By Devin Dwyer
@devindwyer
Follow on Twitter

Jan 6, 2010 8:20am

Chris Dodd Out as Democratic Exodus Continues

By Rick Klein Maybe even Michael Steele will have to change his mind before this is through. Who said Washington wasn’t ready to talk about a changing climate? There’s something in the January air, and it smells like the December air, and maybe even the winds of change we’ve heard so much about. In the space of a disastrous 24 hours for Democrats, two senators who combine for more than 60 years of service on Capitol Hill called it quits. Two top Democratic gubernatorial candidates in battleground states — one an incumbent, the other a shoo-in for the nomination — found better things to do with their time, too. Retirements are complicated things. They’re not always bad things for the incumbent party’s chances (think Connecticut, where Democrats are more likely to hold the Senate seat with a fresh candidate and a fresh start). But waves like this leave everyone damp. A casualty list that includes Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., and Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., is not a story of scattered red-state newbies worried about making a living: These are veteran Democrats making cold calculations about the next 10 months, and they’re not crazy about what they see looming in President Obama’s first mid-term year. Match it up with the gubernatorial toll: Lt. Gov. John Cherry, D-Mich., bowing out of the race for governor in his battered home state, and Gov. Bill Ritter, D-Colo., planning to announce that he’s not seeking reelection in his state, heralded for its deepening blue hues.

Yes, there are still more Republican retirements in Congress (when counting those running for other offices). Yes, this unloads some dead weight (think Dodd, again, and maybe both gubernatorial races, in what’s likely to be a bad year for incumbents and heir apparants). Yes, neither party is particularly stable right now (think Florida, and ask Michael Steele). Yet coming after the wave of Democratic retirements, plus a party-switch, in the House last month, we’re seeing incumbent lawmakers speak louder than even Chairman Steele can. Shaping a narrative Democrats wanted left in 2009: “The moves come at the start of an election year that’s shaping up to be challenging one for lawmakers of all political stripes, and particularly for Democrats. Anti-incumbent sentiment is rippling through the electorate, a majority of the country says it’s on the wrong track, and the party in power typically gets blamed for the nation’s troubles,” the AP’s Liz Sidoti and Ken Thomas report. “This takes two powerful Democrats out of the running in this year’s mid-term elections, and this is a big deal,” ABC’s Jonathan Karl reported Wednesday on “Good Morning America. “Democrats face the prospect of losing as many as six Senate seats.” “A series of retirements can often foreshadow a bad year for a party, and Democrats acknowledge that the struggling economy, a conservative backlash against Obama administration policies — especially on health care — and other factors make it likely they will lose seats,” Peter Wallsten and Naftali Bendavid write in The Wall Street Journal. “Democrats have been quick to point out that more Republicans than Democrats have announced their retirements so far in each chamber.” ”It is not shaping up to be a pretty week for the Democrats,” ABC’s David Chalian reports. “You will certainly hear a lot of talk from Republicans that Democrats are beginning to face the reality of just how tough the current political landscape looks for them and they are running for the hills.” “It is clear that Democrats are starting off the election year in an attempt to unload the dead weight,” Chalian writes. In Connecticut, where Dodd makes it formal with a noon ET press conference outside his home in East Haddam Wednesday: “Without Dodd as a foil, Republicans chances of taking over a seat in this solidly blue state are considerably diminished,” writes Washingtonpost.com’s Chris Cillizza, who broke the Dodd news Monday night. “Former Rep. Rob Simmons and wealthy businesswoman Linda McMahon are battling it out for the Republican nod but either would start as an underdog in a general election matchup with [Attorney General Richard] Blumenthal.” Per the Hartford Courant: “With the embattled Dodd stepping aside, Democrats can now try to recruit a more popular candidate to run in Democratic-leaning state, bolstering the prospects of thwarting a Republican victory. Among the early favorites to replace Dodd is longtime Connecticut state Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, who is seen as one of the state’s most popular politicians.” Wasting no time: “Blumenthal tells The Associated Press that he will announce his candidacy at noon Wednesday at Democratic headquarters in Hartford.” Another story entirely, in North Dakota. “This would have been a tough seat for Democrats to defend even with Dorgan on the ballot and is perhaps a boon to Republicans looking to eat into Democrats’ majorities in 2010,” ABC’s Z. Byron Wolf reports. Republican Gov. John Hoeven is almost certainly a go now — and the seat is almost certainly gone for Democrats. Nate Silver, at FiveThirtyEight.com: “This is un-spinnably bad news for the Democrats.” NRSC Communications Director Brian Walsh, jumping on Dodd/Dorgan/Ritter: “It’s no coincidence that in a 24 hour period, three additional entrenched Democrat elected officials are throwing in the towel. Every day it becomes increasingly clear the President’s coattails have vanished and vulnerable Democrats have no place to hide.” Fueling the hope: “Conservative and Republican candidates who sat on the sidelines during the Democratic electoral surges of 2006 and 2008 are jumping into the 2010 midterm elections with renewed confidence after President Obama’s first year in office,” S.A. Miller writes in the Washington Times. “The class of new recruits, who run the gamut from legislative veterans hoping for comebacks to promising newcomers, has Republican officials eyeing significant gains in the House, Senate and governors’ mansions after two disastrous election cycles.” Also roiling your Senate landscape: “Encouraged by a group of influential New York Democrats, Harold Ford Jr., the former congressman from Tennessee, is weighing a bid to unseat Senator Kirsten E. Gillibrand in this fall’s Democratic primary, according to three people who have spoken with him,” Michael Barbaro reports in The New York Times. “About a dozen high-profile Democrats have expressed interest in backing a candidacy by Mr. Ford, including the financier Steven Rattner, who, along with his wife, Maureen White, has been among the country’s most prolific Democratic fund-raisers.” Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos on “GMA” that he’s “leaning against” a Senate run, in part because “I think we’re going to take the House back this year.” And have we seen the end of the maneuvering in the House? Not if Republican leadership has its way. A new ploy in the health care push…. House Minority Whip Eric Cantor, R-Va., on Wednesday is sending a memo to colleagues and the public that does something you don’t often see in Congress: It names names. Writes Cantor: “Together with my Whip Team, I have identified 37 Democrats who — we believe — can be persuaded to vote against a final health care agreement. Because each of these 37 Democrats voted for the House bill, we only need to turn 3 votes to prevent a final agreement from passing. Below are the 37 Democrats we believe are in play, and the issues that drive their final vote.” “If we can convince enough of these 37 Members (along with the 39 Democrats who already voted no) to reconsider and switch their position on the bill, I know that we can defeat this government take-over of our health care before it becomes law.” In the meantime, a broken presidential promise has the left and the right agreeing again on health care — over transparency. The motives here aren’t pure — but the president’s own words hang out there. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi knows it. Reminded of the president’s C-SPAN promise, Pelosi said: “There are a number of things that he swore on the campaign trail.” The ping-ponged process: “House and Senate leaders have formally agreed to bypass a bicameral conference committee to merge two healthcare bills, and have opted to instead ‘ping-pong’ the Senate bill over to the House and back again, according to House leadership aides,” The Hill’s Jared Allen reports. “Aides said the agreement was reached during a Tuesday evening meeting at the White House with President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and the top two Democrats from each chamber.” Why this could be easy to finish: “Ms. Pelosi on Tuesday signaled she may be willing to give up on a public health-insurance plan in the final bill. The provision was part of the House bill but doesn’t have the support to pass the Senate,” Janet Adamy writes in The Wall Street Journal. Pelosi, D-Calif.: “There are other ways to do [guarantee competition], and we look forward to having those discussions as we reconcile the bill.” Who’s not happy (other than Republicans): “If there was even a tiny chance this bill was going to get better in conference committee, that chance was, in part, reliant on progressive pressure on an open process,” David Sirota writes at OpenLeft.com. Who else isn’t entirely happy… Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., doesn’t like the special Medicaid deal Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., won for Nebraska: “The people of Arkansas did not send me to Washington to be a horse trader. They sent me there to work hard to get good policy,” Lincoln said, per Roll Call’s David M. Drucker. “We’ll see what happens, whether it comes out or not. I think it’s appropriate that it should.” Lots of blame-taking from the president on the foiled Christmas Day terrorist plot — and lost of reviewing still to come. Dana Milbank, in The Washington Post: “For Obama, a former president of the Harvard Law Review, the response to the Under-bomber has been a veritable Review Revue. And it’s not just a semantic thing: His instinct when facing all types of problems — Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, the Fort Hood shootings, the pending Gitmo closing — has led him to the same approach: Order a review. It is a hallmark of his governing style.” The president’s message to his Cabinet: “This was a screw-up that could have been disastrous. We dodged a bullet but just barely,” he told his team behind closed doors, per ABC’s Jake Tapper. The New York Times’ Jeff Zeleny and Helene Cooper: “The tone of the president’s remarks on Tuesday — the sharpest of any of his statements since the incident nearly two weeks ago — underscored his anger over the lapses in intelligence as well as his efforts to minimize any political risks from his administration’s response.” The Los Angeles Times’ Sebastian Rotella and Christi Parsons: “Administration officials did not rule out the possibility of firings over the incident, although Obama admonished White House staffers and Cabinet chiefs in the closed session not to engage in ‘finger-pointing’ over the failures.” Rep. King, to the New York Daily News’ Ken Bazinet: “He seems to be genuinely angry …. and I would think that’s paving the way for someone to go.” But: “He still refuses to use the word ‘terrorism.’ ” King, to Stephanopoulos on “GMA”: “If the situation is as bad as the president says it was … to show that he’s serious, someone will have to go.” Roiling the GOP — the Crist-Rubio clash claims a casualty, in Florida: “Days before Republican activists planned to vote state GOP chairman Jim Greer out of office, he bowed to their pressure Tuesday and resigned suddenly in a blow to Gov. Charlie Crist who had picked Greer for the post and stood squarely behind him to the end,” Adam C. Smith and Beth Reinhard report in the St. Petersburg Times. (Attention: Michael Steele.) “A leading contender to succeed Greer is John Thrasher, a state senator and former Florida House speaker, who has already been endorsed by Crist in addition to former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and Attorney General Bill McCollum, the likely Republican nominee for governor,”ABC’s Teddy Davis reports. Newt to New Hampshire: “With his profile and penchant for controversy as high as ever, Newt Gingrich will return to New Hampshire for the first time in nearly three years at the end of the month,” the Union Leader’s John DiStaso reports. “The Granite Status has learned that Gingrich, the former U.S. House speaker and author of the mid-1990s ‘Contract with America,’ will keynote a ‘Grassroots Communications Conference’ sponsored by businessman Fred Tauch’s self-funded STEWARD watchdog organization on Jan. 30.
The Kicker: “This whole issue of him being a third gate crasher, while it merits more investigation, he’s unlike the other two individuals who are subject to this investigation. He did stay for the dinner.” — A. Scott Bolden, attorney for Carlos Allen, to The New York Times’ Sheryl Gay Stolberg. “If I wasn’t doing this job, I’d be out there with the tea partiers.” — RNC Chairman Michael Steele, to Fox News’ Neil Cavuto.
For up-to-the-minute political updates check out The Note’s blog . . . all day every day:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/

