Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 8:40 AM ET, 02/ 2/2011

The Morning Plum

By Greg Sargent

* States grapple with whether to stop implementing health law: An important story: As I noted here yesterday, Wisconsin is threatening in the wake of Judge Vinson's ruling to stop implementing the health reform law. Now many other states are grappling with whether to follow suit.

Thankfully, it looks like few states will take this route, but confusion continues to reign far and wide, a hint of what could come if the mandate is overturned or if Repubilcans have any measure of success in gutting the law.

* Meanwhile, Health care companies are moving forward with implementation of the law, suggesting again that for all the noise about the mandate, health reform writ large is here to stay.

* House GOP to block regulation of greenhouse gases: This will make a lot of noise today: House Republicans will unveil legislation today banning the Environmental Protection Aency from regulating greenhouses gases under the Clean Air Act.

Republicans will frame the move as another effort to get rid of "job killing" regulations, but it seems that Obama and EPA administrator Lisa Jackson, a bete noir of conservatives, will stand firm, setting up a major showdown.

* Misdirection of the day: With the Senate set to vote on repeal of the health bill today, Mitch McConnell opines that any Senator who votes against repeal is effectively continuing to "dismiss the majority of people in this country as not knowing what they're talking about."

In reality, while several polls that offer only a straight choice between junking the bill and keeping it as is have shown a plurality backs repeal, many other surveys that drill deeper have shown that only small minorities support doing away with the law.

* Repeal fight is going to get very hot next year: Guess what? With the Supreme Court likely to hear arguments about the constitutionality of the individual mandate at the end of 2011 or beginning of 2012, the SCOTUS battle will neatly coincide with the heating up of the presidential race. Fun, fun, fun!

* Inside Obama's handling of Egypt crisis: Obama has taken a hammering from the right for not openly shoving Mubarak from power. But as Michael Scherer points out in a good piece explaining the conflicting forces pulling on Obama's thinking, he is basically staying consistent with the road map he laid out in his big Cairo speech in 2009, in which he vowed a continued push for freedom and democracy, but also said that "no system of government" should be "imposed" by one nation "on any other."

* But: Obama last night had a "direct and frank" conversation with Mubarak, telling him that an "orderly transition" must begin "now."

* Jake Tapper translates: "you cannot remain in office for seven more months, Hosni."

* Young Egyptians are very much on Obama's mind? Marc Ambinder burrows deep inside Obama's thought processes on the Egypt crisis, and finds that the aspirations of Egyptian youth are driving his thinking.

* Comic head-spinning right-wing idiocy of the day: A great post by Conor Friedersdorf on the right wing's laughably self-contradictory criticism of Obama's handling of the crisis.

* What about other dictatorships? Justin Elliott has a useful guide to all the dictatorships with poor human rights records we're propping up with your taxpayer dollars.

* When will Obama say something on gun control? White House advisers have promised some sort of presidential statement or action on guns, but we've heard nothing, and New York City mayor Mike Bloomberg is now upping the pressure:

"The president should stand up and I will keep urging him to say so. We've got to stop all this carnage."

Yup. More of this, please.

* Out-of-control sharia paranoia: Professional sharia alarmist Frank Gaffney names names.

* And the takedown of the day: Alex Pareene unmasks the ridiculous James O'Keefe-style "sting" video assault on Planned Parenthood.

What else is happening?

By Greg Sargent  | February 2, 2011; 8:40 AM ET
Categories:  Climate change, Foreign policy and national security, Health reform, House GOPers, Morning Plum, Senate Dems, Senate Republicans, Supreme Court  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Happy Hour Roundup
Next: Egyptian protesters clash

Comments

OBAMA IS TALKING WITH THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD

You have no reason to trust Obama isn't implementing his "Muslim Agenda"

Another "Bait and Switch."

Report:

The Egyptian government has information a diplomat at the U.S. embassy in Cairo secretly met yesterday with a senior leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, the nation's major Islamist opposition group.

The topic of the meeting was the future of Egypt following the "fall" of President Hosni Mubarak, an Egyptian intelligence official says.


The claim comes amid charges from Cairo that the Obama administration has been encouraging the protests rocking Egypt and targeting the rule of Mubarak, a key U.S. ally in the Middle East.

The Egyptian intelligence official said his government has information of a meeting that took place yesterday between Issam El-Erian, a senior leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, and Frank Wisner, a former U.S. ambassador to Egypt.

The Obama administration dispatched Wisner to Egypt this past weekend to report to the State Department and White House a general sense of the situation in the embattled country

_____________________________

A BIG DEAL was made about Wisconsin - and perhaps the liberals were saying that they should be implementing a law which they believe to be unConstitutional -

AND a law which has been struck down by the Courts.

Officials of a State have ZERO obligation to spend the tax dollars of their People on a law declared unConstitutional


______________________


Well, what do you EXPECT?


