Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Politically savvy Senators wanted middle class tax cut vote

Here's a depressing postscript to yesterday's decision by Senate Dems to postpone the vote on extending the middle class tax cuts: The most politically savvy Senators, the ones who are most involved in the politics of holding the Senate, wanted the vote and urged colleagues to go for it, all to no avail.

Several sources tell me that Chuck Schumer was among the Senators pushing for the vote, on the grounds that it would have been good politics for Dems overall, and Politico reports that Robert Menendez wanted the vote, too. Menendez, of course, is the chair of the DSCC, and Schumer is the former DSCC chair -- and remains heavily involved in plotting political strategy.

Schumer wanted the vote because he believed Mitch McConnell had concluded it was bad for Republicans, according to a source with knowledge of the conversations. "It became clear that McConnell didn't want to have a vote," the source said. "If McConnell sensed that, it was a tell for Democrats that there was political advantage in having it. That's why Chuck was privately pushing for it."

McConnell, of course, repeatedly said he welcomed the vote, and his office even dared Dems to undertake it at their own peril. Yet each time it because clear that Dems might punt on the vote, McConnell's press people blasted the news far and wide.

Also: Though Max Baucus often takes heat from liberals, he, too, pushed for a vote before Senators left town, a knowledgeable source adds.

So why did it fail? According to a very plugged in Senate aide, Senators debating the issue were very aware that the polling was on their side. Yet, paradoxically, this ended up tipping the balance against holding the vote. Senate Dems felt they were alreadly winning on the issue, and in the end they thought a vote risked upsetting a dynamic that was already playing in their favor.

"People felt like, Why rock the boat on a good situation?" the aide tells me. "People weren't sure how how having a vote would effect that dynamic. We would have lost Democrats on certain aspects of the vote. Who knows if the media would cover that as Democrats being splintered? In a way the good polling gave people faith that we dont need to do anything on the issue because we're already winning."

Only in the alternate universe known as the United States Senate, ladies and gentlemen.

UPDATE, 2:35 p.m.: A source with knowledge of the situation gets in touch to insist that Baucus actually pushed very, very hard to hold this vote. Though this cuts against the liberal view of Baucus, it's plausible, since the tax legislation was emerging from his Finance Committee, and he apparently felt some ownership of it. And he wanted Dems to stake out a strong position in favor of extending middle class tax cuts.

By Greg Sargent  | September 24, 2010; 11:02 AM ET
Categories:  2010 elections, Senate Dems  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Morning Plum
Next: VIDEO of Christine O'Donnell: I'm going to stop the whole country from having sex

Comments

TPM says the tax cut vote may NOT be dead after all:

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/09/how-house-dems-might-still-vote-on-middle-class-tax-cuts.php#more

Posted by: nisleib | September 24, 2010 11:15 AM | Report abuse

Missed out on the am thread, but caught the book ref.

Congrats wbg! Will get and read.

Stay tuned for a session of Plum Line After Dark (the Plum Line Cultural session) for a fiction forum.

It's like a book club, but you BYO by yourself, and you don't even have to wear pants.

Posted by: BGinCHI | September 24, 2010 11:15 AM | Report abuse

""People felt like, Why rock the boat on a good situation?" the aide tells me."

This. Kills. Me.

What would a bad situation look like?

Posted by: BGinCHI | September 24, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse

To quote the great Yoda:

"And that is why you fail."

Posted by: Ethan2010 | September 24, 2010 11:21 AM | Report abuse

"Who knows if the media would cover that as Democrats being splintered?"

Of course that's how the media would have spun it. They love "Dems in disarray" storyline.

@Greg

While I still think it was the wrong choice to not hold a vote, the line of thinking that the argument is already winning isn't as totally crazy as you make it out to be. A large portion of the public doesn't follow politics closely enough to know the inside baseball of how/why a hard vote didn't happen.

That said...if I was in the Senate I would have been both publicly and privately railing like a maniac to have a vote.