User Comments

Posted by: matt | January 6, 2010, 9:10 am 9:10 am

“”"”"”These are individuals with electoral problem far removed from any perceived unpopularity of the Obama agenda. Dorgan and Dodd were already longshots to get reelected “”"”
Posted by: matt
I think it’s funny how Dems try to show all the positives of a deteriorating situation and continue to believe Obama’s agenda is what we the people want. The majority of Americans “do not support” this health care bill, so Pelosi will now do it behind closed doors, in direct conflict with Obama’s promise of transparency. Obama has had a dismal first year and the day you Dems sack up and admit it is the day you will actually face reality.

Posted by: lfrichar | January 6, 2010, 9:21 am 9:21 am

This is the tip of the iceburg. Let the carnage begin. HA HA HA HA HA HA

Posted by: billy bob | January 6, 2010, 9:23 am 9:23 am

the dems are jumping ship 1st they will screw americans with health care and cap and trade. Come on dingy harry your are next to quit then you can visit Tommy in searchlight.

Posted by: Daniel | January 6, 2010, 9:23 am 9:23 am

“Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators or Representatives, and Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States .”

Posted by: timbo | January 6, 2010, 9:29 am 9:29 am

Dorgan was a blow – he had a good chance of retaining his seat and was a good Senator. Dodd leaving is a blessing, he had little chance of winning and regularly brought bad headlines on a national basis to the party. I suspect Dodd was encouraged to get out by party leadership, and I’m glad he did.

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 9:30 am 9:30 am

They say you can’t move anything by pushing on a string, but a lot of Democrats are going to be moved into the unemployment line by pushing on Obama’s coattails.

Posted by: Robert Laughlin | January 6, 2010, 9:31 am 9:31 am

POTUS and Dem party refuse to listen to voters as they sneak through (Obama promised C-SPAN visibility; riiiight) this disastrous legislation. He and the other Dems will screw taxpayers one good, last time knowing their political careers are done.

Posted by: fedup_11 | January 6, 2010, 9:31 am 9:31 am

Yea Rah! Now if the rest can just crawl back into their dark little holes!

Posted by: watchinbo | January 6, 2010, 9:33 am 9:33 am

What should really scare Dems is the fact that Dodd & other congressional Dems were willing to be inducted into a political “suicide bombing mission” all for the sake of the Banking Industry, financial institutiions and the Insurance Industry, institutions that have raped, pillaged and plundered the countryside for many decades. Why would Dems execute a suicidal political jihad against their own constituency, by capitulating on unlimited corp bonuses and by removing the “Public Option” in Healthcare legislation, which were the cornerstones of the ‘reform’ and the ‘change’ the Dems paid lip-service to to get elected? If promises of ‘change’ and ‘reform’ swept the Dems into office in majority numbers, why would they abandon their commitment to it? Why would Dodd ppisss away his political career to help such sleazebags who are so unworthy of such help? And why do Dems continue to do this? The Dems lied about their commitment to reform. Let’s just get them out.

Posted by: Born_in_USA | January 6, 2010, 9:34 am 9:34 am

The majority of Americans “do not support” this health care bill, so Pelosi will now do it behind closed doors, in direct conflict with Obama’s promise of transparency. Obama has had a dismal first year and the day you Dems sack up and admit it is the day you will actually face reality.
lfrichar | Jan 6, 2010 9:21:16 AM
Can you name any bill, ever, that has had the conference strategy sessions open to the public? Ever?
As for Obama’s first year, from dealing with the Somali pirates hostage situation to passing a stimulus over lockstep Republican obstructionism to implementing a rational Afghan policy for the first time in 7 years to CAFE requirements increased (to the consternation of OPEC) to stem cell research… Not at all a dismal year, and he has three more to go yet.

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 9:35 am 9:35 am

The media needs a narrative. But the fact is that this is when candidates decide if they’re going to seek re-election. Some decide to run again, while others decide to step down. Dodd’s been in there 30 years and has health concerns. Also, he was devastated by the passing of Ted Kennedy. Though he’s been tremendously productive, especially right now, this was the time to go. The “Friends of Angelo” loan hurt him but what really did him in was literally moving his family to Iowa in 2007 to run for president. He even put his kids in the Iowa schools. People couldn’t believe that.

Posted by: hopesprings52 | January 6, 2010, 9:35 am 9:35 am

Dodd trashed his political career to help Wall street dirtbags dole out enormous bonuses using taxpayer dollars. Obama is trashing his political career, which could have been stellar, just so he can help the grave robbers in the Insurance Industry defeat the “Public Option” feature that would have reformed the Healthcare Industry. Far, far from the image of ‘change’ dems promised to fight for. Ralph Nader was right all along — we really have just a one-party system in this country. There’s Republicans in wolves’ clothing (declared Republicans) and there’s Republicans in sheep’s clothing (Dems). And they have both been bought, lock – stock and barrel, by the powerful lobbyists, like the Insurance Industry and Wall Street. Which is precisely why both Repubs and Dems intractably and staunchly oppose Campaign Finance Reform as much as they oppose REAL, genuine Healthcare Reform, and REAL, genuine Wall Street reform.

Posted by: Dem_at_Heart | January 6, 2010, 9:37 am 9:37 am

Good riddance to Dodd. IMO the s.o.b. is getting out of Dodge one step ahead of the sherriff. The guy ought the be on trial. Now that he’s leaving the Reps won’t be able to use him as a poster-boy for Democrat hypocrisy, corruption and greed.

Posted by: JohnR22 | January 6, 2010, 9:38 am 9:38 am

You know certain people I’m glad are getting out but who cares if they are Dems or Rebpublicans? Perhaps we should get rid of ALL the bad apples on BOTH sides and start fresh. Term limits are a great idea. It’s getting old attacking the president, dems against republicans…HOW ABOUT AMERICANS? Good and bad on both sides…LET’S work TOGETHER. because if we don’t the terrorists will win. Let’s try to find solutions and compromises instead of such anger and hatred. We are ALL Americans…we all want the same thing.

Posted by: Barb | January 6, 2010, 9:38 am 9:38 am

Dodd chose the wealthy Wall Street ‘bonuses’ gang over the taxpayer. Obama and Baucus are choosing the Insurance Industry over ordinary citizens desperately in need of health care reform (Dem withdrawal of the Public Option). So . . . what happened to the Dem promise to fight for change? The answer seems clear. It’s kind of like Dems saying “We vehemently and stalwartly disapprove of child sexual abuse” — BUT . . . “We staunchly APPOSE any legislation that outlaws it.” The first half is what Dems blow between their cheeks for public posturing. The second half is what Dems actually DO when you give them the chance (nothing). Republicans hang tough and doggedly press their issues. The spineless Dems surrender, capitulate, acquiesce and fornicate with their adversary. One represents enduring commitment. The other stands for cowardice and abandonment of their commitments (The Chameleon Retreat). The Dems are thoroughly decimating their integrity by totally abandoning the ‘fight for change’ they promised us.

Posted by: Reflecting_Pool | January 6, 2010, 9:38 am 9:38 am

The four top Democrats in the 2010 midterm election.
I have the utmost respect for the elected Senator’s and there retirement plans more of them need to do the same that are over the age of 65 its time for a real change there are some Senators who need to retire on the GOP side too.
ITS TIME FOR NEW IDEAS AND NEW BLOOD IN THE U.S.CONGRESS
I think the Senator’s should only be aloud to run for office two terms just like the President! If the Senator’s cant make a difference in 8 years something is badly wrong!
SENATOR’S WHO ARE IN THE U.S. CONGRESS FOR 10,20,30,40,50 YEARS WEAR OUT THERE WELCOME they all become boring people!

Posted by: BrendettNC | January 6, 2010, 9:39 am 9:39 am

The Democratic members of congress will vote for health care reform and then retire. Wait until we see what dirty deals they cut for themselves in return for their votes.
All members of Congress who vote for health care without a full debate of the bill on the floor of congress have violated the oaths they have taken to defend the U.S. Constitution and the American taxpayers. If the healthcare bill is good it would pass on merit.
By their actions they have made a mockery of the Congress and the rules of the land.

Posted by: carolyn kelly | January 6, 2010, 9:40 am 9:40 am

*****These are individuals with electoral problem far removed from any perceived unpopularity of the Obama agenda.*****
Yes, that’s absolutely true. However the mass exodus of Independent voters away from the democrats DOES indicate significant dissatisfaction with the Obama/Pelosi agenda. Dems need to accept the simple fact that most voters (including most Indepenendents) do NOT WANT a european-style socialist state. Leftists just don’t “get it”; they really think that once the socialist state is fully implemented, the moronic masses will just LUV it.

Posted by: JohnR22 | January 6, 2010, 9:40 am 9:40 am

I love the smell of napalm on the Democratic side of the aisle.

Posted by: Robert Laughlin | January 6, 2010, 9:41 am 9:41 am

It has been almost 160 years since there was a third-party president in this country. Since then, US “democracy” has presented voters with two corrupt sides of the same counterfeit coin. The illusion of choice is no choice at all. Each year brings more government intrusion into our personal lives, fewer freedoms, and higher taxes to pay for it all. Our only voice comes from the thin reed of a single yes/no vote every 4 years. “No to the incumbant crminals, or yes to the competing syndicate?” Regardless of which poison you choose, it’s still poison.