EVERYONE TOLD THE LIBERALS THAT THE BILL WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL


The liberals and Obama REFUSED to negotiate the differences with the Republicans.

THAT WAS ARROGANCE THAT NOW IS DESTROYING THE HEALTH CARE BILL

Arrogance, arrogance which DRIPS from Greg Sargent's attitude as well.

That is the TRUTH -

And it is about time the liberals start to take a long look at themselves - and they UNDERSTAND WHY THEY ARE GETTING VOTED OUT. THIS ELECTION WAS JUST THE BEGINNING. MORE LIBERALS ARE OUT.

_________________________


ONE great thing about the Court decision - if it stands, HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUMS WILL GO DOWN.

It is simple.

All these 20%-25% increases should be rolled back - COMPANIES WILL START HIRING AGAIN.

Get rid of the health care bill.

If Obama was a REAL MAN, he would sign the repeal and be done with it.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | February 2, 2011 8:46 AM | Report abuse

We warned you the individual mandate was unconstitutional, but the Dems jammed it through anyways, and REPUBLICANS are to blame for the "confusion" when federal judges (plural) agree with us?!

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 2, 2011 8:50 AM | Report abuse

Greg et al.,

If it is as you say, and it is as you say, that "only small minorities support doing away with the law," why is it that I don't hear this fact being hammered home in the news mediad. Where are the Democrats on this issue? Am I tuned in to the wrong stations?

Posted by: mmyotis | February 2, 2011 8:54 AM | Report abuse

Funny how the people who came up with the idea of the individual mandate are now claiming to have "warned" everyone that it was unconstitutional.

Why not just admit that the Republicans have never had any ideas about how to address the health care mess, because they don't think it's a problem? If the only idea they were able to come up with to address the issue they now claim is unconstitutional, isn't that the same as saying they have no ideas?

Posted by: JennOfArk | February 2, 2011 8:55 AM | Report abuse

OBAMA IS TALKING WITH THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD

You have no reason to trust Obama isn't implementing his "Muslim Agenda"


Obama, for years, has been SOFT on terrorism. American National Security Interests have been pushed aside by Obama, in order to be easy on terrorism suspects and the fight on terrorism.


NOW - Obama has a chance to move forward his "Muslim Agenda."


The American People really do not know where Obama stands on Muslim Issues. And Obama has been so secretive about these kinds of issues - the "transparency" that Obama claims has simply not been showed in practice.

There is NO REASON to trust Obama.


This is EXACTLY not the situation the American People deserve. The American People deserve a person who has UNQUESTIONABLE 100% LOYALTY TO THE UNITED STATES AND AMERICAN NATIONAL SECURITY INTERESTS.


We do NOT have that with Obama. If a liberal disputes that, the liberal is LYING.

Obama's Muslim heritage is DRAGGING DOWN our foreign policy.


DOES OBAMA SECRETLY WANT THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD TO TAKE OVER EGYPT???


We shouldn't even have to ask the question

With Bush, no one would ever even think about the question.


OBAMA HAS TO GO - TAKE TO THE STREETS - DEMONSTRATE - LET'S GET OBAMA OUT THE SAME WAY


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | February 2, 2011 8:55 AM | Report abuse

Just remember the humiliating defeat the Obamacrats suffered in the NOVEMBER REVOLUTION of 2010. Remember that the TEA PARTY was a strong, anti-Obamacare force during that time and now.

PRINCETON, NJ -- About 7 in 10 national adults, including 88% of Republicans, say it is important that Republican leaders in Congress take the Tea Party movement's positions and objectives into account as they address the nation's problems. Among Republicans, 53% rate this "very important."...........Gallup

America is depending on Republicans to oppose the Obamanation at every turn, by an overwhelming majority.

The mission is clear.

Let's roll!

Posted by: battleground51 | February 2, 2011 9:01 AM | Report abuse

@Greg

I'm sure this was covered during the ACORN nonsense, but I could use a refresher. Isn't it illegal to secretly record someone with both video & sound? How is it that the individuals who are on these videos can't also sue Live Action for doing so?

Not only would that punish them for creating these utterly false stories, but taking them to court would require them to release the uneditted footage.

I'm sure they've found a loophole or something that lets them get away with this invasion of privacy...but I just don't know what it is.

Do you?

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | February 2, 2011 9:04 AM | Report abuse

Rainforest, let me know what street you're taking!

Posted by: Papagnello | February 2, 2011 9:09 AM | Report abuse

mmoytis

That is NOT true - the MAJORITY of the American People want to get rid of the health care bill.


The liberals STACK the questions on some surveys - and make people FORGET the costs of the bill, the costs to the Economy, the COSTS TO EMPLOYMENT.


And all of a sudden, the liberals are talking in a DECEPTIVE WAY about the polling.