The problem is that after the election, corporate Dems and the GOP will have even more leverage to force the tax cuts for the rich included. Right now, if a middle class-only tax cut made it to the floor, we'd see bipartisan support...very few on either side of the aisle would willing oppose that bill this close to an election. After the election, that pressure is off.

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | September 24, 2010 11:28 AM | Report abuse

haha... Colbert just said he knows the term corn packer is offensive to some but that's what he did that day on the farm.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 24, 2010 11:31 AM | Report abuse

Obama is pushing the new benefits in his health care plan

Small Business Tax 503,000 businesses
Donut Hole rebate 82,000 seniors Medicare preventive services 4,470,000 No lifetime caps or recissions 18,883,000 Coverage up to age 26 196,000 Early retirement reinsurance 118 have currently qualified
430,000 could benefit


_____________________________________


DO YOU HAVE THE COST FIGURES ON THIS ???


Well - let's just talk about the Premium Increases -


20% increase in the $ 2.3 Trillion market


SO JUST THESE ITEMS COST $ 460 BILLION DOLLARS


That represents AN OBAMA TAX INCREASE OF $460 BILLION DOLLARS JUST THIS YEAR


AND Obama has MORE TO COME.

___________________________________

It is extremely IRRESPONSIBLE of the democrats to talk about addtional benefits without mentioning the costs.

This year - it is $460 BILLION DOLLARS - which represents the equivalent of an Obama tax increase.


This is also a DRAG ON HIRING.


Who knows what the other phase-ins will cost.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 24, 2010 11:31 AM | Report abuse

It was reported that 44 democrats led by Rep Adler would not vote for this bill


Instead, they want the taxes held the SAME for everyone - plus capital gains.


So, the democrats would lose


OR there will be an amendment - changing the brackets and adding the capital gains - and amendment which would WIN.


So, this discussion I feel is veering off to the unrealistic because the votes are not there for what you think you might want to do.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 24, 2010 11:45 AM | Report abuse

@wbgonne: Congratulations on the book!

Posted by: sbj3 | September 24, 2010 11:47 AM | Report abuse

"Only in the alternate universe known as the United States Senate, ladies and gentlemen."
---------------------------------------------

Oh, I'd really have to bet that a careful examination of politics in the ~Roman~ senate would turn up similar behavior. Still annoying though of course, even if it's not particularly singular.

Posted by: CalD | September 24, 2010 11:50 AM | Report abuse

LET ME BE CLEAR


This is what Obama is talking about: the health care bill premium INCREASES are estimated to be $460 BILLION this year.


PLUS Obama wants to increase taxes $700 Billion with the tax bracket issue.


THE TOTAL OBAMA TAX INCREASES FOR THIS YEAR ARE $1.16 TRILLION DOLLARS.

Get it? Add up the health care additional costs - PLUS the $700 for the small business owners who are in the tax bracket.


That is an OBAMA TAX INCREASE OF $1.16 TRILLION JUST THIS YEAR.

Get it ?


Ethan do you get it ?


Do you guys get it ? In the middle of an economic crisis Obama is trying to RAISE taxes $1.16 TRILLION DOLLARS.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 24, 2010 11:50 AM | Report abuse

The troll formatting makes this blog unreadable.

Sad

Posted by: nisleib | September 24, 2010 11:54 AM | Report abuse

NISLEIB

You can read it

Go ahead - explain why Obama wants to place a $1.16 Trillion dollar drag on the economy in the middle of an economic crisis.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 24, 2010 11:56 AM | Report abuse

Either learn proper formatting or go away you annoying insect.

Posted by: nisleib | September 24, 2010 12:01 PM | Report abuse

It's cause he hates babies. Obama hates babies, especially ugly babies.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 24, 2010 12:01 PM | Report abuse

STRF-

I'm sick of having to look at all your damn caps. No one likes to be screamed at but, since you are so chronically dense and apparently don't give a sh*t about anyone else on this blog, you probably don't realize it.

No one answers you because we are sick to frakking death of your spamming the threads with repetitive posts and CAPS.

Jeebus. Get. a. clue. If you haven't noticed, it has nothing to do with your pov. Frankly, its you we are sick of.

