03 May, 2009

Happy Hour Discurso

Today's opining on the public discourse.

Sen. Arlen Specter's on the fast track to getting his ass handed to him in a Democratic primary:

When Sen. Arlen Specter announced that he's switching parties, there were press reports indicating that he told President Obama, "I'm a loyal Democrat. I support your agenda."

On "Meet the Press" this morning, David Gregory asked about health care, with this quote in mind. Specter's response was important.

GREGORY: It was reported this week that when you met with the president, you said, "I will be a loyal democrat. I support your agenda." Let me test that on probably one of the most important areas of his agenda, and that's health care. Would you support health care reform that puts up a government run public plan to compete with a private plan issued by a private insurance company?

SPECTER: No. And you misquote me, David. I did not say I would be a loyal Democrat. I did not say that. And last week, after I said I was changing parties, I voted against the budget because the budget has a way to pass health care with 51 votes, which undermines a basic Senate institution to require 60 votes to impose closure on key issues.... I did not say I am a loyal Democrat.

It's quite a start for Specter's career in Democratic politics, isn't it? In the four whole days he's been a Democrat, Specter has voted against the Democratic budget, rejected a Democratic measure to help prevent mortgage foreclosures and preserve home values, announced his opposition to the president's OLC nominee, and this morning rejected a key centerpiece of the Democratic health care plan.

If he's not going to vote with the Dems on a single fucking issue, and continue to act just like a Con by denying reality, there's really no point to having him around. The amusement factor's worn off, even though the Cons are still in a slight freakout over his betrayal.

Of course, we all know the reason he ended up with a D after his name. He's sulking because the rabid right doesn't like him:

The party has changed so much since I was elected in 1980. And now, when I cast a vote with the Democrats on the stimulus package, that one vote created a precipitous drop so that I was looking at a situation where the prospects were very bleak to win a Republican primary, and I simply was not going to put my 29-year record before the Republican primary electorate.

No, because the Republican primary electorate is a bunch of raving lunatics. I just hope the Democratic primary electorate is a bunch of dirty fucking hippies, because it'll warm my heart to see Specter chucked out on his ear by both parties.

There's at least one challenger willing to take him on:

Joe Sestak's not giving up on primarying this guy. I hope he does. Maybe we can set up a special Lieberman Congress at a kiddie table somewhere so all these principled moderates can vote against each other's priorities and pat each other on the back for it.

I look forward to donating money to that campaign. Heh.

So, Arlen's failing spectacularly as a Democrat. How's the Con rebranding going? Ooo, not too good:

The newly unveiled National Council for a New America officially launched yesterday, hosting a town-hall like forum for 100 people at a strip-mall pizza shop in a D.C. suburb. Leading the discussion were House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.), former Florida governor Jeb Bush (R) and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney (R). I've read several reports on the event, and I'm still not sure what the point was.

The initiative reflects the emerging consensus of Republican leaders on how to take on Obama and rebuild their party. Worried that the GOP is being portrayed only as the opposition party, prominent Republicans hope to draw attention to their agenda by using well-known figures such as Bush and Romney to tout their ideas. But they don't believe they need to shift their political views to the left or the right to win.

And therein lies part of the problem. This new initiative is intended to be little more than a fresh coat of paint on a car that no longer runs. There's some value in a discussion that focuses more on Republican policy than politics -- the event reportedly featured very little Obama bashing -- but these GOP leaders don't seem to appreciate the fact that their policies failed miserably and aren't popular with voters.


... [T]here were some policy-oriented questions from an obviously Republican-friendly crowd, which spoke to a larger truth. One young person asked what the government can do for people who "have aspirations to college" but can't afford it "because college expenses have gone up." Another asked what government can do "to assist small businesses."

So, at a Republican event with a Republican crowd about the future of Republican ideas, those on hand wanted to hear more about what the government can do for them.

Somehow, I don't think "Tax cuts" is the answer those folks are looking for. Oops.

And finally, in a follow-up to the hurricane warning brought to us courtesy of David "Diapers" Vitter's decision to hold up Craig Fugate's nomination as FEMA chief, we now know his lame excuse for doing so:

And here's the stupid, as explained by Vitter's compatriot from Louisiana:

Vitter's fellow Louisiana senator, Democrat Mary Landrieu, backs Fugate. She said, however, that she understands Vitter's concerns, which apparently relate to FEMA's maps of controversial "high-velocity flood zones," a designation related to coastal areas that are at high risk in a hurricane or an area that faces significant risk in the event of a flood. Federal regulations currently prohibit FEMA from funding new construction in such zones, and Louisiana officials want more flexibility.

So, what we have here is a Senator from Louisiana placing a hold on the most-qualified FEMA nominee ever, because he wants more "flexibility" to build in the areas most prone to flooding in huricanes.

Fugate himself provided what seems the appropriate response to Vitter's actions. Discussing the government's "National Response Plan" in the aftermath of Katrina in 2006, Fugate said:

"It's a good document, [but] we may have to use a 2-by-4 on a couple of folks."
Vitter seems a perfect candidate for that 2-by-4.

And I'd be happy to wield it, only I'm afraid that a man with a diaper fetish might enjoy it far too much.

I'm afraid the chances of these assclowns ever being fit to govern again is vanishingly small.


Cujo359 said...

Sestak's been something of a disappointment. I'm trying to recall why. In any event, I'm not too excited about him running. He'd be better than Specter, I suppose, but not by all that much.

Anonymous said...

Some history on Sestak: http://thecrossedpond.com/?p=2864