Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

The Morning Plum

"The Republican Tea Party Contract on America." That's what the DNC is rolling out today, in what it bills as a major new effort to get the public to focus on the consequences of a GOP takeover of Congress.

At a presser this morning, DNC chair Tim Kaine will argue that "the Tea Party is now the most potent force in Republican politics," a DNC official says. He will present a "ten point blue print for how the Republican-Tea Party would govern, based on actual positions."

It's a "pre-emptive strike against the GOP's August rebranding effort," the official says. Polls have shown that the public has mixed feelings about the Tea Party, but this initiative isn't really about the Tea Party per se: It's about getting the public to focus on this election as a choice between two governing philosophies.

* Majority rule? Who needs it? The Hill talks to Democratic Senators about whether they back filibuster reform. Turns out -- shocker! -- that a fair number of them don't support it, including Ben Nelson and Dianne Feinstein.

* And: Amazingly, Senator Daniel Akaka tells The Hill that the current filibuster system is "working."

Really? For who? All is right with the world, as long as Senators get to keep riding in the Senators-only elevator?

* Matt Yglesias makes an important point about filibuster reform: The 60-vote threshold transfers vast power to the judiciary and dilutes the ability of the other branches of government to act as a check on it. Case in point: The DISCLOSE act.

* Things we wish we'd witnessed: An angry Nancy Pelosi privately reamed out Senator Harry Reid for the Senate's failure to tackle cap and trade after House Dems bit the bullet and took a tough vote for it.

Said Pelosi: "The Senate is moving at a glacial pace, slower than the glaciers are actually melting."

* Keep an eye on this: The House passed funding for the Afghan war last night, but over 100 Dems voted against it, signaling that war opposition on the left could soon become a major headache for the White House.

* The Gulf oil slick is vanishing far more quickly than expected, and while many questions remain, the spill doesn't appear to have destroyed Obama's presidency.

* Enviros lose another one as renewal energy standard is dropped from the energy bill because Dem leaders think it can't get 60 votes.

* Ruth Marcus calls for the Bush tax cuts to expire, and says what few other columnists are willing to voice out loud: The GOP position on tax cuts and deficits is "Intransigently divorced from reality."

* And: Mark Murray skewers the GOP position on tax cuts and the stimulus.

* In the latest effort to demystify the new health care landscape in the wake of reform, Obama cuts a new Web video walking people through how to use HealthCare.Gov, the government-run site for health care consumers.

* Immigration reform, anyone? A new CNN poll finds an overwhelming majority favors letting illegal immigrants stay here if they have a job and pay taxes. Whatever -- reform can't get 60 Senate votes, can it?

* House Dems tell Charlie Rangel that it's time to go.

* And -- ugh! -- upstart new media reporters are trying to leap over the velvet ropes keeping the rabble out of the White House press room.

What else is happening?

By Greg Sargent  |  July 28, 2010; 8:24 AM ET
Categories:  2010 elections , Climate change , Foreign policy and national security , Health reform  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Happy Hour Roundup
Next: Dear Dems: Stop reading from Rove's playbook on Afghanistan

Comments

Greg, just want to say thanks for getting back to me yesterday morning.

What else is happening?...What's up with Chris Dodd's vendetta against Elizabeth Warren?

Talkingpointsmemo interviewed him saying that he wants a fast confirmation with someone who can shape the Consumer Protection Agency early on while at the same time saying the President shouldn't even consider appointing her during recess. From these two completely contradictory statements it seems like he's incredibly adamant about being against Warren, but he doesn't want to come out and say it. Who's he working for? And how is the process going for Elizabeth Warren? Do you think the President will pick her? And if he doesn't, for the love of god, why?? Like Barney Frank said there is nothing stopping President Obama from putting this champion at the head of that agency. I'm really ambivalent about Obama after the Public Option, the White House's explanation for that was "it's all Joe Liebermann and the Senate's fault", but if they don't come through with Elizabeth Warren on THIS one then that is undoubtable proof that the Obama White House takes care of the wishes of Wall Street first.

Posted by: magnus_terra | July 28, 2010 8:47 AM | Report abuse

Re Yglesias and the consequence for the power of the SC... Yes, I saw that and it is a really smart observation.

Posted by: bernielatham | July 28, 2010 8:50 AM | Report abuse

"It's a "pre-emptive strike against the GOP's August rebranding effort," the official says."

It's been a long wait but nice to finally see my take on the Tea Party thing (a rebranding initiative) echoed by someone else.

