Mitch McConnell Plays Hardball, Or, Calling David Limbaugh
From the New York Times:
Democrats in the Senate hoping to pass nonbudget-related legislation in the lame-duck session were put on notice by their Republican colleagues Wednesday morning: No tax-cut extension? No laws for you!
In a letter signed by the 42 members of the Republican caucus, delivered to the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, and mentioned Wednesday on the Senate floor by the minority leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republicans informed their Democratic counterparts that they would not go forward with “any legislative item until the Senate has acted to fund the government and we have prevented the tax increase that is currently awaiting all American taxpayers.”
Over the last couple of days, I believe readers will agree, a theme has developed in David Limbaugh's posts: Now that we in the hinterlands have given them new power, are these Republicans going to deliver, or what? David still has me worried about some of Eric Cantor's recent comments about retaining the "good" parts of ObamaCare instead of repealing and replacing every last jot and tittle of that abomination. But after about 24 hours of saying gracious things about the need for Republicans and Democrats to work together, Mitch McConnell, joined by every last one of his Republican colleagues in the Senate, has now made clear they have no intention of permitting themselves to get rolled in this ludicrous lame-duck session.
Mitch McConnell, God bless 'im. He may not be the ideal face of the GOP, looking, as used to be said of Calvin Coolidge, as if he was weaned on a pickle. But he's smart, he's utterly in command of the intricate rules of the Senate--and he means to win.
'Tis the season, David Limbaugh, to be jolly.
- Comment (38)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Oct '10
Re: Mitch McConnell Plays Hardball, Or, Calling David Limbaugh
This is absurd. Obamacare has Republican ideas in it--it may be a total disaster, but it really does have bits and pieces of our own ideas. Why is this so hard to believe? It's a great political maneuver.
The bill is filled with micromanaging, horrendous regulation, terrible burdens on states, and bunches and bunches of earmarks. It's a horrible bill, but they did include some of our ideas--no doubt to make it more difficult to repeal.
It's perfectly reasonable what Cantor said. If we cannot repeal Obamacare--and we can't--the next best thing is modifying it to be as close to our replacement bill as possible. Building on top of the few Republican ideas in it lets Democrats save face, and is much more likely to succeed.
May '10
Re: Mitch McConnell Plays Hardball, Or, Calling David Limbaugh
It is about time for the Reps to use the pair they have!
Jul '10
Re: Mitch McConnell Plays Hardball, Or, Calling David Limbaugh
Media Take = Senate Held Hostage.
Average Joe Take = First Things First, Everything Else Not First!
Oct '10
Re: Mitch McConnell Plays Hardball, Or, Calling David Limbaugh
Also, Republicans do not have a mandate to cause chaos and gridlock until 2012--we need deficit reduction and real health reform now. Deficit reduction will be biased in our favor--the bi-partisan plans on the table certainly are--and I suspect if we play our cards right, we can woo centrist Democrats in the Senate and modify the healthcare bill to more closely match our own version.
We can do these things, in an 80% conservative way. Compromise didn't produce the Bush year problems--those politicians wanted to do what they did, they truly were big government Republicans. But things are different now--our problems are so severe, a conservative solution is the only possible way out. So compromise isn't a big risk, when events are so biased towards conservative ideas.
Edited on Dec 2, 2010 at 11:25amRe: Mitch McConnell Plays Hardball, Or, Calling David Limbaugh
Jaydee_007: Media Take = Senate Held Hostage.
Average Joe Take = First Things First, Everything Else Not First! · Dec 2 at 11:18am
Beautiful--just beautiful.
Re: Mitch McConnell Plays Hardball, Or, Calling David Limbaugh
Joseph Eagar: This is absurd. Obamacare has Republican ideas in it--it may be a total disaster, but it really does have bits and pieces of our own ideas....
The bill is filled with micromanaging, horrendous regulation, terrible burdens on states, and bunches and bunches of earmarks. It's a horrible bill, but they did include some of our ideas--no doubt to make it more difficult to repeal.
It's perfectly reasonable what Cantor said. If we cannot repeal Obamacare--and we can't--the next best thing is modifying it to be as close to our replacement bill as possible.... · Dec 2 at 11:15am
Hm. You know what, Joseph? You make a lot of sense. Just be prepared for a particularly close and rigorous cross-examination when our David Limbaugh weighs in.
Sep '10
Re: Mitch McConnell Plays Hardball, Or, Calling David Limbaugh
I just can't help but wonder if the phrase "every last jot and tittle" is in violation of the Ricochet Code of Conduct or not.
Nov '10
Re: Mitch McConnell Plays Hardball, Or, Calling David Limbaugh
Problem: The President is a Democrat — a closet Marxist with a big, fat veto pen.
Problem: Whenever Republicans compromise with Democrats, in any way, that is always a net gain for Democrats. The socialist agenda is advanced through incrementalism — tax by tax, program by program, regulation by regulation, inch by filthy inch.
The problems we face are huge. Stopping Obama's agenda is not enough. If we simply hold the line and maintain the status quo, we lose. We need a massive rollback in the size of the Federal Government. And compromise is never going to get that done.
NO COMPROMISE. For Republicans, that is a loser's game.
Edited on Dec 2, 2010 at 11:57amMay '10
Re: Mitch McConnell Plays Hardball, Or, Calling David Limbaugh
I'm happy to have Senator McConnell play chess so long as he keeps his caucus on the right side of the board. Forgive me for being slow, but who is the Republican whip nowadays? That job is just as important as Majority Leader over the next few weeks - maybe more so.
May '10
Re: Mitch McConnell Plays Hardball, Or, Calling David Limbaugh
I answered my own question: It's Senator Kyl. I feel pretty good about that.
