grayson on Geithner’s Conflict of Interest

06 Thursday May 2010

Posted by in Congress, economy, financial reform, financial regulation, Politics, Progressives, too big to fail, Uncategorized, Wall Street

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

I’ve been considering relocating from Texas to the Sunshine State, since it looks like we may be in for another 4 years of Secessionist Rick here. Alan Grayson’s latest shot across the bow of the U.S.S Turbo Timmy might be enough to tip the scales. From Zero Hedge:

“In today’s ABC Top Line, Alan noted, “when Tim Geithner says that he doesn’t want to see the Fed audited, what he’s really saying is he doesn’t want to see Tim Geithner audited…”

“He was the head of the New York Fed for years and years. This audit would apply to him. And the actions he took — which he can now take in secret and, when this bill passes, will no longer be secret — we’ll be able to see and understand the decisions that he made that among other things put huge amounts of bailout money into the hands of private interests.” Grayson added: “It’s one of the biggest conflicts of interest I’ve ever seen.”

[…]

“The Fed doesn’t want to be audited. Who does? Do you want to be audited? I don’t want to be audited, but sometimes it’s necessary,” he said. “When you’re handing out a trillion dollars at a time — a trillion dollars at a time, which works out to $3,000 for every man woman and child in this country — don’t we have a right to know what happened to it?”

“It’s central to the bill. We’ve had secret bailouts from the Fed to private interests now for the past two years without any exposure whatsoever. … We need to know what happened to our money, because when the Fed hands out our money, every dollar in your pocket, every dollar in your checking account, every dollar in your 401(k) becomes that much cheaper and less in value.”

Dialing 1-800-MOVERS.

Senate Passes Two Meaningless Amendments on Financial Regulation

06 Thursday May 2010

Posted by in Congress, economy, financial reform, financial regulation, Politics, too big to fail, Wall Street

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

Any time I see that the Senate has passed something by a vote of 93–5 or 96–1 I can be sure of one thing—it’s meaningless. It’s the equivalent of a proclamation naming Sunday as the official first day of the week. Such was the case yesterday with 2 amendments to the financial regulatory bill:

“The Senate on Wednesday approved two amendments to the financial regulatory bill that both Democrats and Republicans claimed would end the prospect of taxpayer-financed bailouts for companies deemed “too big to fail.”

[…]

By a vote of 93 to 5, the Senate approved an amendment by Senator Richard C. Shelby of Alabama, the ranking Republican on the Banking Committee [which] eliminated a $50 billion fund that was designed to help bridge financial shortfalls while a failing company was undergoing liquidation. Mr. Shelby said the fund was “a honey pot” that would facilitate “backdoor bailouts.” (Somewhere Frank Luntz is smiling).

[…]

The Shelby amendment also requires the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to oversee the liquidation of a systemically important financial company that is failing, using money provided by a special line of credit with the Treasury.”

And where does the Treasury get its money again?

“The Senate also approved, by a vote of 96 to 1, an amendment by Senator Barbara Boxer, Democrat of California, saying that no taxpayer money may be used to keep a ailing financial company alive.”

Wow, earthshaking stuff there too. Wake me up when (or should that be if) they get around to the Brown–Kaufman amendment.