Posted by: h5mind | January 6, 2010, 9:41 am 9:41 am

The sooner he leaves the better.

Posted by: CW | January 6, 2010, 9:42 am 9:42 am

Come on my friend let us play Golf – Angelo Mozilo

Posted by: freedom | January 6, 2010, 9:43 am 9:43 am

These are individuals with electoral problem far removed from any perceived unpopularity of the Obama agenda. Dorgan and Dodd were already longshots to get reelected, and Dodd’s departure actually makes the CT race more promising for the Dems. This is a disaster in the minds of the media only.
Posted by: matt
_________________________
I wouldn’t bet on it matt.
A quick look at any poll in the country right now will show that the Dems approval rating is nowhere near what it was when Obama took office. The outcome of a Congressional election actually depends on the mood of the country at the time and the mood this time is shifting toward the Republicans.
Even if CT does elect a Democrat, I doubt very much if there will be many races this year where the Dems will be victorious.

Posted by: marco | January 6, 2010, 9:43 am 9:43 am

jhw539 — That’s the best you have? Somali Pirates, shortchanging a General by 10,000 troops in Afghanistan and having zero effect on oil prices? Tell me there Einstein, what difference do you see in the current Afghan policy that wasn’t in the previous? Please spare me with the hot air of an “exit strategy” as that was a nice sound bite from know nothing Obama when it comes to military tactics.

Posted by: lfrichar | January 6, 2010, 9:45 am 9:45 am

Reid and Pelosi should go next.

Posted by: CW | January 6, 2010, 9:45 am 9:45 am

regardless of party, WE THE PEOPLE had better really, really start sending messages to congress because we are losing our representation! senators and representatives no longer have their eyes on protecting us from government invasion and taxation. these current members will never choose to protects us from themselves. they spend freely while denying themselves nothing. until it is proven that WE THE PEOPLE hold them accountable, really,we will never have that “change” (the way we understand it) that is used as a campaign prop, but never delivered. the change they actually deliver, is change in power structure to take control of our lives and our destiny.

Posted by: Sarah | January 6, 2010, 9:49 am 9:49 am

I can not wait till November and neither can all the middle class in this country. The Dems forgot one important fact, “By the People. For the People”. Can’t come quick enough for me.

Posted by: Patriot | January 6, 2010, 9:51 am 9:51 am

Sorry People – The GOP are Spendocrats too— They talk Fiscal Responsibility till their elected– Then Nada— They doubled the size of Govt. and took Clintons surplus leaving the Country with the Worst Financial Breakdown Since the Great Depression–In addition their deregulation”less Govt.” Mantra is a lie that gave us Bernie Madoff, and Worthless Credit Default Swaps. Had it not been for BIG GOVT. Financial intervention and Raising of FDIC Insurance– The Run on the banks would have made The Great Depression look like a Tea party.Over 150 banks have failed in the last year alone. I see the Difference between the Dems and GOP as this — They both Spend-But the GOP love to spend on wars and on Nation Building and the Dems Love to spend domestically — I rather see the money spent here!!!!

Posted by: brian | January 6, 2010, 9:56 am 9:56 am

Can you name any bill, ever, that has had the conference strategy sessions open to the public? Ever?
————
jhw, it doesn’t matter what happened in the past, ever. This POTUS promised to have ‘the most transparent administration ever’. He also promised that discussions about health reform would be open, broadcast via C-SPAN. What we saw were the grand-standing speeches by both parties and then the various votes.
What about the closed-door meetings the President held with just the Democrats? What about the working sessions at the WH with just Democrats? What about the meetings were those nice sweetheart deals were actually discussed and granted? Were those broadcast?
And now, announced plans to exclude all Republican representation from the negotiations to merge the 2 bills. Gibbs has already mmmm’ed and hawed and if’ed and but’ed to say those negotiations won’t be broadcast either.
Do you think how the the health insurance reform bills have been, and will be, handled matches what President Obama promised? I have to tell you, I don’t.
I keep telling myself ‘give him time, this time we have a POTUS that will actually live up to his promises’. But when I heard how the merger of the HOR to Senate bills would be handled, major disappointment.

Posted by: malcat | January 6, 2010, 9:56 am 9:56 am

WHERE are the articles about the healthcare bomb (I mean bill)that is being snuck through congress in Nancy Pelosi’s underwear?

Posted by: cindy | January 6, 2010, 9:57 am 9:57 am

I think the Senator’s should only be aloud to run for office two terms just like the President! If the Senator’s cant make a difference in 8 years something is badly wrong!
BrendettNC | Jan 6, 2010 9:39:31 AM
You do realize that the term of a Senator is defined by the constitution as 6 years, not 4, so two terms would be 12 years…

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 9:59 am 9:59 am

Dodd quitting is not a surprise since he would be political fodder for ANYONE running against him! However, maybe other Dems are quitting because they have been exposed to the dirty politics of buying and selling your soul to the highest bidder and will not become a party to the dirt! Maybe, after leaving office, they will expose the crooks to the American taxpayers! Not all politicians are crooks and do have good qualities! One could only hope for one of them to expose the corruption on both sides of the aisle with real data!

Posted by: ross | January 6, 2010, 10:00 am 10:00 am

Ram socialist healthcare redistribution scheme down our throats then retire with tax funded proceeds…….yeah that’s taking one for our deah leedah…..dems are true profiles of courage.

Posted by: xdem | January 6, 2010, 10:01 am 10:01 am

I wish people would stop using the word socialism to describe the Democrats. Real socialists are probably laughing their hind ends off listening to American politics.

Posted by: Reason | January 6, 2010, 10:03 am 10:03 am

That’s the best you have? Somali Pirates, shortchanging a General by 10,000 troops in Afghanistan and having zero effect on oil prices? Tell me there Einstein, what difference do you see in the current Afghan policy that wasn’t in the previous?
lfrichar | Jan 6, 2010 9:45:49 AM
What difference in the Afghan policy? Are you serious? He’s committed FOUR TIMES AS MANY TROOPS. By your math, Bush short changed his Afghan general by OVER 70000 TROOPS – a factor of four.
I know fuel economy standards don’t go boom or kill people, but there is no debate about the long term impact increasing them has on our long term dependence on foreign oil.
And if tripling the number of troops equals no difference in Afghan policy to you, then you’re just too blinded by hatred for any rational discussion. Sorry to interfere with your daily two minute hate.

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 10:04 am 10:04 am

I used NOT to believe in term limits; we have elections to take care of that-I thought.The electorate is too stupid,lets do term limits, 2 for senators, 4 for reps-clean the outhouse.

Posted by: Paulpaul | January 6, 2010, 10:04 am 10:04 am

Im trying to understand the dems but they are worse that a woman on PMS.Why going against the will of the amjority of americans ?? Trying to copy the European Socialism when the Europens themselves want to be like us !! They have tried the road the dems want and have failed ! many retirees in Europe have partically lost their benefits or have to pay to keep them . Healthcare has them bankrupt. Not enough taxpayers to cover for allthe expenses. And why are we allowing these thieves to run our future behind closed doors and in secrecy?? Wake up America !!

Posted by: Not a Sheep | January 6, 2010, 10:05 am 10:05 am

Cripple the country they were elected to legislate. Then run home to hide in a closet. I believe the previous Administration referred to that as: “Cut and Run”. Not something people of character are noted as doing. Then again we “are” talking about liberal politicians. Forgive the redundancy.

Posted by: WhatChange? | January 6, 2010, 10:06 am 10:06 am

You need 2/3 of congress and 3/4 of states to agree to federal term limits. not to likely.

Posted by: Ray | January 6, 2010, 10:09 am 10:09 am

“h5mind” said it best and it bears repeating: “It has been almost 160 years since there was a third-party president in this country. Since then, US “democracy” has presented voters with two corrupt sides of the same counterfeit coin. The illusion of choice is no choice at all. Each year brings more government intrusion into our personal lives, fewer freedoms, and higher taxes to pay for it all. Our only voice comes from the thin reed of a single yes/no vote every 4 years. “No to the incumbent criminals, or yes to the competing syndicate?” Regardless of which poison you choose, it’s still poison.”

Posted by: Miami-Vices | January 6, 2010, 10:10 am 10:10 am

What evidence does anyone have of an exodus if independent voters from Dems? Americans want true health care reform and trying to entice the party of no has watered that down to where the majority of American disapprove. The elections will tell the tale, not you posting pundits.

Posted by: DewyB | January 6, 2010, 10:11 am 10:11 am

matt | Jan 6, 2010 9:10:23 AM….How did you determine Dodd was a longshot?

Posted by: deanbob | January 6, 2010, 10:11 am 10:11 am

jhw, it doesn’t matter what happened in the past, ever. This POTUS promised to have ‘the most transparent administration ever’.
…
And now, announced plans to exclude all Republican representation from the negotiations to merge the 2 bills.
malcat | Jan 6, 2010 9:56:54 AM
Ignoring history is foolish. And by every measure, this administration IS the most transparent ever. What other administration released Whitehouse visitor logs (Bush went to the courts for years to prevent it)? Or revealed the raw books on a major bills spending like this one did with the stimulus website (taking considerable damage, which all past administrations avoided by simply not releasing the spending information)? I’ll accept ‘best ever’ rather than condemning them for not being absolutely perfect.
As for excluding Republicans from negotiations, they are voting no even after extensive compromises (and literally months spent in intensive ‘Gang of Six’ negotiations) have been adopted (including the major left-infuriating dropping of even a watered down public option). Republicans negotiated in obvious bad faith on the stimulus, with every one voting lockstep No in the House even AFTER the concession of adopting a Republican amendment that diverted almost 10% of the total funding from teachers, police, fire (ie, Dem union supporters) to an upper middle class tax break. Inviting the Republicans into these final negotiations would be like inviting President Ahmadinejad to an interfaith dialogue between Christians and Jews.

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 10:12 am 10:12 am

Four Democrats in the HOUSE quit before Xmas also….maybe the “quitters” are not just quitters, but fed up with how Pelosi and the strong arm tactics in Washington are not their cup of tea! Any Dem with a sense of honesty would not compromise themselves under these circumstance!

Posted by: ross | January 6, 2010, 10:12 am 10:12 am

Chris Dodd will now become a lobbyist for A.I.G.