Oct '10
Re: Mitch McConnell Plays Hardball, Or, Calling David Limbaugh
For a basic intro to Republican healthcare ideas, this Heritage Foundation report explains it. To sum up, insurers need a (rather complicated) insurance scheme of their own, designed and run by representatives of the industry. Initial government effort is required for research and development, but in theory this insurance scheme could be privately-run (as it almost is in Utah--the Risk Adjuster Board is run by health insurance and consumer representatives, answerable to the state legislature).
This sort of scheme is why private healthcare markets in other countries work just fine, but not here in the U.S. It's also a prerequisite for a fiscally-solvent exchange. The healthcare bill pays pays lip service to these ideas--I suspect they wanted to woo conservative Blue Dog Democrats, not Republicans--though in a mis-mashed, incompetent manner.
(And like I said above, it also has horrendous regulation, earmarks beyond all reason, doesn't reduce costs, and on sum is a total disaster. But it's important we don't risk destroying our own ideas at reform).
Aug '10
Re: Mitch McConnell Plays Hardball, Or, Calling David Limbaugh
Lady Kurobara
-- a closet Marxist with a big, fat veto pen.
I just can't help but wonder if the phrase "big, fat veto pen" is in violation of the Ricochet Code of Conduct or not.
Aug '10
Re: Mitch McConnell Plays Hardball, Or, Calling David Limbaugh
Peter Robinson
Mitch McConnell, God bless 'im. He may not be the ideal face of the GOP, looking, as used to be said of Calvin Coolidge, as if he was weaned on a pickle.
I think he looks more like an amiable tortoise myself.
Re: Mitch McConnell Plays Hardball, Or, Calling David Limbaugh
Peter: Thanks. I did see this yesterday and hoped it was still current, i.e., that it had not been superseded by yesterday's Kumbaya event between the president and GOPers. But I also didn't want it to interfere with my bad mood. Ok, just kidding.
What I find noteworthy about this and other similar developments we've seen is that there is might be a sea change development occurring that distinguishes today's Dem shellacking from the one they received in 1994, i.e., the Tea Party phenomenon. We've said it before, but it bears repeating: It is shaping up as though the protest movement in favor of recapturing fiscal sanity will be almost as important in holding victorious Republicans accountable as it has been (and will continue to be) in displacing the irredeemably profligate Dems.
We are witnessing nearly immediate, direct accountability in real time -- as these incumbents, even the very entrenched and powerful ones, realize they are not beyond being replaced themselves. In direct response to having our sovereignty stolen, we are reclaiming it and the politicians -- at least more so than in a long time -- are giving it back to its rightful owners.
Oct '10
Re: Mitch McConnell Plays Hardball, Or, Calling David Limbaugh
@Lady Kurobara:
Mathematically, the Federal Government has to get smaller. We cannot pay for it anymore, and tax hikes literally cannot keep up with the shortfall (there's bunches of CBO reports showing this).
Do you honestly believe the 1997 welfare reform was a victory for leftists? Or the mid-90s balanced budgets? Both were compromises, in conservatives' favor.
We have the upper hand here. What we need is more 90s-style politics, not a rejection of compromise--the past decade saw the rise of big-government, statist Republicans; compromise didn't drive them towards betrayal of principle, they wanted to do so.
[edit to make slightly more civil]
Edited on Dec 2, 2010 at 12:13pmOct '10
Re: Mitch McConnell Plays Hardball, Or, Calling David Limbaugh
@David Limbaugh: Best way of putting it I've heard so far. We are reclaiming our sovereignty--government by consent of the governed!
Re: Mitch McConnell Plays Hardball, Or, Calling David Limbaugh
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
Peter Robinson
Mitch McConnell, God bless 'im. He may not be the ideal face of the GOP, looking, as used to be said of Calvin Coolidge, as if he was weaned on a pickle.
I think he looks more like an amiable tortoise myself. · Dec 2 at 12:09pm
That's close. To me, he looks like the cat that ate the canary. I have always liked McConnell. For a good long time, he staged a filibuster against McCain-Feingold. His wife, whom I knew when she was a White House Fellow years ago, is a wonderful woman and very, very canny herself.
Aug '10
Re: Mitch McConnell Plays Hardball, Or, Calling David Limbaugh
We have to root around the toolbox to find some other methods of insuring that our representatives actually represent. Waiting for another two years with Obama in office is way too risky.First, we need to kick the can down the road past the lame duck yesterday. Second, when the break is over, we need to make it clear to our reps that we expect brutality in spending cuts, bloodshed in the earmarks category, total destruction of the czar system, complete ignorance of European financial escapades, a shootout with the EPA (backshooting ok), and a peckinpahish wild bunch of violence among the status quo. Well, at least that is a start.
And Limbaugh can carry that overtime back to Georgetown !
Oct '10
Re: Mitch McConnell Plays Hardball, Or, Calling David Limbaugh
Well, the bi-partisan budget plans do brutally cut spending, including earmarks. . .and those tax expenditures we all love so much (why do we spend so much money through the tax code? Without all those deductions tax rates could fall 10 percentage points and still raise the same revenue).
Nov '10
Re: Mitch McConnell Plays Hardball, Or, Calling David Limbaugh
Joseph Eagar: @Lady Kurobara:
Mathematically, the Federal Government has to get smaller.
We have the upper hand here. What we need is more 90s-style politics, not a rejection of compromise--the past decade saw the rise of big-government, statist Republicans; compromise didn't drive them towards betrayal of principle, they wanted to do so.
Both of us agree that the Federal Government must be reduced. I will never argue against that. And I fully agree that "statist Republicans" were complicit in creating the current mess.
However, as is my wont, I have taken the extreme position. I have planted my banner ("No Compromise!") and I will stand my ground. And I suggest that, the closer Republicans adhere to my position, the better off we will be.