Take a frakking hike already.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | September 24, 2010 12:01 PM | Report abuse

Re: STRF: It's like NewsRef come back from some wilderness with terrible Stockholm Syndrome.

Posted by: Papagnello | September 24, 2010 12:02 PM | Report abuse

OT:

Brawl erupts between Reid, Angle supporters at forum

"He punched me twice, so I punched him back twice," Kay Mehta said as she nursed a red, tearing eye and waited for police to arrive. "I was just defending myself."

No arrests were made. Police interviewed those involved for a report on the incident. The names of all of the participants were not released.

[...]

A Reid backer, Kelly Tanaka, said one male Angle supporter refused to let her pass in front of him.

She alleged he tried to push her over the seats in front of him when she tried to pass. That is when the Reid and Angle partisans began to tussle and then exchange blows.

Tanaka accused the Angle supporter of hitting her. Mehta said she then got involved. Some bystanders said one of the women shoved the man back into his seat when he tried to get up.

The fight escalated after Angle finished speaking and blew a kiss to supporters in the audience. She left quickly to catch a flight to Reno as the scuffle disrupted the auditorium.

"I was just trying to get him off her," said Mehta, a Reid supporter. "We were just trying to get by."

http://www.lvrj.com/news/fight-erupts-at-reid--angle-election-forum-103685344.html

This is f__king bulls__t.

Angle did this.

SHE is responsible for her crowd.

Where is the media?

She has been EGGING her supporters on, coaxing them to violence.

WAKE THE F__K UP.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | September 24, 2010 12:06 PM | Report abuse

WHAT MAN HITS A WOMAN?

SHARRON ANGLE IS RESPONSIBLE.

2nd AMENDMENT REMEDIES.

The Republican Party IS RESPONSIBLE.

ENOUGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

CALL IT OUT, MEDIA. WAKE THE F__K UP MEDIA.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | September 24, 2010 12:08 PM | Report abuse

STR, your math does not = reality. And do your own damn research. Also, you seem to spend a lot of time here, are you retired living on SS and Medicare?

Have a great Friday all. The new ActBlue page is linked below. I left Feingold on because he received the most contributions and we need to keep going on him. I added Sestak, Boxer and my guy Bill Hedrick. He's a true progressive and came close to taking the seat in 2008. I'll be donating later today.

http://www.actblue.com/page/plcommunity

Posted by: lmsinca | September 24, 2010 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Ethan - Given that she is nuttier than squirrel poo I'd guess that those that support her are not that stable mentally either. I doubt they need much egging on.

For years we've heard wingnuts say the only way to talk to a liberal is through violence (remember Man Coulter posing with a baseball bat?) This incident can't really be much of a surprise to you, can it?

Don't expect anyone in the media to say squat about this. The media's job these days is to repeat, word for word, what the GOP tells it to.

Posted by: nisleib | September 24, 2010 12:13 PM | Report abuse

Maybe the "no tax cut vote" dynamic is this: if you want a tax cut, and are part of the middle class, the chances of getting one after the November election is to vote more Democrats in?

Maybe there is another dynamic going: just let the tax cuts expire for all which would then allow the deficit to recover somewhat.

Posted by: dozas | September 24, 2010 12:17 PM | Report abuse

Thanks to Greg for the insight on the buffoonish decision-making process on this.

I am with everyone else (Greg, Josh Marshall, Jon Chait, etc.) absolutely pulling their hair out over the decision not to hold a vote. Dems are clueless if they think they are already winning on this issue. Working in Dem politics is becoming increasingly frustrating as we approach the election. We seem intent on throwing away any advantages that might mitigate the beating we are in for.

I am still trying to figure out if this is more accurately characterized as a split between more liberal MoCs and Blue Dogs OR conversely, a split between those with a better grasp of electoral politics and amateurs. I know the beaten-dog syndrome is pervasive, so it might not just be Blue Dogs. Or perhaps there is lot of overlap, considering that so many Blue Dogs are relatively inexperienced.