Posted by: steve | January 6, 2010, 10:12 am 10:12 am

Maybe both parties will have a clean sweep and then maybe the newly elected will do the people’s business instead of making themselves rich.

Posted by: zee | January 6, 2010, 10:15 am 10:15 am

I have been a registered Dem all my life, but am now ashamed of the party and what it represents which is more government telling us how to live. I’m sick of the whole mess.

Posted by: steve | January 6, 2010, 10:16 am 10:16 am

steve | Jan 6, 2010 10:12:09 AM…That won’t matter since Obama promised he wouldn’t have lobbyists in the White House!

Posted by: deanbob | January 6, 2010, 10:16 am 10:16 am

“h5mind” said it best and it bears repeating: “It has been almost 160 years since there was a third-party president in this country. Since then, US “democracy” has presented voters with two corrupt sides of the same counterfeit coin. The illusion of choice is no choice at all.
Miami-Vices | Jan 6, 2010 10:10:14 AM
Yet in the last 160 years America has risen to be the most powerful and prosperous free nation mankind has ever seen. I suppose everything from the (government sponsored) development of the Internet (still US controlled), walking on the moon, sequencing the human genome (the next Internet-scale boom peculating), inventing the cell phone – all those concrete achievements are just a corrupt illusions right?
The US has the worst governmental system – except for all the other options.

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 10:18 am 10:18 am

Reid’s bill is unconstitutional! If Congress has the power to force each person to have health insurance, then
individual liberty would be totally meaningless!
deanbob | Jan 6, 2010 10:13:56 AM
If Congress has the power to force each person to support the military/pay property tax/not dump cyanide in the river/drive on the right side of the road/etc individual liberty would be totally meaningless!
… I really wonder where libertarianism trips over into anarchism. I think the current crop of ravers seems to miss the line. If the health care bill is unconstitutional, the Supreme Court (which is as conservative as when they shut down Gore in 2000) will strike it down, as is their sole, Constitutionally granted mandate to judge.

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 10:21 am 10:21 am

Dodd, along with Barney Frank, were responsible for encouraging banks to lend money to unqualified borrowers. They ran Freddie and Fannie into the ground.

Posted by: brian | January 6, 2010, 10:25 am 10:25 am

sen. Dodd’s early announcement of quitting reelection was triggered by a local ABC station poll in Connecticut showing only 13% in support of his reelection only one week after Dem. leadership decided to give Uconn hospital one hundred million stimulus money to boast the reputation of Dodd. Apparently, a great majority of people in his state are sick and tired of the two corrupt father and son senators who represent their state in US senate over half a century.
Is Harry Reid the next to drop out the his reelection race soon?

Posted by: austin | January 6, 2010, 10:25 am 10:25 am

Pure political genius. The Dems, as always, turn their backs on those who got them where they are. They “persuade” the incumbent to move on. Fresh Dem gets a good chance at avoiding the coming retaliation against the incumbent. America continues to go socialist. Yeah!

Posted by: xlr8xlr8 | January 6, 2010, 10:26 am 10:26 am

Amazing that Hillary is getting her wish; a The Unites Socialist States of America. We as a people are too stupid to see this whole “Dems bailing” thing as the political ploy that it is. Dems will keep control and we will continue to pay the price. Beautiful…

Posted by: xlr8xlr8 | January 6, 2010, 10:29 am 10:29 am

“Anti-incumbent sentiment is rippling through the electorate, a majority of the country says it’s on the wrong track, and the party in power typically gets blamed for the nation’s troubles.”
Dhhhh – Gosh ABC sure got that one figured out without any help. Do you think that the people ‘know’ who caused the problems?

Posted by: James L. | January 6, 2010, 10:29 am 10:29 am

The tsunami is building. Come November, “it’s a hard rain a-gonna fall.”

Posted by: Jack Davis | January 6, 2010, 10:30 am 10:30 am

That gets rid of half the Frank”n”Dodd monster. One can only hope Barney boy goes with him. If not we must light our torches, grab our pitchforks and chase the other half out of Washington.

Posted by: hkdakota | January 6, 2010, 10:34 am 10:34 am

I was watching a local T.V. show last night called 207, when a banking expert said, in his opinion, the economy will greatly improve in 2010.
In other words, this time next year, our country will be back on the right track. Speaking as one of the people who choose Barack Obama as our President, I wake up every morning greatly relieved the Republicans are out of power.

Posted by: Amy in Maine | January 6, 2010, 10:37 am 10:37 am

jhw539 —- Obama delayed Bush’s 21,000 troop agreement to “assess” the Afghanistan situation. Bush made the huge mistake of allowing NATO and UN troops to take care of Afghanistan when clearly we should have finished it ourselves. Bush did authorize 21,000 and had sent 6,00 of them as Obama came in office. Then there was a delay which lasted until Obama made a decision after 10 months in office to send more troops. I don’t hate Obama, I have just lost all faith i him with the lies. What ever happened to his 10 year plan to get us off our complete dependence on foreign oil? You remember his “10 year plan” right? Where is it?

Posted by: lfrichar | January 6, 2010, 10:37 am 10:37 am

Chris Dodd should be in an orange jump suit picking up trash on the highways

Posted by: Peter King | January 6, 2010, 10:41 am 10:41 am

Maybe Obama will take the hint and announce his step down from the office.

Posted by: Jim Rod | January 6, 2010, 10:43 am 10:43 am

jhw:Keep on defending the guy. I admire you for your loyalty. I agree most bills are not done openly but the problem is Obama ran on this platform of transpaency. He said CSPAN would be allowed to cover the health care bill process from start to finish througout his campain. The fact is he is a liar and the american people cant trust a liar. In fact, he is still trying to push this bill without conference. You know this is a desperate move and that is why the public has had enough of these sneaky tactics and is the main reason these cowardly senators are retiring. They know it is a bad bill and are trying leave the american people with a bill that will break this country. The cost of medicaid to the states will break them financially except for Nebraska of course.

Posted by: Lester | January 6, 2010, 10:45 am 10:45 am

lfrichar, Daniel- health care is not going to be ruined by the Democrats. Especailly the ones that that are true liberal and believe in a single payer or public/govt. run insurance option. Health care was ruined because it was stripped and all the importnat stuff was taken out to appease 2-3 moderate dems and Lieberman (who would never allow govt. option when he’s from the state filled with insurance companies). Here’s one point no one mentions- We already have a public option- it’s called the emergency room. They can’t refuse care so people with on insuracnce go when their problems reach a tipping point. Would it be cheaper to cover them early or when thr problem reaches an emergency? Either way the taxpayers are paying, so why not pay less.

Posted by: DSchles33 | January 6, 2010, 10:47 am 10:47 am

timbo is right on in his analysis. dorgan was a loss for dems, dodd was a gain for dems. as a conservative who can’t stand the congress or the administration’s ideology and shoddy and corrupt governance, i wish dodd was still in. he would have lost the seat and made a lot of people look foolish for campaigning for him. conservatives should quit gloating, in any case. it confirms the suspicions of many moderates of ugliness. There was a republican once who won a big war. instead of gloating, he said, “with malice towards none.” if our ideas, thinking, compassion and strategies are better, let’s prove it but in any case stand down with the nastiness.

Posted by: Luke Liberty | January 6, 2010, 10:48 am 10:48 am

“”"”"Inviting the Republicans into these final negotiations would be like inviting President Ahmadinejad to an interfaith dialogue between Christians and Jews.”"”"”"
Posted by: jhw539
You do understand the word “representation” do you not? Right now, what the Dems are doing is in direct violation of what our country stands for. The majority of Americans do not want this health care bill, period. Yet, Pelosi is allowed to do what she wishes to pass it. Then, we are required by law to pay for it with absolutely zero benefits for 3 years. As for transparency, guests lists and false numbers (lies) on a web site do not spell transparency. Spending $1.2 trillion with only Democrats involved, giving bribes and favors, behind closed doors pretty much shoots transparency in the @$$, don’t you think? We all need to hold our representatives to their promises or vote them out ASAP. Transparency, Gitmo, unemployment, Iraq, pork spending, business as usual, no lobbyist or special interest in Obama’s administration were all lies in his campaign and he has expended 25% of his time in office already. His change is shown in his approval rating.

Posted by: lfrichar | January 6, 2010, 10:50 am 10:50 am

jwh, Comparing previous administrations’ transparency to President Obama’s is comparing the ability of kittens to build nukes to those of scientists. Claiming transparency against the low benchmarks we have in history is d**ing with faint praise.
Yes, the Republicans held rank against something they opposed. Didn’t the Democrats hold rank against something they wanted? What’s the difference when one party holds together versus another which holds together? You are condemning Republicans for doing the same thing as Democrats. Of course, some of the Democrats had to be bribed to keep them in lock-step.
As for Republicans voting no so stubbornly about health reform…I agree with you to a point.
But please tell me ONE thing the Republicans wanted that was accepted by the Democrats. Tort reform? A mention that they might consider a test pilot something or other…I don’t call that inclusion. Do you?
Dropping public opiton? That decision was made to keep Democrats on board. Not because the Democrats cared one teensy bit about Republicans.
Face it, the Democrats have completely ignored all Republican suggestions; only granting what pleased the Republicans to keep the Democrats with the same views from bailing.
The promise of bi-partisonship made by President Obama was a sham. He knew all he had to do was keep the Democrats in line. And that’s what happened with sweetheart deals, arm-twisting, and the desire to be ‘part of history’.
As for combining the 2 bills. The Democrats have chosen to break with traditional, time-honored processes to rush through what THEY want. Think about this: Democrats live in areas served by Republicans in the HOR and Senate. Excluding those Representatives and Senators ignores the voice of those Democratic citizens along with the Republican and independents; citizens who may not want what comes out of this exclusionary process.
I hope future Congresses and administrations don’t continue this behavior. Instead of the USA we have always been, we will become no better than other countries where the party in power suppresses all others.

Posted by: malcat | January 6, 2010, 10:53 am 10:53 am

The US has the worst governmental system – except for all the other options.
———-
Now on that we can definitely agree, jhw! I hope and pray we are not seeing some fundamental changes that will make it less than what the USA has ever been.