Its ALL a bunch of lies.


The American People want to get rid of this bill. YOU WANT A SURVEY? Take the election last November - Republicans took control of the House - the CLEAR SENTIMENT OF THE PEOPLE.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | February 2, 2011 9:12 AM | Report abuse

Sometimes you just can't let the junk in the comments section of the PlumLine stand.

""Tony Blair is running from interview to interview trying to drum up fear of an “Islamic” takeover of Egypt and proclaiming Mubarak “immensely courageous and a force for good” in an interview with Piers Morgan on CNN.

“I don’t think the west should be the slightest bit embarrassed about the fact that it’s been working with Mubarak over the peace process but at the same time it’s been urging change in Egypt,” he said.

One comment the Guardian did not report but which was particularly striking was a response to Morgan’s questioning why the UK and US went to war on Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein but did not insist that Mubarak go. Blair – with a look of outrage said: “Mubarak is no Saddam!”

Robert Fisk, certainly the best western reporter on the Middle East, may not have heard Blair’s nonsense from the streets of Cairo but his latest column is an ideal response:

And then there was the absence of the “Islamism” that haunts the darkest corners of the West, encouraged – as usual – by America and Israel. As my mobile phone vibrated again and again, it was the same old story. Every radio anchor, every announcer, every newsroom wanted to know if the Muslim Brotherhood was behind this epic demonstration. Would the Brotherhood take over Egypt? I told the truth. It was rubbish. Why, they might get only 20 per cent at an election, 145,000 members out of a population of 80 million.

A crowd of English-speaking Egyptians crowded round me during one of the imperishable interviews and collapsed in laughter so loud that I had to bring the broadcast to an end.""

Posted by: lmsinca | February 2, 2011 9:23 AM | Report abuse

@Imsinca

"Sometimes you just can't let the junk in the comments section of the PlumLine stand."

If only the moderators of this site thought that way...

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | February 2, 2011 9:27 AM | Report abuse

@clawrence

"REPUBLICANS are to blame for the "confusion" when federal judges (plural) agree with us?!"

You do realize that the individual mandate was a REPUBLICAN idea don't you.

You do realize that Obama and virtually all the progressives first choice for HCR would have been Medicare for all or at minimum an "option" to buy into Medicare.
Why didn't the Dems do that Clawrence.

Because Obama was foolish enough to think he could work with the R's and the Insurance companies and so he incorporated a REPUBLICAN idea.

And so my question for you Clawrence..is WHY did the Republicans offer an idea that is unconstitutional?

Posted by: rukidding7 | February 2, 2011 9:30 AM | Report abuse

Hope the Democrats grab the ring this time .. let the Republicans try to sell green technology as a jobs killer, and leave it to the Democrats to talk about millions of new jobs instead.

An American company just sunk 300 extra large into a factory in Saigon ... 600 good jobs. China and Korea are going full bore on solar and wind and the USA is sticking with maximizing Exxon shareholder value.

Posted by: caothien9 | February 2, 2011 9:34 AM | Report abuse

DDAWD:

On the previous thread you challenged:

"""Go on, point me to the time where any one of the three of us called abortion a trivial decision.""

I responded to you at length there, but cao has subsequently made things a lot easier on both of us. He now says:

""At the developmental point of most abortions the fetus doesn't even have a nervous system yet. Even with the most fanciful flights it is months from having a mind, and given that, i say that abortion at thAt stage is a morally trivial decision""

There you go.

Posted by: ScottC3 | February 2, 2011 9:40 AM | Report abuse

@Cao

I'm going to prey upon your intellect and ask for you to think before providing an honest answer.

You know I'm not some knee jerk righty who thinks all socialism is evil...IMO countries that balance socialism and free enterprise fare the best and that our "real" argument is simply about the "balance" of the two not the "either/or" straw man tossed up by our righty friends.

Having said all of that Cao...those 600 good jobs in Saigon...how are the workers being treated these day. I do not expect Vietnam to have necessarily caught up with our OSHA standards, or our pay rates in just a single generation after a devastating war sprayed their nation with Agent Orange and flattened many of their structures.

I ask this mainly in an attempt to ascertain how much of a "labor" advantage Vietnam still has over the U.S. or whether the pay/worker protections e.g OSHA are nearing what the U.S. requires.

Posted by: rukidding7 | February 2, 2011 9:45 AM | Report abuse

It is interesting that none of the house and senate members are complaining about their "Obama Care" provided by Government, but as soon we, the people, suppose to have the same health care, they got problem with it.
And yet some of you dummies support them and trust them? WOW, we are one stupid nation really.

Posted by: BOBSTERII | February 2, 2011 9:49 AM | Report abuse

@Greg

OT But...any word when your techies are going to give us some protection from the disturbed person who corrupts every thread?