Posted by: bernielatham | July 28, 2010 8:59 AM | Report abuse

"And: Amazingly, Senator Daniel Akaka tells The Hill that the current filibuster system is "working.""

And we have our first candidate for brain dead comment of the morning. REALLY? How can any sane rational human have watched the joke of the U.S. Senate during the HCR fiasco and say it is WORKING!!!!!

I may be the Lone Ranger here but at this moment I'm hard pressed to find anything I disrespect in the public sphere as much as the U.S. Senate...although the Republican controlled Florida Legislature is actually more evil...they are not as incompetent and perhaps no more bought and paid for than their brethren in the U.S. Senate.
A pox on the U.S. Senate!!!

Posted by: rukidding7 | July 28, 2010 8:59 AM | Report abuse

"The planet formerly known as Iowa"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/michaeltomasky/2010/jul/27/us-politics-republicans

Posted by: bernielatham | July 28, 2010 9:10 AM | Report abuse

It is time now that the election draws nigh to get away from the labels..Tea Party..Conservative..Liberal..Democrat...
Republican...it's time to start ASSOCIATING POLICY POSITIONS WITH THESE LABELS.

Yesterday our friend Carthage gave us a great preview of what he hoped President Palin could accomplish. Ergo the Tea Party Platform

ABOLISH SOCIAL SECURITY and MEDICARE.

Do away with most of Gov't Regulation. Welcome to a brand new level of pollution of our environment and cheating us in our economy by Wall Street. Who needs any freaking regulation?

Make sure Iran never gets a nuke and do WHATEVER Israel thinks we should do...to disagree with the Sovereign nation of Israel in Palin World is to be an anti Semite.

And so we can count on another war in Iran, and perhaps North Korea.

They are unabashed about our preeminence in the world and believe we rule through the divine right of our Christian God. We are the best, the brightest, and if we're bullies it because it's good for the world to have us bully them...after all Sister Sarah and her ilk know what's best for the World.

Of course CUT TAXES with NO MENTION of how that will impact the deficit. In the Tea Party world the deficit just disappears magically. Even though every economist with any credibility including the vast majority of Republioans including former Reagan leading economic adviser Bruce Bartlett have shown repeatedly that supply economics does not work.

We need to figure a way to pound on ACTUAL POLICIES...tough I admit since the MSM is far more interested in sound bites and the horse race than on what really matters for our nation.

Posted by: rukidding7 | July 28, 2010 9:11 AM | Report abuse

rukidding, I couldn't agree more with you.

The Senate is useless. It has stood as THE obstacle against Democratic initiatives. One to ten Democrats are working with Republicans on obstruction and filibustering at any given time. The US Senate is disgustingly useless. Why do we have an institution whose sole motive is to put a check on what the people want on behalf of the rich and the special interests?

Posted by: magnus_terra | July 28, 2010 9:11 AM | Report abuse

Thanks for the Tomasky link, Bernie.

The missing 13th amendment? Those people are unhinged. I can't decided to whether to laugh at The Onion-esque quality of their platform or weep at the fact that some people take it seriously.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | July 28, 2010 9:20 AM | Report abuse

@Bernie Thanks for the Tomasky link.

He makes the point I tried in my earlier post. I simply find it hard to believe that when Americans ACTUALLY LEARN what the R party platform includes that they're going to be supportive.

Up till now the Tea Party has been a bit ethereal, other than cutting taxes and reducing the deficit they have failed to be specific about much. Ultimately this could be the downfall of the Tea Party.
Right now they are united but that's because they only have a few guiding principles...cut taxes..lower the deficit..and we're mad as hell throw the bums out vote against any incumbent.

When Tea Partiers actually have to figure out REAL issues such as our bloated defense spending and the havoc it's wreaking on the deficit and the economy...
the waste going on in Iraq and Afghanistan...if anybody takes the time to learn of the FAILURE of supply side economics our just looks at the results...
no rational person could vote repub on economic grounds..the R's have always been at the helm when our economy runs aground and it's always taken a Dem to get us sailing again. That's simply fact. Check out the history books.

And so my actual rambling question Bernie..
how are we going to educate the American voter between now and November? How do we overwhelm the noise machine that is Fox News and Talk radio? I truly do not believe that if the American electorate is armed with FACTS that they could possibly vote repub.