Posted by: malcat | January 6, 2010, 10:57 am 10:57 am

None of thse retirements or decisions not to run again are truly catastrophic for the Dems.
Dorgan and Ritter were going to lose anyway, and Dodd’s exit means the Dems can now field a viable candidate in that race against a weak Republican.

Posted by: matt | January 6, 2010, 10:57 am 10:57 am

Good riddance to Dodd, the King of Corrupt while the Democratic party again has everything handed to them on a silver platter by the voters and again they blow it big time with inside fighting and general stupidity running rampant in the US Government in General.

Posted by: CC | January 6, 2010, 10:57 am 10:57 am

“”"”" Either way the taxpayers are paying, so why not pay less. “”"”"
Posted by: DSchles33
Do you believe in a “deficit neutral” $1.2 trillion bill? Do you trust your government to fulfill its’ promise? IF this were truly deficit neutral, then why not make it immediately mandatory that nobody can be seen in an emergrncy room without insurance? This would upset the illegals. IF our health care costs are too high and rising, how is a “government subsidized insurance program” going to lower those costs? As the costs continue to rise, insurance companies will fall and the subsidies will rise creating a huge cost incrase to our government which will far exceed the government estimate of $1.2 trillion. You might trust them, but I don’t.

Posted by: lfrichar | January 6, 2010, 10:59 am 10:59 am

How about recruiting all those quitters for the ABC’s “Dancing with the Senators” special edition? They will be allowed to do all the backstage deals on who will be voted out and who proceeds to the next round. Harry Read should be one of the judges…

Posted by: H1N1Hysteria | January 6, 2010, 11:01 am 11:01 am

the rats always jump from a sinking ship and they are starting. the whole of congress and everyone else up there that crooked will be voted out next election. If anyone thinks the American people are going to standby and let mr obama and all his cronies destroy this wonderful country, they are wrong, and ms peloishi better get her a new car so she can learn to drive to work instead of fly and cost America a fortune a day flying a plane as big as mr obama’s. let her buy her own gas and car if she wants the job. she’ one of them thats in the big crook of the show,no knowing if she is standing or setting. every time she opens her mouth she in trouble. i think the people know more about the government than her. how did she get put in that position anyway. or why does mrs obama have to have 22 assistance. i just guess people can’t remember things anymore and need the help keeping lies straight

Posted by: brendadav | January 6, 2010, 11:01 am 11:01 am

Obama said, no less than 8 times, that he would allow people to see their representatives (House and Senate) working for them on CSPAN. TRANSPARECY – ha! He chided the Clintons for working on healthcare behind closed doors. So, not only is he a liar, but he is also a hypocrit.

Posted by: deanbob | January 6, 2010, 11:01 am 11:01 am

The fragmentation of both major political parties could be a boon to many Americans disenfranchised by the two-party system, including progressives weary of an increasingly centrist Democratic party. Here’s hoping that it spurs the push for proportionate representation rather than winner-take-all.

Posted by: Yukon Sam | January 6, 2010, 11:04 am 11:04 am

Bloomberg article Jan. 4th 2010 – The Mayo Clinic, praised by President Barack Obama as a national model for efficient health care, will stop accepting Medicare patients as of tomorrow at one of its primary-care clinics in Arizona, saying the U.S. government pays too little.
**********

Posted by: wheresmymoney | January 6, 2010, 11:09 am 11:09 am

Outstanding! Now we need to get rid of Pelosi and Reid, among others.

Posted by: JustMe | January 6, 2010, 11:13 am 11:13 am

We who are responding represent the 20% of the nation that pays attention to this sort of thing, so I’m not sure how this signals anything. It could be bad for Dems in the sense that on down-year elections the opposition has a tendency to show up at the polls more, but that’s natural. My guess is we will never see “true” dominance anymore by either party and we’ll go through this cycle every 2 years.

Posted by: Disopants | January 6, 2010, 11:17 am 11:17 am

Good riddance.

Posted by: CW | January 6, 2010, 11:21 am 11:21 am

I have never seen people so excited about a midterm election in my life. Let the games begin! :)

Posted by: Alex | January 6, 2010, 11:24 am 11:24 am

Sounds like they are draining the swamp on their own.

Posted by: jamescbuilder | January 6, 2010, 11:26 am 11:26 am

HEY BRIAN leave old BARNEY alone.he may have had a bad[slick] nite..

Posted by: paws 7000 | January 6, 2010, 11:27 am 11:27 am

I was really hoping for a Peter Schiff vs. Chris Dodd debate. Peter would have torn him to pieces, verbally of course.

Posted by: Huh | January 6, 2010, 11:29 am 11:29 am

But please tell me ONE thing the Republicans wanted that was accepted by the Democrats. …
Dropping public opiton? That decision was made to keep Democrats on board. Not because the Democrats cared one teensy bit about Republicans.”
malcat | Jan 6, 2010 10:53:08 AM
If ANY Republicans supported a public option, it would not have been dropped. Period. The public option was doomed by Republican’s universal opposition to the bill. That’s why it survived in the House (with not filibuster) but died in the Senate, where Democrats only have 58 seats + Joe “Vote for McCain” Lieberman, not enough to overcome the perpetual Republican Filibuster Of Everything (they set a third consecutive record for Most Filibusters Ever).
But there is no point debating if you brush away even a huge concession to Republicans (and their constituents) as nothing since one or two Democrats wanted it…

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 11:29 am 11:29 am

Outstanding! Now we need to get rid of Pelosi and Reid, among others.
————
From BOTH parties!

Posted by: malcat | January 6, 2010, 11:30 am 11:30 am

AMY IN MAINE I was watching [local] tv last nite and they said all dogs should have facelift.how ever it was a paid commercial.

Posted by: paws 7000 | January 6, 2010, 11:31 am 11:31 am

“I have been a registered Dem all my life”
This is the latest gimmick being posted by right wingnuts to promote the hype that Dems are in trouble.
I recall that 2 GOP congressmen announced their retirement last week.

Posted by: New Wave | January 6, 2010, 11:33 am 11:33 am

Good riddence. Can’t he leave now?

Posted by: Tyrone | January 6, 2010, 11:35 am 11:35 am

That’s a couple of Socialists out, but their removal will not do us much good if they are replaced by more Socialists or RINOs. We need honest constitutional conservatives in those spots. Vote them all out and replace them.

Posted by: Suz | January 6, 2010, 11:37 am 11:37 am

Now if only Barney Frank and Chuck Schumer would pack it in. I don’t care if their replacements are Democrats…these jerks need to go along and become soda jerks or something.

Posted by: david | January 6, 2010, 11:40 am 11:40 am

But there is no point debating if you brush away even a huge concession to Republicans (and their constituents) as nothing since one or two Democrats wanted it…
————–
jhw, But Republicans didn’t want the public option. I’m sorry that I did not make myself clear on that. Let me see if I can express myself better.
I first listed something (tort reform) that was ‘sort of’ added to please Republicans. It’s the only thing I can think of. Do you know of anything else?
And then I listed public option as an example that was removed…but it was not removed because the Republicans didn’t want it, but removed because some Democrats did not want it.
Was there anything removed that ONLY Republicans wanted out? I can’t think of anything.
Once again, you are condemning the Rs for sticking together when the Ds did the very same thing.
I think the Congressional leaders and President Obama need to consider the possibility that some Republicans may have heard from constituents during the holiday break and just might be willing to change their vote.
Apparently, all have decided it isn’t important or it’s not worth the risk.

Posted by: malcat | January 6, 2010, 11:41 am 11:41 am

And that’s still a lie. Posted by: jhw539
********
I posted the FACTS the other night. You can still google it. The only lie is from Obama. How many does that make? They are getting too large to count. Have you seen that he said no less than 8 times that healthcare discussions would be aired on C-Span?

Posted by: wheresmymoney | January 6, 2010, 11:43 am 11:43 am

ABC news are you going to investigate why Obama and the Dems continue to lie to the American people.I know you have that C-Span promise that you ran for Obama several times during the elections,I would like to see it again.Joe Wilson was right to call the President a liar,Obama’s actions have made the case for him over and over again.

Posted by: Johnny L | January 6, 2010, 11:52 am 11:52 am

I first listed something (tort reform) that was ‘sort of’ added to please Republicans. It’s the only thing I can think of. Do you know of anything else?
And then I listed public option as an example that was removed…but it was not removed because the Republicans didn’t want it, but removed because some Democrats did not want it.
…
Once again, you are condemning the Rs for sticking together when the Ds did the very same thing.
malcat | Jan 6, 2010 11:41:06 AM
The D’s stick together? Are you serious? When was the last time the D’s rallyed a full 100% party line vote in Congress? How many YEARS do you have to go back?
It’s no win with you – every single concession is ONLY because the Democrats allow it, therefore none of them count. The public option was pulled because the unanimous Republican opposition to it was heard (particularly by Senator Nelson, who represents a state that voted for McCain first and Democrats second). And since Democrats are in control of Congress (when Joe “Vote for McCain” Lieberman feels like it), by your logic EVERY concession made to Republicans is because a Democrat wanted it.

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 11:56 am 11:56 am

I posted the FACTS the other night. You can still google it. The only lie is from Obama.
wheresmymoney | Jan 6, 2010 11:43:03 AM
Not worth my time. I invite anyone who cares to hit the fact check pages. Obama NEVER promised to veto the defense bill if it included earmarks, a defined type of budgetary clause that has been used in every defense bill for the last 20 years (probably since FDR) has. And don’t believe earnest paraphrases from partisan hacks – find Obama’s actual words.

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 11:58 am 11:58 am

Now, THIS is change i can believe in!!! Thank you Obama for bringing this about!

Posted by: ncpilot09 | January 6, 2010, 11:58 am 11:58 am

Thank you Obama for bringing this about!
ncpilot09 | Jan 6, 2010 11:58:49 AM
You more likely have Tim Kaine to thank. I doubt Obama (or more accurately his staff) had to provide any encouragement for this standard party housecleaning (Chris Dodd went far easier than the Republican’s dead-man-walking Jim Bunning did).

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 12:03 pm 12:03 pm

jhw539: No matter the number of facts you present, the GOP wingnuts will keep going round in circles.
I have since realized that their trade is to engage in circular debate regardless of the facts presented to them.