Again perhaps the WaPo could hire Kevin.:-)

Posted by: rukidding7 | February 2, 2011 9:52 AM | Report abuse

rukidding7 writes
"You do realize that the individual mandate was a REPUBLICAN idea don't you.
... And so my question for you Clawrence..is WHY did the Republicans offer an idea that is unconstitutional?"


rukidding, what you need to remember is that this is not a policy fight for the Republicans. It is a political fight. They don't care what is in the affordable care act; they care only that the Dems generally & President Obama specifically do not have significant policy victories on which to run for reelection. Trying to have a policy debate or discussion with people who are only concerned about the politics is an exercise in futility.

Posted by: bsimon1 | February 2, 2011 9:56 AM | Report abuse

@Clawrence

We're waiting on your answer as to why the Republicans appear to be such back stabbers.

Obama gave up on Medicare for all or even the Public Option to buy into Medicare even though that was clearly the will of the American people as judged by poll after poll after poll.

http://www.wpasinglepayer.org/PollResults.html

And so Obama tried to work with Republicans even thought the Tea Party leader Sen Demented said nothing about working with the Dems and instead talked purely about partisan advantage as in "Obama's Waterloo".

And so again Clawrence WHY did the Republicans offer up an unconstitutional idea? Do you suppose they were out to trick him? Perhaps a simple honest mistake by the Republicans to come up with an unconstitutional idea....

We're waiting Clawrence..........

Posted by: rukidding7 | February 2, 2011 10:00 AM | Report abuse

Meanwhile, in another "ends-justify-means" universe, if government can FORCE Americans to buy health insurance, what's to stop them from forcing you (like Switzerland) to buy a guns and ammo?

Five South Dakota lawmakers have introduced legislation that would require any adult 21 or older to buy a firearm “sufficient to provide for their ordinary self-defense.”

The bill, which would take effect Jan. 1, 2012, would give people six months to acquire a firearm after turning 21. The provision does not apply to people who are barred from owning a firearm.

Nor does the measure specify what type of firearm. Instead, residents would pick one “suitable to their temperament, physical capacity, and preference.”

*Illustrating Pelosi-Care absurdity by being absurd.*

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | February 2, 2011 10:00 AM | Report abuse

lmsinca:

""Robert Fisk, certainly the best western reporter on the Middle East...""

Certainly? Well, if by "best" you mean "most virulently anti-American and unobjective reporter in the middle east", then perhaps Fisk is in the running.

You may have heard of the blogging term "fisking", meaning to effectively refute a column or comment line by line. The similarity to to his name is no coincidence, and it isn't because he was the "fisker".

Posted by: ScottC3 | February 2, 2011 10:02 AM | Report abuse

Short answer, ruk, this is an extremely poor country. It's also quite corrupt. I make no bones. Honest answer: I don't know much about the state of workplace safety here but I wouldn't be it's at OSHA standards. But safety is serious business here.

My impression is that the workplace mutilation rate is way below China's. But I have only observation , not data.

The reason companies like Intel come here is the combination of cheap labor and educated workforce. Give Vietnamese a chance to advance and they'll grab at it, take night school classes, study their brains out. In the USA we'd visit friends on the weekends and see kids studying I
Instead of hanging at the mall. The work ethic is like no other.

Posted by: caothien9 | February 2, 2011 10:04 AM | Report abuse

@bsimon

"Trying to have a policy debate or discussion with people who are only concerned about the politics is an exercise in futility."

Indeed! :-) I'm in total agreement with that statement. However I perceive Clawrence to be a nice man who tries to post with manners and so I just thought I'd toss him some food for thought.

Posted by: rukidding7 | February 2, 2011 10:05 AM | Report abuse

Things in Cairo are turning ugly. Pro-Mubarak counter-protesters showed up today on horses and camels, armed with machetes and knives. The military is not intervening to keep the factions separated. The time to shove Mubarak out may be coming soon.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | February 2, 2011 10:06 AM | Report abuse

Scott

I don't know much about Fisk, but I've heard the same thing from several different sources, so maybe he's right? Or we could just, pardon my French, shoot the messenger.

Posted by: lmsinca | February 2, 2011 10:12 AM | Report abuse

@Cao

Thanks for the answer.

"The work ethic is like no other."

I think that is true for many nations and immigrants to our country. They are hungry, we are not, consequently they are eating our lunch.

The Mexican immigrants in our nation are almost mind numbingly hard workers. I drove a large truck for several years here in Florida going out to the dairy farms to load raw milk on my trailer. I got to know many Mexican immigrants...became friends with one...and was always impressed at how hard they worked in the milk parlors. As my friend explained to me however the dairy farms were the "good" jobs for immigrants. The vegetable and fruit farms..not sooo much. These people are incredibly industrious and work far harder than most of the Americans I have known.