Posted by: jbossch | September 24, 2010 12:17 PM | Report abuse

i explain why Obama wants to place a $1.16 Trillion dollar drag on the economy

That's only if you allowed ALL the Bush era tax cuts to expire. Obama has not supported that at all. In addition you realize we have these tax cuts now, right? So where are the jobs? Where are the unicorns and rainbows promised by Bush?

Stop it with the all CAPS propaganda please. Thanks.

As for the Dems, this has to be lowest moment in their history as a party. Absolutely zero balls. I hate to say it, but perhaps they need to lose and lose big. Maybe just maybe we'd get public servants interested in fighting for the people and not the corporations.

Posted by: Alex3 | September 24, 2010 12:18 PM | Report abuse

SaveTheRainforest:
So what? Make Adler put his money where his mouth is. Do you have any kind of idea what kinds of ads he's running against ex-Philadelphia Eagle Jon Runyan? Exactly, blasting the clown for using loopholes for not paying taxes. So I think Adler is all bark and no bite on this one.

Posted by: Calvin_Jones_and_the_13th_Apostle | September 24, 2010 12:18 PM | Report abuse

SaveTheRainforest:

I am not the only one here answering you, so it's obviously more than "no one". KEEP UP THE GOOD FIGHT!

Ethan2010:

You've missed that Yoda was wrong, and Luke eventually did NOT fail.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 24, 2010 12:18 PM | Report abuse

"Angle did this."

?????

Oh my!

Posted by: sbj3 | September 24, 2010 12:19 PM | Report abuse

"You've missed that Yoda was wrong, and Luke eventually did NOT fail."

Because he stopped being a chickens__t and faced his fears like Yoda told him to.

Until the Dems stand up to the INSANITY that is the Republican Party and take on the broken media and the broken political system and call them ALL out for their malfeasance (including corporate right-wing DINOs), they will lose and the country will continue to degrade.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | September 24, 2010 12:23 PM | Report abuse

People----------

need to learn

how to write

in complete sentences and paragraph form

to allow
----______\\\\]]]]]]####@@@@@
the blog comments to

stay readable and

on point.

When some lazy troll

breaks

UP!!!1111!!eleven!1!!!1one!!!11

e
v
e
r
y


sentence

as if it
s
////////\\\\\\\\\\
SOME special

important point,

it JUST MUDDLES UP the entire place.

But let's
---------------
face it,

that's

what

trolls do.

That's their entire goal.

In the desperate

h

ope

__________________

that they can ruin the experience for

everyone

ELSE.

So, really,

it's not all that surprising.

IT"S A REEL SHAMEZ

that

NoNeSeNcE like

this123456789101112131415

is what

the INTERWEBZ

results in.

IT cOUld

____________________________________

be sooooOOOOOOoooOOOooOOoooooO

much better.

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | September 24, 2010 12:24 PM | Report abuse

Ethan, the Dems in the Senate, and elsewhere, would have to chew off their own arms to get out of that relationship.

Ain't gonna happen.

Posted by: BGinCHI | September 24, 2010 12:25 PM | Report abuse

People----------

need to learn

how to write

in complete sentences and paragraph form

to allow


the blog comments to

stay readable and

on point.

When some lazy troll

breaks

UP!!!1111!!eleven!1!!!1one!!!11

e
v
e
r
y


sentence

as if it
s
////////\\\\\\\\\\
SOME special

important point,

it JUST MUDDLES UP the entire place.

But let's
---------------
face it,

that's

what

trolls do.

That's their entire goal.

In the desperate

h

ope

__________________

that they can ruin the experience for

everyone

ELSE.

So, really,

it's not all that surprising.

IT"S A REEL SHAMEZ

that

NoNeSeNcE like

this123456789101112131415

is what

the INTERWEBZ

results in.

IT cOUld

____________________________________

be sooooOOOOOOoooOOOooOOoooooO

much better.

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | September 24, 2010 12:25 PM | Report abuse

Why listen to a guy like Chuck Schumer, who's won every election he's ever been in, when you could listen to the "dead woman walking" Claire McCaskill and the "I'm a Democrat who can only get 47% in California" Dianne Feinstein?