Posted by: New Wave | January 6, 2010, 12:04 pm 12:04 pm

Nope…this is directly on the plate of Obama for exposing to what levels he will stoop to get a “statue” built to his own ego…i.e., the arm-twisting and bribery used to get the 60 votes in the senate to pass a “health care reform” bill by Christmas Eve. The sole purpose of this bill is for his legacy. He refused to allow his senators to listen to their constituency…and overwhelming majority of whom do NOT want this “reform”. That shows many of us that this president does NOT care what the people want…he’s forgotten that, historically, the president works FOR the people. He prefes to consider himself above that…I think he considers himself an emporer. And I think that the American people…at least the moderates that got him into office are starting to realize that also. And his constant blaming someone for bad things while garnishing credit for any good things just emphasises that point. I know you won’t agree, and I suppose you’ll go into your typical attack mode….but, in my opinion, you on the extreme left are now swimming against the current…..

Posted by: ncpilot09 | January 6, 2010, 12:13 pm 12:13 pm

Here’s a perfect example of what we’re talking about. This story is about Dodd’s calling it quits. A typical respons was posted just a minute or two ago: “(Chris Dodd went far easier than the Republican’s dead-man-walking Jim Bunning did)” Ever since Obama has been in office, you guys make excuses for the left by defining what you consider to be faults of the right. (“yeah, but Bush”, “yeah, but cheney”…yeah, but McCain” And it continues right into this discussion: “Year, but Jim Bunning…” I guess when your side has no character, then you must attempt to destroy the character of those who disagree with your side……happens every time. You might not have like George Bush, but one thing is for certain: He stood by his principles, and I never heard him once lay blame at his ‘failings’ on Clinton. He took responsibility. You oughta get your guy to try that once in a while…then he might start getting some respect from the other side of the aisle and around the world
“

Posted by: ncpilot09 | January 6, 2010, 12:19 pm 12:19 pm

I wonder how many democratic posters here also thought the titanic couldn’t sink. Of course I suppose most are blinded by colour and there are none so blind as them that will not see.

Posted by: anitlaen2 | January 6, 2010, 12:19 pm 12:19 pm

Virtually every poll shows support for democrats including Obama dropping, and for those who think this has nothing to do with a preceived drop in support for democratic policies are correct. The drop is due to ACTUAL drop in support for their policies.

Posted by: jonny | January 6, 2010, 12:22 pm 12:22 pm

Flash back to 2005/06. Despite all the problems 9/11/Hurricanes our economy was doing well. Really it was. Now 2006 instead of split majority – it was and still is Democratic controlled congress. Since then nothing but problems. This is true look it up. But to solve the problem – everyone that has been in office Dem/Rep/Lib/Cons – MUST GO. That simple. You can’t work together so you should not work at all.

Posted by: emw511 | January 6, 2010, 12:22 pm 12:22 pm

so did Obama really believe all that transparency bull when he was running? Did he know he would be nothing more than Pelosi’s lap dog on a 6″ leash? (this is what happens when you play chutes and ladders in congress and propell a FRESHMAN senator to the presidency!)

Posted by: cindy | January 6, 2010, 12:23 pm 12:23 pm

jhw..dead man walking? Surely you mean Robert C Byrd!

Posted by: cindy | January 6, 2010, 12:25 pm 12:25 pm

So Deeds and Corzine should be the Governors of their respective states? Oh wait they lost and they lost big. You can always teach english in Iraq.

Posted by: Joe Doakes | January 6, 2010, 12:27 pm 12:27 pm

He should have been voted out 20 years ago. Instaed people make these rhinos lifers in the houses. Then we get into a stale leadership because they are eventuly lobbied into a buy off.

Posted by: Jim Rod | January 6, 2010, 12:29 pm 12:29 pm

8th paragraph before mention of the FACT that more Republicans are leaving the Senate than Democrats?! This is not reporting, it’s propaganda. Shame on you, ABC.

Posted by: Andrew | January 6, 2010, 12:37 pm 12:37 pm

I think this should be a lesson to all of us. Whether you are a Democrat/Republican/Independent, this a perfect example of how our votes REALLY matters. We all know Dodd is stepping down because is seat is in jeopardy. Now, I am not attacking him ( I am a Democrat) but, he realizes instead of losing miserably I can just retire and save face. Obviously, his constituents will be unsatisfied with his efforts thus far. So, continue to let your vote be heard on any election day.

Posted by: T-ROC | January 6, 2010, 12:40 pm 12:40 pm

When Obama was elected, I read a number of columns suggesting that the country had chosen to make a turn to the left. But now, as many of us figured, it has become painfully obvious that there was no such shift, and the American people are tired of the new far-left approach. The 2010 elections will verify this.

Posted by: Steve from Wisconsin | January 6, 2010, 12:46 pm 12:46 pm

Chris Doddd needs to take Harry reid with him. Harry has no chance.

Posted by: Larry Coker | January 6, 2010, 12:46 pm 12:46 pm

The D’s stick together? Are you serious? When was the last time the D’s rallyed a full 100% party line vote in Congress? How many YEARS do you have to go back?
It’s no win with you – every single concession is ONLY because the Democrats allow it, therefore none of them count. The public option was pulled because the unanimous Republican opposition to it was heard (particularly by Senator Nelson, who represents a state that voted for McCain first and Democrats second). And since Democrats are in control of Congress (when Joe “Vote for McCain” Lieberman feels like it), by your logic EVERY concession made to Republicans is because a Democrat wanted it.
————
jhw, Did not every Democratic Senator vote for the health reform bill that was passed? I call that sticking together. Some of those senators wanted the public option, didn’t they? But those senators forced their fellow Democrats to drop the public option, right? Why blame the Republicans for not voting for something that NONE of them wanted instead of the Democrats that caved in to party pressure?
The public option being dropped by the Senate was something the Republicans wanted dropped…one concession.
What if the numbers in Congress were reversed and Republicans felt compelled to fix health insurance? What if the Republicans told the Democrats: “We’ll agree to eliminating pre-existing limitations”? Now, the Democrats loathed everything else about the bill; no public option, no control on premiums, higher premiums for pre-existing (no limits mentioned), insurance companies would control EVERYTHING just the way it is today. AND a piece of the bill tried to prevent any future Congress from changing the law.
How would you feel if the Democrats voted for the bill without reading it, with no televised debates, closed meetings by the Republicans? He/she simply caved into the Republicans just to eliminate pre-existing limitations.
That’s the type of thing you want some Republicans to do. One concession (although a biggee) but they are supposed to give in on a bill that they believe is flawed.
You say it’s a no-win with me? The truth is: I want health insurance reform BADLY. And I know a lot of Republicans that agree with me.
The conflict is in the details. I (and many Republican members of Congress) do not believe that these 2 bills, even when merged will be sustainable. We want a plan that will last more than a few years before driving the country deeper into debt. What happens when the program has to be drastically cut back or disolved?
If Democrats (elected and citizen) would stop demonizing Republicans and actually LISTEN to us, you will find us no different than you. We love this country and want it to succeed just as much as you do, regardless of who holds control of Congress or the WH. We just have different opinions of how best to do some things.

Posted by: malcat | January 6, 2010, 12:48 pm 12:48 pm

A typical respons was posted just a minute or two ago: “(Chris Dodd went far easier than the Republican’s dead-man-walking Jim Bunning did)” Ever since Obama has been in office, you guys make excuses for the left by defining what you consider to be faults of the right. (“yeah, but Bush”,
ncpilot09 | Jan 6, 2010 12:19:42 PM
Uh, I didn’t bring up Bush, but thanks for quoting a parenthetical aside from an offhand remark about political apparatus (which is actually pretty interesting regardless of side). Not sure what that is an example of exactly, but wow – Republicans really want us to forget their top leader who implemented many of their core planks (tax cuts for the rich to ‘create jobs’, a ‘bring it on’ preemptive foreign policy, etc) for the last 8 years don’t they? Maybe rather than hoping we forget how the neocon ideas failed utterly, they should come up with new ideas? Just a thought.

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 12:55 pm 12:55 pm

From Gallup:
Barack Obama begins his second year as president with 50% of Americans approving and 44% disapproving of his overall job performance. Though similar to his late 2009 ratings, THIS IS ONE OF THE LOWEST ratings for a president at the start of his second year — on par with Ronald Reagan’s in 1982.

Posted by: ajax | January 6, 2010, 12:57 pm 12:57 pm

Flash back to 2005/06. Despite all the problems 9/11/Hurricanes our economy was doing well. Really it was.
emw511 | Jan 6, 2010 12:22:46 PM
Better use a fuzzy lens on that flash back because if you bother to look up the hard numbers on job creation or income growth for everyone but the top quintile, they are historical lows eclipsed only by the depression and other Bush years (including Bush Sr oddly enough).

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 1:00 pm 1:00 pm

What if the numbers in Congress were reversed and Republicans felt compelled to fix health insurance?
malcat | Jan 6, 2010 12:48:58 PM
What if Republicans wanted to reform Welfare led by a guy with the same name as a slimy lizard? Oh yeah – that really happened and the Democrats compromised, won a few minor concessions and in return for the concessions voted for the bill.
What about if a Republican President just off the tightest election seen in America ever wanted to push through over a trillion dollars in deficit-funded tax cuts for the rich? Oh yeah, that happened and bowing to tradition the Senate Democrats accepted the electoral mandate and didn’t filibuster.
What if Republicans didn’t have a paranoid persecution complex unsupported by all documented reality? Well, I can’t even guess what that would be like.

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 1:03 pm 1:03 pm

Barack Obama begins his second year as president with 50% of Americans approving and 44% disapproving of his overall job performance. Though similar to his late 2009 ratings, THIS IS ONE OF THE LOWEST ratings for a president at the start of his second year — on par with Ronald Reagan’s in 1982.
——–
Ajax, give the president a break here. He is trying to deal with 2 wars, a deplorable economy, waaaay too ambitious agenda from the start, and a bunch of ‘whining’ citizens that actually believed his campaign promises AND demand he live up to them.
I think he needs to face reality and try the suggestion: Do one thing, do it well, and move on…to the next.