And at the risk of offending 12Bar, whom I respect and like very much..IMHO one of the major things holding back our Mexican immigrants is their Catholic faith. They believe it when the Pope tells them birth control is a sin, consequently they are burdened (at least in the economic sense) with very large families. It's tough enough to work your way up from the very bottom of the economic heap when you have language difficulties, receive poor pay..far below minimum wage..and then you toss in ten mouths to feed..it's a tough road for them.

Sorry my bleeding heart is dripping once again but I have seen the Mexicans out on our Florida farms first hand.

Posted by: rukidding7 | February 2, 2011 10:16 AM | Report abuse

ruk7, Abe Lincoln was a REPUBLICAN and did a few things that were unconstitutional too, but given the alternative better in the long run. Anything was better than Hillary's plan. As I told you on the other thread, two wrongs (or even 10) sometimes make a right.

In related news: Anderson Cooper was punched 10 in head by mob in Egypt. No wonder Katie Couric doesn't want to go there.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 2, 2011 10:19 AM | Report abuse

for RUK7:

"When I returned you all were fuming about the type of comments you just suggested. I never read anything like this from Cao."

Just so you know what kind of company your keeping, one of these quotes was from just last evening. Two were from his days on the Fix when he made exactly the same sort of remarks that caused his meltdown yesterday. Imagine what would happen if he was actually reading my comments.

=========================================
I won't speculate about whatever the wh*re who squatted and grunted and expelled you into the pile of fish guts she was busy cleaning thought about while she caught her breath, perhaps it was an idle speculation about which of the hundreds of seven dollar clients contributed the curdled tapioca that included the other half of your genes.

Posted by: caothien9 | February 2, 2011
========================================

Conservatives should be collectively gassed.

Posted by: caothien9 | December 20, 2010
=======================================

Anyone opposed to abortion should read leapin's post below and reconsider. This creep should definitely have been aborted

Posted by: Noacoler | March 15, 2010
=======================================

Better to abort thirty seconds before birth than bring an unwanted child into an already overpopulated world.

Posted by: Noacoler | February 23, 2010
========================================

Nice guy, huh? You see RUK, some "things have learned to walk that ought to crawl."

Posted by: Brigade | February 2, 2011 10:27 AM | Report abuse

@ Bernie: "tao - Will you be able to get up to the hill?"

Yes, oh yes, that will happen.

One thing about UpstateNY: we get after it in the aftermath, navigation on Thurs will be fine.

It's official...1st "snow day" since high school. It's snowing in sheets now.

Don't get to do this every year, but there's enough snow now in the ADKs to snowshoe up a peak packing telemarks (Macomb in the Dix Range is the most accessible) and ski down a one of the slides. That's the Fri plan. Whiteface on Sat..

{{{ I think my Celt forbears must have snuggled up with some Vikes @ some point:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pathfinder_(1987_film) }}}

Posted by: tao9 | February 2, 2011 10:28 AM | Report abuse

A few Republicans offering something resembling the individual mandate a DECADE earlier was not some kind of trick. You guys also can't seem to distinguish between RomneyCare (on the State level, where citizens are free to move to another State) and ObamaCare (which would force someone to kill themselves or move to Vietnam, although I'm not sure which of those "options" is worse).

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 2, 2011 10:30 AM | Report abuse

I was wondering if the Egyptian leadership was going to take a page from how Iran handled their large protests.

It looks like they are going to follow the Iranian blue print, and have now send out their thugs to launch violent assaults on the gatherings of protesters.

This was the method that the Iranian regime used to erode the size of the turnouts, until finally the protests faded away.

Mubarak said he is not going to run again, but his regime have no intention of going away.

Watch for the violence to escalate, and for Mubarak's goons to keep on attacking protesters, just like The Ayatollahs' goons did to the protesters in Tehran.

Posted by: Liam-still | February 2, 2011 10:31 AM | Report abuse

Brigade, over at the Fix, caothien9 repeatedly called Palin "stupid" for not aborting her Down syndrome child.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 2, 2011 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Clawrence....

Are you suggesting you believe in IOKIYAR?

You know, it's ok if you're a Republican?

Are you saying that Obama should have known better than to adopt a REPUBLICAN idea in HCR in order to try and achieve a bi-partisan solution?

Is that the same logic that made it OK for R's to introduce legislative ideas and then literally turn around and vote against that very same legislation after Obama said, "Hey guys great idea let's do it"?

Are you suggesting you're against bi-partisan solutions? Obama adopts a Republican idea and then gets his bill taken to court by Republicans because THEIR idea is unconstitutional? Are you suggesting that Obama should simply ignore ALL Republican ideas because once he accepts them and proposes their legislation they then turn against him and vote against the very legislation THEY originated.

I'm confused Clawrence. Are you suggesting that even though Obama was swept into office with the largest plurality in decades he should simply ignore ANY progressive ideas and do EXACTLY what the R's want?