Posted by: rukidding7 | July 28, 2010 9:30 AM | Report abuse

"'The Republican Tea Party Contract on America.' That's what the DNC is rolling out today, in what it bills as a major new effort to get the public to focus on the consequences of a GOP takeover of Congress"

Is it just me or is the campaign the equivalent of: "Yes, okay, we totally suck, but these other guys are even worse! Vote us! We suck marginally less!"

"* And: Amazingly, Senator Daniel Akaka tells The Hill that the current filibuster system is 'working.'"

Technically, it is working. A hammer is working when it's hammering in nails or breaking windows.

"Immigration reform, anyone? A new CNN poll finds an overwhelming majority favors letting illegal immigrants stay here if they have a job and pay taxes."

But do they want to kick them out of their receiving government assistance? If so, I don't think either party is going to tackle "Amnesty for Tax Payers; Kick Out the Needy" style immigration reform.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 28, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

Re Yglesias: yes and no. Citizens United was a constitutional decision, so the judiciary was checking the lawmaking power of the exec and legislature. All they can do now is try to limit the scope of the decision by, for example, requiring disclosure. I'm not really sure how the 60-vote threshold is more of an impediment there than in any number of statutory decisions (e.g. Ledbetter), which Congress can legislatively overturn.

Posted by: joeff | July 28, 2010 9:43 AM | Report abuse

@rukidding: "How do we overwhelm the noise machine that is Fox News and Talk radio? I truly do not believe that if the American electorate is armed with FACTS that they could possibly vote repub."

Perhaps. Although, "a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still."

That being said, I spend a lot more time on blogs like this one that watching Fox or listening to talk radio, and I'm going to vote a down-the-line Republican ticket in November. I'm looking forward to it, and not because any of the candidates excite me.

Best of luck battling history. Incumbent parties tend to lose seats, and incumbent parties that have disappointed their base and excited their opponents tend to lose a lot, irrespective of how you think they should behave if properly educated with "the facts". There are exceptions to this, but they are few and far between.

One of the problems is "getting out the facts" can contain facts like the idea that Republicans want to ABOLISH SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE, which is not really a fact, but sort of very-slippery-slope conclusion, and about as substantive as conservative who give us the Obama logos with sickles and hammers (because, you know, Democrats are -just like- Communist, with their centralized planning and speaking of Russian.

"if anybody takes the time to learn of the FAILURE of supply side economics our just looks at the results..."

And it's a proven fact that umbrellas cause thunderstorms. Check it out.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 28, 2010 9:44 AM | Report abuse

"Why do we have an institution whose sole motive is to put a check on what the people want on behalf of the rich and the special interests?"

I think this gets to the crux of the issue. The founding fathers were concerned with protecting citizens from government over-reach. What we've ended up with 220 yrs later is a government that spends most of its time protecting corporations/special interests from the citizens.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | July 28, 2010 9:58 AM | Report abuse

Another Tea Party candidate, the Republican running for governor in Maine, won't talk to the press. Has he been talking to Sharron Angle and Rand Paul? Or just Sarah Palin?

http://www.pressherald.com/news/LePage-Deepest-apologies-for-age-jab.html
"How do we keep this above board, how do we keep this straight?" Hale asked.

"Well, from now on, what I am going to do is, I'm not going to make any comments to reporters unless it's in writing," LePage said.

Hale asked, "Really?"

Posted by: mainer2 | July 28, 2010 9:58 AM | Report abuse

"Onion-esque quality"

Which is evident also in the ideas of Sam Brownback's primary opponent for Governor of Kansas. (As Wonkette puts it, 2010 is the Year of the Exotic Candidate.)

— Heffington, a former Boeing employee and homebuilder in the Wichita area, said covert government operatives are infiltrating hospitals in Kansas and elsewhere to conduct biological and chemical warfare experiments on unsuspecting patients.

— In February, she said, she learned operatives implanted microchips in a man who had refused to give the government a lucrative invention he had created. The microchips were transported through a window and into the man's body using a satellite, she said. "The technology is so advanced that they can do it that way," she said.

— A22-year-old man was unlawfully detained, tortured and infected with H1N1 by operatives after discovering that Guantanamo Bay detainees were secretly being flown to McConnell Air Force Base, Heffington said. She believes a pen was used to deliver the virus.

— The state of Kansas is operating under a dictatorial French law that the CIA helped establish here in the 1950s, Heffington said.

"They needed a state where unsuspecting people could be treated like guinea pigs so they could try out their covert activities," she said.

— Heffington founded and is chief executive of an advocacy organization she named the Association for Honest Attorneys. The group's website lists three board members: Heffington, director Cortland Berry and God, who is identified as "our most trustworthy board member."