Posted by: malcat | January 6, 2010, 1:04 pm 1:04 pm

People did not vote for this agenda in the first place. As usual the liberals/progressive/marxists have to hide behind conservative positions while running. They know they can’t stand the light of day on what they really want to accomplish.
Obama said he would not raise taxes, he said he would have a transparent administration, he said he would not spend like Bush, he said he would make our country more secure. He lied on all these positions and more will come.
Democrats live in the world of lies.

Posted by: Freedom and liberty | January 6, 2010, 1:06 pm 1:06 pm

How would you feel if the Democrats voted for the bill without reading it, with no televised debates, closed meetings by the Republicans? He/she simply caved into the Republicans just to eliminate pre-existing limitations.
That’s the type of thing you want some Republicans to do.
malcat | Jan 6, 2010 12:48:58 PM
And hundreds of hours of debate have been televised, Republicans who showed the vaugest willingness to accept compromise were courted with months of meetings in the Senate and personal calls from the President, and any Senator who votes for either bill without knowing what is in is derelict in their duty – both the Senate and House bills have been posted for weeks, and review of the conference committee changes is a matter of hours, even if they don’t use their staff of dozens of lawyers to help out.
You are creating a paranoid fantasy land that just doesn’t hold up to documented reality.

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 1:06 pm 1:06 pm

No, we don’t want anyone for foget Bush and his issues. Nor do we want anyone to forget his successes. What we DO want is for the current president to stand on his own, succeed or fail, and stop blaming everyone else. We, as Americans, are quite frankly tired of his blame game. I’m not positive, but I believe that Obama has yet to make any kind of speech concerning our nation in which he did not lob a blame at someone other than his administration. It’s just plain childish and starting to become quite boorish. And, by the way…did YOU look up the income growth/job creation of the first 6 years of Bush? Perhaps your advice would be well spent on youself

Posted by: ncpilot09 | January 6, 2010, 1:07 pm 1:07 pm

People did not vote for this agenda in the first place.
Freedom and liberty | Jan 6, 2010 1:06:29 PM
? Health care was front and center in the debates and the Democrats are hewing pretty closely to their well-publicized positions. The only legitimate beef is that they ran on being much MORE liberal than reality (and a few bought Senators) allows.
Obama has been pretty meticulous in moving towards to the policy goals he stated in the election, and no one sane is surprised he’s not 100% there after less than a year.

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 1:11 pm 1:11 pm

And, by the way…did YOU look up the income growth/job creation of the first 6 years of Bush? Perhaps your advice would be well spent on youself
ncpilot09 | Jan 6, 2010 1:07:49 PM
Do share the numbers from the first 6 years of Bush’s term (when his trillion dollar deficit funded tax cuts goosed the economy). Include the citation too.
Even cherry picked it would be nice to see some actual data from the Right for once.
Are you going to include his deficit numbers too?

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 1:14 pm 1:14 pm

What if Republicans didn’t have a paranoid persecution complex unsupported by all documented reality? Well, I can’t even guess what that would be like.
——-
jhw, you keep responding to me with examples not relevant to my post.
I asked how you would feel if the conditions surrounding health insurance reform were different.
I would really enjoy hearing your response to the issues of that post.
How would you feel if what I described was reality?

Posted by: malcat | January 6, 2010, 1:15 pm 1:15 pm

Good riddens as he was nothing but a fake, fraud and lier. He won`t be missed by me……..

Posted by: DON | January 6, 2010, 1:21 pm 1:21 pm

I asked how you would feel if the conditions surrounding health insurance reform were different.
I would really enjoy hearing your response to the issues of that post.
How would you feel if what I described was reality?
malcat | Jan 6, 2010 1:15:28 PM
I would feel fine. Annoyed at being in the minority, but I would accept the pragmatic positions being taken to get some of my main concerns addressed.
And we don’t have to play make believe – THE EXAMPLES I CITED ARE ALMOST IDENTICAL SITUATIONS. Democrats have been in the minority position on major, major policy change and they behaved far more reasonably. Welfare reform by the Republican Congress was a HUGE deal. Read up on it if you didn’t live it.
The bad faith negotiation by Republicans on the stimulus is unprecedented (when you get a big concession, the traditional return is you provide your vote – that’s the trade) and is a very legitimate reason why they now cut out. And really should have been cut out before they strung along Baucus and wasted months in the Senate moving the goal posts.

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 1:22 pm 1:22 pm

And don’t believe earnest paraphrases from partisan hacks – find Obama’s actual words.
Posted by: jhw539 |
********
I printed the same item the other night. Take off your Obama goggles. Look up the speech. HIS OWN WORDS:
On Aug. 17 at the Veterans of Foreign Wars in Phoenix, President Barack Obama gave waste and pork in the defense budget a thorough tongue lashing.
Then he delivered the hammer: “And if Congress sends me a defense bill loaded with this kind of waste, I will veto it.”

Posted by: wheresmymoney | January 6, 2010, 1:27 pm 1:27 pm

And hundreds of hours of debate have been televised, Republicans who showed the vaugest willingness to accept compromise were courted with months of meetings in the Senate and personal calls from the President
—————-
Courting of Republicans: Yes, several Republicans were approached. I have a feeling those approaches consisted of something like this:
President or Congressional Democrat: “We want you to be part of this historic event of reforming health insurance availability. Please vote with the majority so that all Americans can have health insurance.”
Republican to Approacher: “What type of concessions will you give me so that my constituents will approve my voting with Democrats?”
Approacher: “Well, nothing really, but you DO get to be part of this historic moment.”
Approachee: “I’m sorry, but I don’t approve of a lot that’s in the bill.”
Approacher: “Tough, you vote our way or you will be cut out of it all.”
Approachee: “Well, if you’re going to be that way, I’ll stick with my principles.”
Approaching someone is be nice; treating someone as an equal is how to win others to your side.

Posted by: malcat | January 6, 2010, 1:30 pm 1:30 pm

On Aug. 17 at the Veterans of Foreign Wars in Phoenix, President Barack Obama gave waste and pork in the defense budget a thorough tongue lashing.
Then he delivered the hammer: “And if Congress sends me a defense bill loaded with this kind of waste, I will veto it.”
wheresmymoney | Jan 6, 2010 1:27:47 PM
AND WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH EARMARKS? You can have your own opinion, but at least stick to English. Obama didn’t even guarantee to veto a bill with pork (a completely undefined bumpersticker term in this context). You said he promised to veto the defense bill if it contained earmarks, then provide a quote where he clearly does no such thing and think that proof?
You have clearly illustrated EXACTLY why I said people should not trust the paraphrases of partisan hacks. (For anyone who cares, that includes googling up the paragraph that Obama quote was pulled for to read for yourself how Obama clearly and specifically defined wasteful spending – NEVER ONCE REFERRING TO EARMARKS, which are a defined budget vehicle).

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 1:33 pm 1:33 pm

and any Senator who votes for either bill without knowing what is in is derelict in their duty – both the Senate and House bills have been posted for weeks, and review of the conference committee changes is a matter of hours, even if they don’t use their staff of dozens of lawyers to help out.
——-
jwh, the bills were passed in December. The Senate and House bills were being modified throughout the debates, closed meetings, and almost up to the final votes.
What happened to posting all bills days before the vote with NO changes allowed?
So, you DO believe that any Senator who votes FOR a bill without knowing what is in it is derelict in their duty.
See, something else about which we agree…adding HOR Representatives though.

Posted by: malcat | January 6, 2010, 1:35 pm 1:35 pm

Approaching someone is be nice; treating someone as an equal is how to win others to your side.
malcat | Jan 6, 2010 1:30:35 PM
The concrete concessions offered by Democrats are well known and extensive, even if you write them off because one Democrat (from a Red state) and an Independent (who very actively campaigned for McCain in 2008) wanted some of them too.

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 1:41 pm 1:41 pm

So, you DO believe that any Senator who votes FOR a bill without knowing what is in it is derelict in their duty.
See, something else about which we agree…adding HOR Representatives though.
malcat | Jan 6, 2010 1:35:59 PM
But we clearly disagree on what “knowing what is in it” means. Frankly, I would say a Senator who has only received a thorough briefing and summary page from his large staff of lawyers and wonks better knows what is in the bill than one who just read the whole thing verbatim. That’s how every successful private company operates too – the CEO never reads the minutia of even the biggest contract.
Your claim they were modified “almost” up to the final vote by debate (at least you accept the documented reality that there’s been a great deal of debate that has resulted in modifications to the bill) leaves out the fact that the time between the final modifications and the final vote was enough for a competent legislator – who kept up on the legislation and knew the key points of concern – was enough for them to know what they voted for.
This isn’t a Patriot Act slide, this is a bill that has been formed by more debate than any in the last 40 years. The insinuation it is rushed is absurd.

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 1:45 pm 1:45 pm

Approachee: “I’m sorry, but I don’t approve of a lot that’s in the bill.”
Approacher: “Tough, you vote our way or you will be cut out of it all.”
Approachee: “Well, if you’re going to be that way, I’ll stick with my principles.”
Approaching someone is be nice; treating someone as an equal is how to win others to your side.
malcat | Jan 6, 2010 1:30:35 PM
And politics isn’t nice, never has been. Look at what some Democrats had to swallow in the Welfare reform process led by ‘treat you as equals’ (hah!) Newt…

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 1:48 pm 1:48 pm

Posted by: New Wave | January 6, 2010, 1:52 pm 1:52 pm

jwh, we apparently are not going to agree. You seem unable or unwilling to understand what I’m saying.
I described a monstrosity of health insurance reform that did nothing to control health costs, premiums, control insurance companies in any way but force them to cover pre-existing conditions without limitations WHILE allowing them to charge increased premiums for that coverage.
The truth is: almost every major insurance companies do cover pre-existing conditions NOW with some delay such as 6-months after policy is accepted. They do so by..wait for it….charging HIGHER premiums.
You say you would be fine with that. I would NOT! What a disgusting sham any such bill would be. And any Democrat that voted for such a piece of c*r*a*p would be voted out of office and kicked out of the party. He/she would be lucky not to be shot by some far-left lunatic.
But, it looks like we can’t agree. So I’ll close the discussion. Thanks for the chat.