But even that is confusing Clawrence since again he has done that very thing in at least two specific case where the R's then turned around and voted against their own proposals.

Really I'm not sure how you want Obama to govern...and don't come up with that will of the people crap unless you were a solid supporter of Medicare for all because that was the will of the American people...
Again clawrence...

http://www.wpasinglepayer.org/PollResults.html

Posted by: rukidding7 | February 2, 2011 10:36 AM | Report abuse

No.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 2, 2011 10:40 AM | Report abuse

"reconciled with a limited government of enumerated powers"


I suppose that is EXACTLY THE QUESTION


Conservatives believe in a "limited government of enumerated powers."


Liberals do NOT believe that - they believe that the Federal government should be expanded - in an UNLIMITED WAY - to put in place their horrible "liberal agenda."


So - it seems we have a legitimate dispute - EXCEPT that the Constitution is a "limited government of enumerated powers" - and there really is no CONSTITUTIONAL way the liberals can expanded the Federal government in an unlimited way. The Conservatives are right - and it is that plain and simple.

Posted by: RainForestRising | February 2, 2011 10:42 AM | Report abuse

Papagnello in reply to your comment at 9:09 AM


I think that because of the weather, we are going to have to do this in the Spring


Also - instead of a march, maybe we will have everyone just take lawn chairs and just sit in the street, like a Stationary March - to symbolize that we are steadfast in our resolve.


We could also tailgate, cook up some food, a few kegs - that will work.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | February 2, 2011 10:45 AM | Report abuse

Republicans Vote To Repeal Obama-Backed Bill That Would Destroy Asteroid Headed For Earth

http://www.theonion.com/articles/republicans-vote-to-repeal-obamabacked-bill-that-w,19025/

"WASHINGTON—In a strong rebuke of President Obama and his domestic agenda, all 242 House Republicans voted Wednesday to repeal the Asteroid Destruction and American Preservation Act, which was signed into law last year to destroy the immense asteroid currently hurtling toward Earth.

The $440 billion legislation, which would send a dozen high-thrust plasma impactor probes to shatter the massive asteroid before it strikes the planet, would affect more than 300 million Americans and is strongly opposed by the GOP.

"The voters sent us to Washington to stand up for individual liberty, not big government," Rep. Steve King (R-IA) said at a press conference. "Obama's plan would take away citizens' fundamental freedoms, forcing each of us into hastily built concrete bunkers and empowering the federal government to ration our access to food, water, and potassium iodide tablets while underground."

"We believe that the decisions of how to deal with the massive asteroid are best left to the individual," King added.

Repealing the act, which opponents have branded 'Obamastroid,' has been the cornerstone of the GOP agenda since the law's passage last August. Throughout the 2010 elections, Republican candidates claimed that the Democrats' plan to smash the space rock and shield citizens from its fragments was "a classic example of the federal government needlessly interfering in the lives of everyday Americans."
..............................
Use link to go to the entire long report.

Posted by: Liam-still | February 2, 2011 10:45 AM | Report abuse

All, new Adam Serwer post on the violence in Egypt:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2011/02/egyptian_protesters_clash.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | February 2, 2011 10:51 AM | Report abuse

Clawrence

Could we make a deal my brother. While I agree with you that in "some" cases perhaps two wrongs can make a right..I find those cases to be very rare.

Pointing out somebody's boorish behavior towards G.W. Bush does not justify boorish behavior towards Obama..or the next President or the next President.

You sound childish IMHO as in "neener neener but he did it first mommy" every time you come to the blog with some justification for present or future behavior based on somebody's past transgressions.

A perfect example is your last post about Cao. Anybody who has carefully read Cao would come to the conclusion that in "reality" he more than likely believes Sarah Palin's decision about Trig visa vis abortion was SARAH PALIN'S own personal decision. Now if he was drawn into a food fight with potty mouthed Brigade perhaps he slipped and got caught up in blog hyperbole...haven't we all at one time or another? But why would you keep dwelling on that when it's not a real representation of how Cao thinks or has posted in general.

So here' an idea for you to munch on Clawrence. Anybody who ranted and raved in an inappropriate fashion at G.W. Bush was just that inappropriate. Anybody who rants at Obama inappropriately is also just that inappropriate. The inappropriate rants against G.W. do not excuse the inappropriate rants against Obama..nor will rants against Obama excuse rants at the next R President. And in fact Clawrence...you and the right wing conservatives are sooo much better than that you are going to take the high road.

Now let's get back to the "important" topic of the day..WTF is going on in Egypt. You say someone punched Anderson Cooper in the head. That's too bad. I am beginning to develop some real respect for Anderson Cooper, this will simply add to it...he's putting his butt on the front line and I appreciate that..bully for Anderson.

Richard Engel is my favorite because he continually puts his rear on the line in Iraq, Afghanistan and now Egypt. I think Richard Engel must be an adrenalin junkie!