— If elected, Heffington said, she would sign no law unless it was supported by at least two-thirds of Kansans. She said she would conduct a survey on each bill. "I'm going to do my own poll," she said. "I'll make sure it's fair. I will have a statistician."

— Heffington, who strongly opposes abortion, added that she would not approve any legislation that didn't pass a biblical test. Asked what she would do if presented with a bill that drew more than two-thirds public approval but with which she disagreed on religious grounds — such as a measure easing restrictions on abortion — she said: "It's just not going to happen."

http://cjonline.com/opinion/2010-07-26/column_gop_candidate_says_secret_forces_are_at_work

Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 28, 2010 9:59 AM | Report abuse

More bilge from the journolist.

I guess the WaPo just assumes that their readers prefer to have their news filtered by a secretive progressive group that focuses on manipulation the press and public opinion to elect the people they like and to destroy the people and families that they do not like.

Posted by: TECWRITE | July 28, 2010 10:04 AM | Report abuse

Hey KW, head over to yesterday's palin thread. I collected some reading on Islamophobia. Time for a little education, since you said you didn't see the systematic effort to demonize muslims.

Posted by: srw3 | July 28, 2010 10:09 AM | Report abuse

"One of the problems is "getting out the facts" can contain facts like the idea that Republicans want to ABOLISH SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE, which is not really a fact"

They want to privatize both. While technically different than "abolish" the results will not insure any sort of security.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 28, 2010 10:15 AM | Report abuse

@tw:secretive progressive group that focuses on manipulation the press and public opinion to elect the people they like and to destroy the people and families that they do not like.

Fine, go write at red state you misinformed troll. Shocking news, colleagues talk amongst themselves, consult experts to help inform their writing. Details at....

Posted by: srw3 | July 28, 2010 10:17 AM | Report abuse

@suekzoo1: I'm sorry, I know it's not funny to the poor people who live in Ks, but I seriously LMAO at some of those. My personal favorite:

'and God, who is identified as "our most trustworthy board member."'

Who could argue with that? In fact, I think I'm going to add "God" as a reference on my resume. It'll probably go over really well in this corner of Wingnutistan.

In all fairness to Ms. Heffington, though, you do have to be just shy of being completely bats**t crazy if Brownback is just too liberal to represent you.

Posted by: schrodingerscat | July 28, 2010 10:22 AM | Report abuse

"Why do we have an institution whose sole motive is to put a check on what the people want on behalf of the rich and the special interests?"

The Senate was designed by the founders to have an anti-majoritarian effect and dampen democratic excesses. Read the Federalist and some basic constitutional history sometime.

It's frightening how utterly ignorant you leftists are of our history and founding principles, and how ignorantly hostile you are to them.

Posted by: quarterback1 | July 28, 2010 10:24 AM | Report abuse

All, looks like another Democrat is reading from Karl Rove's script in attacking the anti-war position:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/07/dear_dems_no_reading_from_rove.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | July 28, 2010 10:27 AM | Report abuse

What ruk and others write about the Senate above is spot on. House of Lords protecting monied interests in a way that we've never seen. And it's likely to get worse after this year.

Sadly, the DNC and the WH have no response to this other than to protect incumbents. I can't help but think that the Blanche Lincoln primary was a defining moment in this fight.

I know we shouldn't wish for Dems to lose, as GOP Sens are far worse, but it's getting past hope to think that these half measures are working. We need better Dems and a better Senate. Our government is not functioning properly when half of the congress is broken.

Posted by: BGinCHI | July 28, 2010 10:30 AM | Report abuse

@SWR3: "Hey KW, head over to yesterday's palin thread. I collected some reading on Islamophobia."

I did. I understand you really believe you're right on this, but I disagree. I noticed a lot of rhetorically flourishes with adjectives that told me how I was supposed to think about people, and a poorly considered turn of phrase from Daniel Pipes, but I hate to tell you: I remain unconvinced. And I'm pretty sure you're no more flexible than I on the subject, so I suggest we agree to disagree.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | July 28, 2010 10:31 AM | Report abuse

"TRANSPARENCY":

* Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) "believes that it is important that any future campaign finance laws include strong transparency provisions so the American public knows who is contributing to a candidate's campaign, as well as who is funding communications in support of or in opposition to a political candidate or issue."

* Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas): "I think the system needs more transparency, so people can more easily reach their own conclusions."

* Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.): "I don't like it when a large source of money is out there funding ads and is unaccountable... To the extent we can, I tend to favor disclosure."