IDIOTS.

Posted by: theorajones1 | September 24, 2010 12:29 PM | Report abuse

Alex3:

We DID have jobs under Bush, what are you talking about?! Using YOUR SIDE's logic, though, there would have been even MORE jobs lost under Obama "but for" the Bush tax cuts.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 24, 2010 12:34 PM | Report abuse

All, I've got video of Christine O'Donnell in 2003, vowing to stop the whole country from having sex:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/09/video_of_christine_odonnell_im.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | September 24, 2010 12:38 PM | Report abuse

This pretty much tells you "who started it":

"As Angle was giving her closing statement, a stream of Reid supporters among the 800-member audience began to leave the auditorium, which has close rows of theater-style seating.

A Reid backer, Kelly Tanaka, said one male Angle supporter refused to let her pass in front of him.

She alleged he tried to push her over the seats in front of him when she tried to pass. That is when the Reid and Angle partisans began to tussle and then exchange blows."

The Reid thugs tried to disrupt Angle by streaming out -- shoving their way in front of Angle people, ya think maybe -- while she was closing. Think that was unplanned?

It's very consistent with past Dem disruption and violence, including last year's Dem and union violence.

Posted by: quarterback1 | September 24, 2010 12:40 PM | Report abuse

I'd like all the tax cuts to expire.

There was nothing crippling about the tax code under Clinton. Nothing at all.

I don't buy in to the argument that letting the expiration of these tax cuts go as planned, as per the GOP plan, will crash this economy. Most economists agree that the multiplier effect of tax cuts is LESS than the multiplier effect of direct spending. Therefore, while tax cuts can have a positive impact, they just aren't the best bang for the buck.

Heck, according to Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody's Economy.com and a former adviser to Republican Sen. John McCain during his 2008 presidential campaign, the making the Bush income tax cuts permanent has a multiplier of 0.32, which means that for every dollar the government cuts in taxes, GDP grows by $0.32. Cutting the corporate tax rate also has a multiplier of $0.32. Yet the tax multiplier for food stamps is $1.74...

That is why I am not hot and bothered about the Dems not holding a vote on the tax cut issue; I don't WANT them to extend the tax cuts. I didn't want the tax cuts when Bush passed them, why would I want them now?

If you absolutely must do a tax cut of some kind go with a Payroll tax holiday.

Besides, I doubt the Dems could get the messaging right in any case. 90 plus percent of us received a tax cut as part of the stimulus yet what percent of us even realize that?

Posted by: nisleib | September 24, 2010 12:40 PM | Report abuse

Here are photos of the assault by Reid brawl.

http://www.lasvegassun.com/photos/galleries/2010/sep/23/reid-angle-forum-fight/

Who is instigating and initiating physical contact and confrontation?

NRO has a video of Angle's 5-minute closing, throughout which Reid supporters are heckling and disrupting, including the clever use of "applause" to drown her out, as would appear to be what we also see in the photos.

Sure, Ethan, "ANGLE ANGLE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS." For disruption and assault by Reid supporters.

Posted by: quarterback1 | September 24, 2010 12:59 PM | Report abuse

QB defends a male striking a woman.

Nuff said.

Truly despicable.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | September 24, 2010 1:00 PM | Report abuse

The Do Nothing / Know Nothing Republican Party only wants people to vote for them. Tax Cuts are only for that purpose. In theory people had thought that they help but do the math it doesn't make any sense. Paul Krugman has said this on tax cuts: Independent estimates say they would add about $3.7 trillion to the national debt over the next decade.

Posted by: MarkHarrisLtd | September 24, 2010 1:03 PM | Report abuse

QB1,

Your comments to Ethan2010 will have no resonance until you utilize the ALL CAPS. However, do not forget that ALL CAPS are apparently ok for him but no one else.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | September 24, 2010 1:09 PM | Report abuse

quarterback1:

Those pictures look like the "lady" struck the first blow.