Posted by: rukidding7 | February 2, 2011 10:57 AM | Report abuse

Richard Engel is my favorite because he continually puts his rear on the line in Iraq, Afghanistan and now Egypt. I think Richard Engel must be an adrenalin junkie!

Posted by: rukidding7 | February 2, 2011 10:57 AM
========================================

Steve Centanni of FOX should be your favorite. He was actually captured by terrorists. Puts his rear on the line instead of just bloviating about it.

Posted by: Brigade | February 2, 2011 11:02 AM | Report abuse

I think I offered up the solution in comments yesterday - unfortunately at the end of a dead thread - so here goes again: all these states suing over the health care plan already have an opt-out provision; they can set up their own plan that meets the same goals and opt out of the federal plan. That didn't keep them from suing; apparently they want the option to have NO plan and to keep the status quo.

We should give it to them by amending the health care law to allow states to opt-out WITHOUT setting up their own plan - in return for forfeiture of all federal Medicaid funding. Then, the glorious free market can pick up the tab for the uninsurable and indigent in those states, with skyrocketing annual premiums for those who do have insurance.

This would certainly pass constitutional muster, as there's no coercion whatsoever, while at the same time, allowing the states convinced of the superiority of free market healthcare to really experience it. After all, if they aren't willing to get with the federal program, or to set up their own, we shouldn't be subsidizing their private healthcare market.

I suspect this would put an end to the lawsuits pretty quickly; opting out would not release hospitals in these states from having to treat all comers to emergency rooms so either the state will have to fund it via higher taxes or the costs will be passed on to private insurers who will continue to jack up premiums (+ 30% for profit), which will lead to a business exodus from any state adopting this course. I think it might be the best way forward - it will satisfy those wingnuts who insist that the states are "laboratories" for what works, and will illustrate in short order what DOESN'T work, which is the system we've had, minus federal dollars propping it up.

I mean, after all, if they insist on being freed from the tyranny of federal mandates on health care access, it's only right that they should also be freed of the tyranny of federal dollars to keep their inefficient & expensive free market health care systems chugging along.

Posted by: JennOfArk | February 2, 2011 11:02 AM | Report abuse

@tao

Here I was all set to give you guys the ole "neener neener" it's sunny and 72 here today in St. Pete and you go and ruin it for me.

"Don't get to do this every year, but there's enough snow now in the ADKs to snowshoe up a peak packing telemarks (Macomb in the Dix Range is the most accessible) and ski down a one of the slides. That's the Fri plan. Whiteface on Sat.."

I am SERIOUSLY envious. Enjoy it enough for all of we Celts...I know you will. :-)

Posted by: rukidding7 | February 2, 2011 11:06 AM | Report abuse

Great. Another dead thread. Ok, so I'll bring it up AGAIN the next time the topic comes up - and probably post it right after ANOTHER new thread is announced.

Posted by: JennOfArk | February 2, 2011 11:10 AM | Report abuse

RUK7 (to clawrence):
"A perfect example is your last post about Cao. Anybody who has carefully read Cao would come to the conclusion that in "reality" he more than likely believes Sarah Palin's decision about Trig visa vis abortion was SARAH PALIN'S own personal decision."
===================================

Who else's decision would it have been? Have you lost your marbles? That wasn't even the issue. He said she was "stupid" for not aborting.

=======================================

"But why would you keep dwelling on that when it's not a real representation of how Cao thinks or has posted in general."

How do you know what he thinks? It is most certainly a representation of his posts in general. Why do you think he was continually banned at the Fix? You're losing what little credibility you have by supporting someone who dazzles you with his claims to be intelligent while factually in error on most of his verifiable claims---he lies a lot, too.

Posted by: Brigade | February 2, 2011 11:10 AM | Report abuse

I mean, after all, if they insist on being freed from the tyranny of federal mandates on health care access, it's only right that they should also be freed of the tyranny of federal dollars to keep their inefficient & expensive free market health care systems chugging along.

Posted by: JennOfArk | February 2, 2011 11:02 AM
========================================

That might be okay if they could also be free of the federal taxes needed to support the program.

Posted by: Brigade | February 2, 2011 11:13 AM | Report abuse

Brigade, it's no use trying to reason with him. He's content to ignore the ugly truth about caothien9, Noacoler, GoldAndTanzanite, and whatever other names Chris Fox has had to use because he got banned over and over again. There is no one posting here on the right as evil and vicious as caothien9.

Again, I ask Greg: why hasnt caothien9 been banned?

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 2, 2011 11:18 AM | Report abuse

@Jenn -- I won't comment on the wisdom of the plan, but some states are considering dropping out of Medicaid.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/11/what_if_states_ditch_medicaid.html

Posted by: NoVAHockey | February 2, 2011 11:45 AM | Report abuse

@Brigade & Clawrence

First off you need to understand one important thing. I could give a rat's arse about anything that went on at the Fix.
I'm not a Cilizza fan and quite honestly I've NEVER visited his column much less the comments section.