Posted by: malcat | January 6, 2010, 1:55 pm 1:55 pm

In addition to jhw539′s example, we can also recall how the GOP passed the medicare bill under Tom Delay.
The GOP were openly offering bribes to their congressmen on the floor while keeping the vote open for a lot longer than the house rules allowed.
————-
New Wave and jhw, quoting the failings of previous administrations doesn’t support your cause that this administration is justified to do the same thing.
If you thought what the Republicans did was so terrible, why support the Democrats for doing the same thing?
That logic is like children caught fighting. The second one to throw a punch usually yells “he hit me first”.
Politicians are no better. And those who support the second punch aren’t either.
I am a Republican, but I do not blindly condone everything my party’s elected representatives do.
What you said in the quote I pasted above…I deplored that activity. It was wrong. And I don’t think they had the right to do it because sometime in the past the Democrats did it and before that the Republicans did it and … And the Democrats have no right to ‘get even’ either.
I don’t know about you, but I expect better of all Presidents and Congressional representatives. It makes no difference to me if they are Rs or Ds or members of any or no ‘party’.
None get a pass because ‘he did it first’.

Posted by: malcat | January 6, 2010, 2:07 pm 2:07 pm

You say you would be fine with that. I would NOT! What a disgusting sham any such bill would be.
malcat | Jan 6, 2010 1:55:09 PM
I do not agree with your technical and legal interpretation of the bill or even the current documented situation (neither does the CBO or Mayo clinic), so we disagree on the facts. May as well be debating religion.

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 2:07 pm 2:07 pm

NEVER ONCE REFERRING TO EARMARKS, which are a defined budget vehicle).
Posted by: jhw539 |
********
You may try and separate “earmarks and pork” but they are both doing the same thing. Stealing taxpayers’ money.

Posted by: wheresmymoney | January 6, 2010, 2:18 pm 2:18 pm

For this president and his administration to be the “wave of the future”, the “new face of America”, the “most open, bi-partisan ever”, they sure do look back into the past when something they try to accomplish fails. How much longer do we have to listen to “well, Bush did this…” “Bush didn’t do that…” “Bush spent to much/Bush didn’t spend enough…” and so on and so on. We already know what the Bush era was about. We lived through it, worked through it, read about it, watched it. But that was Bush. THIS is Obama. He is a Democrat president with a Democrat Congress. If they are incapable of getting done whatever they want to, it’s not the Republican’s fault, it is their own. They seem to think every bill, every new policy, every new idea they have is the best one ever, and the public REALLY WANTS IT. So, why drag their feet? Pass the bills. Who needs the Republicans, right? Great bill, great public support, great Congress, great President… just vote it through!! All hail the Great Obama! And Pelosi, and Reid, and Frank, and Dodd (oh, wait, I forgot, he’s kinda like Sarah Palin now right? You know, a quitter.)

Posted by: Shoe | January 6, 2010, 3:15 pm 3:15 pm

This country has stage 4 economic cancer. Obama and the democrats are handing out free cigarettes and anti-depressants so we can face the end quickly and without jitters. The republicans say they would start the chemo, but will they really? Are Americans too soft to fight back and face serious pain? Is this American experiment still worth fighting for? And the most impt question: is there a realistic chance we can survive?

Posted by: cindy | January 6, 2010, 3:29 pm 3:29 pm

shoe: The reason for the ‘Bush did this and Bush did that’ statements is that GOPers are critisizing President Obama for things that they never had a second thought when President Bush was in office.
In most of the cases, even the Dems did not criticize Bush for them then. An example is the way the GOP politicized the latest terrorist attempt. I do not recall anyone blaming Bush for 9/11. Do you?
So pointing out the staggering hypocrisy is in order.

Posted by: New Wave | January 6, 2010, 3:54 pm 3:54 pm

Chris Dodd is a prime example of political corruption and greed:He should be ashamed.Good Riddance

Posted by: Rich Johson | January 6, 2010, 5:32 pm 5:32 pm

The reason for the ‘Bush did this and Bush did that’ statements is that GOPers are critisizing President Obama for things that they never had a second thought when President Bush was in office.
In most of the cases, even the Dems did not criticize Bush for them then. An example is the way the GOP politicized the latest terrorist attempt. I do not recall anyone blaming Bush for 9/11. Do you?
So pointing out the staggering hypocrisy is in order.
—————
New Wave, I am a Republican that criticized President Bush for a lot of things he did wrong: tax cuts for the wealthy while ignoring those in real need; the Iraq War when we should have finished Afghanistan; and a lot more.
And so sorry you were in a coma 2005-2008 while Democrats and liberals were calling President Bush senile, evil, a terrorist, murderer, and some I won’t bother typing because they will only get censored. And sorry you missed the rally where President Bush’s image was set on fire…that was a love-fest NOT!
And the big one: 9/11/2001. Democrats soon demanded congressional hearings because President Bush failed to prevent it…after less than 9 months in office. Some of the really lunatics even insisted he was part of the plot.
Hypocrisy? Just keep thinking about candidate Obama’s promises about transparency…I will have all (as in everything) about the health insurance reform out in the open.
But glad you’re out of that coma; hope you’re feeling better now. Keep taking those meds so reality can break through the delusions.

Posted by: malcat | January 6, 2010, 5:33 pm 5:33 pm

Ya Right…. ‘Transparency’ is the latest wingnut slogan. We look forward to your next slogan.

Posted by: New Wave | January 6, 2010, 5:43 pm 5:43 pm

Ya Right…. ‘Transparency’ is the latest wingnut slogan. We look forward to your next slogan. — POSTED BY NEW WAVE
——–
Hey, President Obama started it. Wouldn’t want me to ignore something so important to the POTUS.
But your response is about what I expected. Nothing to do with my post, just an insult.

Posted by: malcat | January 6, 2010, 5:53 pm 5:53 pm

It’s not an insult. Is it a coincidence that the slogans used by wingnuts here are the same that Rush Limbaugh uses in his broadcasts?
We know were you guys get the talking points from.

Posted by: New Wave | January 6, 2010, 5:59 pm 5:59 pm

I suspect that Dodd and many others who have schemed, bent rules and turned blind eyes to all this corruption that has absolutely made life miserable for so many, see the writing on the walls and knows his future and hopefully many others as politicians is over.

Posted by: david | January 6, 2010, 6:03 pm 6:03 pm

1. Term limits.
2. A successful recall initiative for violating the oath of office, which includes being faithful to the Constitution:
“I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; …”
95% of what these people do is flat-out unconstitutional. Why can’t we recall them from office instead of possibly removing them AFTER THE DAMAGE IS DONE????

Posted by: Joe Independent | January 6, 2010, 6:31 pm 6:31 pm

It’s not an insult. Is it a coincidence that the slogans used by wingnuts here are the same that Rush Limbaugh uses in his broadcasts?
We know were you guys get the talking points from.—posted by New Wave
————–
Please explain how using a word that is almost synonymous with President Obama’s campaign and his presidency by his OWN use of the word a ‘wingnut slogan’.
I am exceedingly proud that I have never watched Limbaugh, or Beck for that matter. I prefer to obtain news from news sources, not talking-head celebrities such as those 2 and others such as Olbermann. Did break a finger nail once changing channels when accidentally landed on Rush once.
Sorry, New Wave, the truth is I am registered Republican, but am more Independent. My husband is register Democrat, but is just like me. Amazing what you can learn about insider politics when you are registered as a member of the party.
I just happen to have the intelligence to see faults where faults exist and to see successes where they exist. You know….pretty much the worst nightmare of Democrat AND Republican politicians.

Posted by: malcat | January 6, 2010, 6:49 pm 6:49 pm

Did anybody watch Nancy Pelosi yesterday as she summarily dismissed transparency with a laugh and a wave of her crooked hand? This woman thinks she is queen! Every time I see her I start singing songs from Les Miserables…what is that about? haha.

Posted by: cindy | January 6, 2010, 7:07 pm 7:07 pm

Time for the entire MSM, in the tank for Dems, to investigate all, all their corruption with every old bull running in the House and Senate. Voters in Conn, ND, Colo., Mass., other so called Blue states should not forget how these phony Dems ran in 2006-08.They ran as moderates, conservs, CenterRight almost Pub. But, when back in DC, they voted socialist pacifist. Every time. Look at the domestic socialist agenda trying to be pushed via bribes, corruption et al. And their foreign policy: does anyone ,even libs think this crew will protect our borders and national security??? NO is the answer. And you know, the voters might just wake up and really push out more Dems than the MSM think. I pray so.

Posted by: Glenn Koons | January 6, 2010, 8:36 pm 8:36 pm

BTW, there are some good candidates in all those states in which the Dem rats are jumping ship. Colo has Scott McGinnis. Mass. has Scott Brown. Conn. has Rob Simmons. ND has their very good guv. I hope to see others elected in all 50 states , ousting these socialist pacifists.

Posted by: Glenn Koons | January 6, 2010, 8:38 pm 8:38 pm

Obama and his cronies lied their way into the White House. They have a full benefit package — unlike the health care package they’ll cram down our throats. And now they’re “behind closed doors” wheeling and dealing with our futures — they’ll get off scott free and we will pay higher taxes. Our children and grandchildren are in deep trouble. We need to replace all liberals in Congress as soon as possible.

Posted by: CarolinaUNC | January 6, 2010, 9:59 pm 9:59 pm

With all the Democrat defectors Washington DC is going to have a serious shortage of crooks and will need to import some fellow travelers from North Korea or Iran to make up the deficit.

Posted by: obamanation | January 6, 2010, 10:11 pm 10:11 pm

Our government thinks we’re stupid — and they have good reason to believe that. Anyone in the public that supports this bill is wearing blindfolds with their fingers in their ears. If was such a great bill, why did Nancy and gang have to make it law that they are exempt from it (??), and why in the world would they have to bribe their own party to sign on?! Sign me up for the party of NO. I would be a proud member to No more bribes, payoffs, lies, secret meetings, signing expensive bills without reading them, no to corruption, no to trashing the the Constitution, no to massive, irresponsible spending, no to excessively higher taxes to pay for the pork in these ‘unread’ bills, no to unvetted “Czars”, no to jetting around on Air Force One at taxpayers expense for publicity stunts, and etc, etc.

Posted by: Kath | January 7, 2010, 12:06 am 12:06 am

Top

Chris Dodd Out as Democratic Exodus Continues

Related Videos

Leave a Reply