Ethan2010:

You defend these males striking an ELDERLY woman no less.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znXHJQSX78o

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 24, 2010 1:11 PM | Report abuse

"Truly despicable."

On the contrary, I posted photographic evidence of what actually happened, rather than making wildly false assertions based on nothing, like you did.

I read the article closely, and correlated its details with the photographic evidence. They show Reid supporters trying to disrupt Angle by shoving their way out, past Angle supporters while she was speaking.

They show a beefy and unkempt female Reid supporter initiating confrontation and assaulting an elderly man. I don't find any of this surprising, having observed the behavior of leftists for many years in such settings.

Your avowed sense of chivalry doesn't cover up for your partisan blindness and the fact that you in typical fashion purported to pass judgment without the facts. Your side attacked. Whatever you think of a man defending himself, that's what happened. And you apparently defend the violence and disruptive behavior of your side.

Like we learned something new about you here. I've always said you are a dangerous personality.

Posted by: quarterback1 | September 24, 2010 1:18 PM | Report abuse

Standing up for a man striking a woman.

Joke, QB that pretty much sums you both up to a "T".

Despicable.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | September 24, 2010 1:24 PM | Report abuse

Troll,

Indeed, Ethan is the most unself-aware and blindly partisan lefty I've come across, and a walking set of double standards. He's also incapable of understanding any ideas outside his own set of beliefs, much more so than your ordinary partisan lefty. This reminds me of when he and others here declared Michelle Bachmann guilty of the "murder" of the Kentucky census taker who committed suicide. He always passes immediate judgment without regard to facts.

Posted by: quarterback1 | September 24, 2010 1:29 PM | Report abuse

Ethan2010:

I thought that you were "officially" done with me as of the prior thread? That means, at a minimum, not responding to my posts. This is a test.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 24, 2010 1:29 PM | Report abuse

I looked at the pictures in your link, did you?

It looks to me like the guy hit the girl first. And hard!

Posted by: nisleib | September 24, 2010 1:29 PM | Report abuse

I looked at those pictures in your link, it looks like the guy threw the first punch.

What a jerk. First he blocks her in, then he hits her.

I'd hope the police take action on this.

Posted by: nisleib | September 24, 2010 1:35 PM | Report abuse

nisleib:

To men the first "legal assault" in those pictures were by the lady against the man, but I'm happy to let a jury sort it out (we also don't know if there were "fighting words" involved).

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 24, 2010 1:35 PM | Report abuse

Poor Ethan, out of ammo. Shot to he**
by the facts and left repeating insults.

Btw, those anti-Prop 8 goons in jake's video were like a pack of wolves on that old woman. If they were not criminally charged, there is no justice. And those are your peeps again, Ethan.

"Despicable" indeed.

Posted by: quarterback1 | September 24, 2010 1:36 PM | Report abuse

Sorry for the double post, I'm having computer issues.

Posted by: nisleib | September 24, 2010 1:37 PM | Report abuse

men = me,

(darn Spellchecker ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 24, 2010 1:37 PM | Report abuse

Jake - Agreed, let a jury deal with it.

Still, those photos, while not good for anyone involved, look worse for the guy than the gal. It looks like he was intentionally blocking her and when she tried to get around he hit her.

Posted by: nisleib | September 24, 2010 1:40 PM | Report abuse

Apology accepted.

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 24, 2010 1:42 PM | Report abuse

Joke, I call out scum like you when I see you do something so reprehensible that I feel I need to respond.

The fact that you defend a man hitting a woman is disgusting. I don't care who got angry at who first. A real man doesn't strike a woman, PERIOD. And a real man doesn't defend another man who strikes a woman.

As I said, the fact that you stand up for a man striking a woman sums up your whole sense of morality (immorality, really, a total lack of morals) and lack of basic decency. That is YOU to a "T".

Posted by: Ethan2010 | September 24, 2010 1:43 PM | Report abuse

You are skipping right over the photo where she has her left hand on his chest, why is that?