All of them filibustered a measure to start a debate over a modest disclosure bill.

Jamelle Bouie added:

Between Citizen's United and the DISCLOSE Act, we've witnessed something genuinely incredible: in the interest of furthering the interests of powerful corporations, a narrow majority of Supreme Court conservative justices overturned decades of campaign finance precedent, and a small minority of conservative senators blocked congressional efforts at reform. At the risk of sounding really exasperated, this is absolutely insane.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_07/024929.php

At the risk of sounding really exasperated, Republicans are lying back-stabbing scumbags.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | July 28, 2010 10:37 AM | Report abuse

GETTING HOT IN HERE:

Worldwide, 2010 is on track to become the warmest year on record.

Scientists at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies reported recently that the average global temperature was higher over the past 12 months than during any other 12-month period in history. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has released corroborating data, adding that the past four months, including June, have each individually been the hottest on record as well.

The NASA findings were based on data from 5,000 weather stations around the world, said scientist Reto Ruedy, co-author of the study. Scientists used temperature anomalies, or departures from the baseline, rather than absolute measurements to account for differences in the instruments of individual stations.

The average global temperature, computed over a 12-month period, reached a new record in May and held steady for the month of June, he said. This was despite the recent minimum in solar activity, which should have had a cooling effect on Earth.

Apparently, Ruedy said, the solar cycle "has much less impact than the warming trend."

NOAA research meteorologist Tom Knutson doesn't find that surprising. The trend has existed since records began in the late 1800s.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/07/27/98203/earth-bakes-worldwide.html

Dems: let's stop global warming

Republicans: let's start global scamming

Posted by: Ethan2010 | July 28, 2010 10:40 AM | Report abuse

All, come on over to the new thread:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/07/dear_dems_no_reading_from_rove.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | July 28, 2010 10:44 AM | Report abuse

@Kevin_Willis: I don't think that I am inflexible. I just haven't seen a even a small minority of conservatives reach out to the overwhelmingly peaceful and law abiding American Muslim community. Instead, there are numerous examples of conservatives who are complicit in demonizing Islam for not calling out Coulter, Pipes, Horowitz, and now Gringrich for their willingness to trash the freedom of religion amendment to gin up nativist feelings in the republican base.

Feel free to provide me with evidence to the contrary. I am persuadable, but I haven't seen any evidence of this.

Do we believe in freedom of religion and property rights? How can anyone who values the constitution be against the NY mosque? How far from ground zero is far enough? Harlem, New Jersey. California? Who gets to decide this? It already passed local zoning boards. Don't you believe in local control?

Don't you see that associating a Islamic community center, with the 911 terrorists is part and parcel of demonizing Muslims? Why is this different from a YMCA?

As a thinking person and a conservative who believes in the constitution, how can you support this blatant xenophobia, nativism, and Islam bashing?

Posted by: srw3 | July 28, 2010 10:54 AM | Report abuse

@Kevin Thanks for your thoughtful response but you twisted my post just enough to make your response incorrect.

I did not say ALL REPUBLICANS wish to abolish social security and medicare. Of course there are many who do not wish to do that. However the vast majority of "Tea Bag" type candidates...or the more conservative wing of the Republican Party wishes to do just that. Whether it's Sister Sarah leading the charge...or Joe the Plumber...or R's actually running for office from Rand Paul to Sharron Angle...most..the majority of them would like to abolish social security and Medicare.

This makes your false equivalency of saying R's are for abolishing Social Security the same as those who insult Obama with socialist..communist etc. completely false. As I just pointed out there are MANY MANY of them on record who wish to do just that.

I do not insult Rand Paul or Sharron Angle or Sarah Palin for pointing out they believe in abolishing Social Security. Nor do I believe I am insulting or speaking derogatorily when I point out the majority of Tea Partiers (not all) would like to shrink Government dramatically including wiping out SS and Medicare. I'm simply pointing out this is what they believe...they are entitled to their beliefs..but I couldn't be more opposed..and I believe the country at large is opposed to dismantling Social Security.

Posted by: rukidding7 | July 28, 2010 11:31 AM | Report abuse

"Majority rule? Who needs it? The Hill talks to Democratic Senators about whether they back filibuster reform. Turns out -- shocker! -- that a fair number of them don't support it, including Ben Nelson and Dianne Feinstein."
---------------------------------------------

You left out Russ Feingold. I would say though that any senator who's been there more than one term and isn't a complete idiot is going to want to approach this topic with great caution and no little trepidation. As badly as Republicans have abused this privilege and as much as we can all agree that *something* needs to be done about it, anylone who remembers what life was like when the Republicans were in the majority (a privilege they also abused pretty badly) is naturally going to want to step very carefully here. I've always thought that a good one-line definition of shortsightedness is the tendency to assume all current conditions are permanent.