Secondly you and clawrence need to grow up and let it go....I'm a fan of Cao's based on Cao's posts since I've been back at the PL. I don't really care what went on at the Fix. When it collapsed we were inundated by potty mouths and deranged people like rainman..and Jake who finally got tossed when he confessed his only reason for being here was to bring down another "liberal" blog, not because of birtherism or any political views.

"his claims to be intelligent while factually in error on most of his verifiable claims---he lies a lot, too. "

I have yet to read Cao claim he is intelligent. That was MY claim, so now you guys are dogging him for something I said. BTW I stand by that claim...if you weed through the potty mouth BS hurled by both sides and focus on "substance" it would be foolish for anybody to deny that he is obviously incredibly bright, very well read and informed. So he comes to different conclusions than you guys. Get over it...and if this is a feud you brought over from the Fix may I suggest you go back to the Fix. This is the Plumline. THIS is where I have gotten my very positive observations of Cao.

One last thought boys...it seems apparent to me that once Cao realized how many of us on PL enjoy substance over style...he amended his "style" and concentrated far more on substance. I wish I could make that same statement about you two. I know you can do it...if you simply get over the effing Fix. NOBODY here cares about the Fix..let it go.

This is the last time I'll address this as it's probably really really irritating my fellow posters here as a total waste of time...but it was at the end of the thread and I still have hope for you two...we're going to convert you from Fixistas to PLiners yet. :-)


@Jenn

Yes do re-post later...you make excellent points!

Posted by: rukidding7 | February 2, 2011 11:53 AM | Report abuse

That might be okay if they could also be free of the federal taxes needed to support the program.

Federal Medicaid matching funds aren't based on how much any given state contributes in the Medicaid portion of FICA. Given that the states who get the highest rates on matching funds are the ones where per capita incomes are the lowest, just pulling back the matching funds - which these states' citizens have not paid via federal taxation - would pretty much put them in the crapper.

Not surprisingly, many of these are the very states who are suing to get out from under the onerous boot of federal oppression on health care.

But I'd still say, pull back all the Medicaid funding. Back in the day, the feds did the same thing with states balking at raising the drinking age. They didn't MAKE them raise it, they said, "raise it or forfeit your federal highway funds." Not "raise it or forfeit your federal highway funds, but your citizens won't have to pay the taxes that go to federal highway funding."

Just amend AHCA or the Medicaid act to say that if a state isn't participating in the federal program or setting up their own program, they forfeit Medicaid funding.

Posted by: JennOfArk | February 2, 2011 12:01 PM | Report abuse

You see, Brigade? He actually thinks it's OUR fault but anything caothien9 has posted is all in the past, even though caothien9 just TODAY called your mother a "wh*re who squatted and grunted and expelled you into the pile of fish guts she was busy cleaning".

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 2, 2011 12:05 PM | Report abuse

'"wh*re who squatted and grunted and expelled you into the pile of fish guts she was busy cleaning"."

In response to Brigades suggestion that Cao's mother should have aborted him.

clawrence let it go...stop this tit for tat nonsense...PLEASE..I like you and you are truly embarrassing yourself as being incredibly childish and you're embarrassing me for responding.

It's not about whose "fault" it is...I certainly am not trying to charge "fault" I'm simply suggested we'd all be better off if you guys grew up a bit and let go of this OBSESSIVE tit for tat..whether it be with Obama or Cao...it's really easy...take a deep breath...that's it...now release it and let it go...

Posted by: rukidding7 | February 2, 2011 12:23 PM | Report abuse

Then STOP responding.

Posted by: clawrence12 | February 2, 2011 12:32 PM | Report abuse

"Alex Pareene unmasks the ridiculous James O'Keefe-style "sting" video assault on Planned Parenthood." Speaking of ridiculous - Planned Parenthood has already fired the individual involved. Also, a second video was posted today. Want to bet there'll be a third? And a couple more fired employees? Want to bet that people like you and Pareene will keep pretending that no one cares? Some of us do, though; we think underage sex slavery is horrible, and that people who don't seem to mind it that much aren't much better.

Posted by: MikeR4 | February 3, 2011 11:58 AM | Report abuse

No wonder Plum wants to do a coverup on the Planned Parenthood deal.

Those are his boys from the Springfield printing plant operation who are picking up the young women at the Paper Moon ~ and then those same young women drive all the way to Richmond (1.5 hours away) for "services".

I'm pretty sure I could run down there and video Paper Moon for no more than half an hour and find someone from the Washington Post involved.

Might even find Plum!

Posted by: muawiyah | February 3, 2011 4:40 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

© 2011 The Washington Post Company