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 24, 2010 1:44 PM | Report abuse

nisleib,

First contact, as well as first finger pointing, yelling, etc., are clearly the Reid woman.

But like jake, I'd be happy to let a jury decide the assault charge. Not much doubt I can see that she did exactly what he said -- shoved him when he stood up.

The bigger, "political" picture is clearly also that the Reid folks "started it."

Posted by: quarterback1 | September 24, 2010 1:44 PM | Report abuse

In the brawl pictures, why is everyone holding back the man?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | September 24, 2010 1:44 PM | Report abuse

Looks like these two American Indian (?) women tried to pass in front of this guy. One did and the other didn't. Looks like the second woman then was talking to the man or he was refusing to let her pass. He started to get up and she pushed him or touched him in his chest. Then he got up and punched her. The rest of the crowd was restraining him, not her.

That's the way the pictures look to me. I don't even know whose side each is on.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | September 24, 2010 1:49 PM | Report abuse

""People felt like, Why rock the boat on a good situation?" the aide tells me. "People weren't sure how how having a vote would effect that dynamic. We would have lost Democrats on certain aspects of the vote. Who knows if the media would cover that as Democrats being splintered? In a way the good polling gave people faith that we dont need to do anything on the issue because we're already winning."

Are these people insane? I really mean it. They can't possibly believe this BS, can they? Good lord, talk about out of touch with reality. And these guys are the ones saying policies are bad politics when they are too Liberal. The Est Dems are absolutely clueless. Or worse, they know exactly what they are doing. Either way, BLECCCHHHH!

Posted by: wbgonne | September 24, 2010 1:49 PM | Report abuse

If he wouldn't let her pass then yelling and finger pointing, even trying to push past someone, would be understandable.

What is NOT understandable is the guy, who belligerently wouldn't let her pass, then hauling off and smacking her.

Posted by: nisleib | September 24, 2010 1:51 PM | Report abuse

"In the brawl pictures, why is everyone holding back the man? "

They aren't, to the extent it means anything. Look more closely.

Two people are holding back the man; one of those appears to be a Reid supporter.

Two are holding back the woman.

One is between them pushing them apart.

Now, why are they pulling the woman OFF of the man?

Posted by: quarterback1 | September 24, 2010 1:52 PM | Report abuse

"The rest of the crowd was restraining him, not her."

Not true at all. Look at again.

Posted by: quarterback1 | September 24, 2010 1:54 PM | Report abuse

I guess I don't really understand this virtual reality stuff. How can Senate Dems measure support for something they don't do(vote for no tax increase for under 250K)? I thought not voting for something meant you didn't support it. I am so confused.

Posted by: xpatriate | September 24, 2010 1:57 PM | Report abuse

QB,

He struck the woman IN THE FACE.

Look at him, he weighs close to 300 pounds. He could have moved. He could have stood up and yelled at the woman to get off him. He didn't. He sat there and did not let the woman pass on purpose. Then he STRUCK. THE. WOMAN. IN. THE. FACE.

DESPICABLE.

Go ahead and support that, it clearly exhibits you are a disgusting person with a total lack of morals and sense of decency.

Truly outrageous and disgusting.

This is Sharron Angle's campaign supporter.

This is the kind of person who supports Sharron Angle. A man who would literally strike a woman in the face. And scum like you who defend him. Neither you nor he have the slightest sense of morality nor the most basic common human decency.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | September 24, 2010 2:01 PM | Report abuse

nisleib:

Sitting silently in one's seat, even if it means "not letting someone pass" is hardly justification for assault.

Ethan2010:

So much for your pledge to ignore me. BTW: every man, whether he hits a woman or not, is entitled to a defense (read the Gideon v. Wainwright and Miranda v. Arizona cases some day ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 24, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

Oh, great. More Koch-Head Con Law. Who you gonna believe, me or your lying eyes?