And after all, slowing down the whims of the majority and protecting the rights of the minority aren't actually such perversions of the Senate's purpose, they pretty much *are* the Senate's purpose. We may not like it at the moment but we're not the only ones who live in this country. Of course it goes without saying that anyone who disagrees with me or you is an idiot, a subhuman and very likely quite insane, but they still have rights and in a representative democracy, they're still supposed to have a voice. The process may be out of balance in terms of degree right now, but not in principle.

Democracy at its most functional is not *supposed* to be about any one group getting everything they want, even when it's the group that mostly agrees with me. It's supposed to be about everyone -- even the aforementioned subhuman crazies -- getting a deal they can live with. And let's be honest, a lot of the whining and poutrage among ultra-liberals right now basically boils down to the fact that even though this president and this congress have pulled off some pretty historic accomplishments, we're still not getting *everything* we want.

Posted by: CalD | July 28, 2010 11:44 AM | Report abuse

"All is right with the world, as long as Senators get to keep riding in the Senators-only elevator?"

These people think they're entitled. Screw em. Same with Charlie Rangel. Go away so we can elect another democrat in your district. If you can't keep your nose clean, you don't get to keep your job.

Posted by: SDJeff | July 28, 2010 12:47 PM | Report abuse

"Asked if his ethics problems are hurting politically vulnerable Democrats, Rangel responded, “That’s a political question and I’ve been so absorbed with my own problems, I haven’t given it much thought.”"

Excerpt from the Hill:

"Asked if his ethics problems are hurting politically vulnerable Democrats, Rangel responded, “That’s a political question and I’ve been so absorbed with my own problems, I haven’t given it much thought.”"

Yes, Charlie is all about Charlie

Posted by: SDJeff | July 28, 2010 12:50 PM | Report abuse

Can we wait until Rangel is found guilty before throwing him to the dogs?

The case does look bad for him, but that is why we have a process to evaluate the issues and make a judgement.

John Tassini, a person running for Rangel's seat, suggested on KOS that Rangel resign for the good of the party. I asked him if he would agree not to run again and endorse rangel, if rangel stepped down now was exonerated. Crickets......

Posted by: srw3 | July 28, 2010 1:33 PM | Report abuse

srw, that's a fair point. And I know it's unfair of me, but Rangel just looks like a crook to me. Always has. Way too smooth talking...I remember 2 years ago him coming up with all sorts of asinine reasons why he wouldn't back Obama when it was clear Clinton could not catch up, and he said it all with a crooked doublespeaking politician smile on his face, I just wanted to punch him in the nose.

He's kind of ridiculous, and it's hard to see how these charges would all be made up. He's entitled to nothing. Another dem can take his place, easy.

When control of congress and the future of our country is at stake, I say cut him loose. We can't afford the distraction. Just my opinion.

Posted by: SDJeff | July 28, 2010 2:08 PM | Report abuse

Who slipped in the Consumer Financial Literacy Act the part which states that, “The Financial Stability Oversight Council will be made up of 10 federal financial regulators and an [1] independent member with insurance expertise ….[and] be chaired by the Treasury Secretary” [Tim Geithner]. Barney Frank (House leader on the bill) stated with great fervor that the agency would be independent and merely use the Treasury for an address. Boy, did someone fool him! I leave it to you to guess who that might have been. Now, what good would it do if the Director is Elizabeth Warren (I hope) or your favorite deity? The Council has him/her stonewalled. Because of that Council composition the proposed $500,000,000 to be spent on the agency sounds like an expensive sham. Too bad, the TRUTH was needed to recommend that the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) of 1968 use the financially, mathematically-TRUE, Compound method of expressing the Annual Percentage Rate that is used in the Truth in Savings Act of 1991. The current Simple-Interest method used by the TILA can be astronomically different from the mathematically-true compounded APR. On a typical Payday Loan the SIAPR is 392%, but the mathematically-true, [compound] CAPR is 3723%. Exempted from the Act are lawyers, accountants, auto dealers. Why? … perhaps the elixir of emolument.

Posted by: afblair | July 29, 2010 9:07 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company