Posted by: wbgonne | September 24, 2010 2:10 PM | Report abuse

Wow. Ethan2010. That. Was. Quite. A. Comment.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | September 24, 2010 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Joke and you are entitled to be a scumbag pos. Doesn't mean you should be. But you are. (Read: reality v. you)

Posted by: Ethan2010 | September 24, 2010 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Troll,

Go ahead and cast your lot with your fellow scum. I thought you were above that, but I guess I was wrong. I guess you'd rather mock me while standing up for violence against women then support common decency. Suit yourself. In the end, it's not surprising. You are, after all, a Republican.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | September 24, 2010 2:17 PM | Report abuse

That's right, Troll, stand with US!

I am Sparticus

Posted by: JakeD2 | September 24, 2010 2:27 PM | Report abuse

When does the new season of Spartacus start?

Posted by: sbj3 | September 24, 2010 2:29 PM | Report abuse

It is sheer lunacy to think that raising people's taxes in an economic downturn (yes, I KNOW that it was in the original legislation!) is somehow a recipe for success. To say:

"Senate Dems felt they were alreadly winning on the issue, and in the end they thought a vote risked upsetting a dynamic that was already playing in their favor."

has Harry Ried's fingerprints all over it.

Here's the telegram guys:

HAD YOU PASSED LEGISLATION TO KEEP EVERYONE UNDER $250,000 WITH THE CUTS, THAT WAS INDEED A WINNING ARGUMENT. BUT YOU DIDN'T!!!!!!!!! YOU JUST GUARANTEED THAT EVERYONE'S TAXES WILL GO UP. THAT IS NOT A WINNING ARGUMENT!!!!!

Okay, off my soapbox. Love to hear the answer when a Rep candidate asks a Dem why they let taxes go up while they were in control of both houses. Plugged in Senate aide indeed!

Posted by: 54465446 | September 24, 2010 2:30 PM | Report abuse

I think Spartacus is delayed because the lead actor's cancer has returned.

Ethan2010, come on, your being even more hyperbolic than usual. We don't know all the facts and even the most peaceful person can take a pop at anyone given the right set of circumstances. If somebody were to get up in my grill and start shoving their finger in my face over something, when I'm already agitated because my candidate (in my subjective opinion) is being treated unfairly, I'd like to think I could show some restraint, but I couldn't guarantee it. Do I condone violence? No, but I can see circumstances in which it occurs where all parties are at fault. Relax and dismount your self righteous horse.

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | September 24, 2010 2:38 PM | Report abuse

Troll, I am not afraid of confrontation, as you well know. I have never EVER EVER struck someone. EVER. This man is a PIG. Go ahead and say it with me. The man is a PIG for striking that woman in the face. I don't care who is at fault or if the woman grabbed him by the shirt or even, frankly, if the woman hit him. A man has NO BUSINESS striking a woman for ANY reason. Especially not a large, heavyset man who was obviously in no personal danger. The man is a pig. Anyone who defends this man for any reason is disgusting and reprehensible.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | September 24, 2010 2:45 PM | Report abuse

Will you losers quit doing what Christine O'Donnell says God doesn't like with each other please? Who cares about pushing and shoving in Nevada?

Posted by: 54465446 | September 24, 2010 2:50 PM | Report abuse

"disgusting and reprehensible"

What if I'm already disgusting and reprehensible for other reasons?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | September 24, 2010 2:50 PM | Report abuse

disgusting and reprehensible

What if I'm "disgusting and reprehensible" for other reasons?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | September 24, 2010 2:54 PM | Report abuse

I'm just laughing my head off at poor spastic Ethan. LOLOLOL

You are a real hoot, but get a grip. You first went all hysterical claiming Angle supporter attacked, then the photos show it was a burly Reid woman accosting and shoving down an old man. Now your panties are all in a wad over hitting girls, and you're spewing insults. We've all seen bellowing, violent leftist women like this.

Don't you know that your "real man" chivalry schtick is like totally outre bourgeois sexism, though? Didn't they teach you that in your gender feminism classes?

Posted by: quarterback1 | September 24, 2010 3:49 PM | Report abuse

"When does the new season of Spartacus start?"

Is there anyone left to kill?

Posted by: quarterback1 | September 24, 2010 3:52 PM | 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