Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Retirements worry House Democrats for 2010 midterms

1. The retirement announcement of Tennessee Rep. Bart Gordon on Monday set off a fresh round of speculation that House Democrats may be on the verge of large-scale retirements that could imperil their electoral prospects in the upcoming midterm elections. Democratic strategists who pooh-poohed recent retirements of people like John Tanner (Tenn.) and Dennis Moore (Kan.) as indicative of a larger political trend privately acknowledged in the wake of the Gordon retirement that the tough national environment had played a major role in his choice to step aside. In an interview with the Fix, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Chris Van Hollen (Md.) acknowledged there would be "some more" retirement within his ranks between now and the end of the year but added that no "flood" of vacancies was on the horizon. Most Democratic insiders who closely monitor the House playing field put the tipping point at which control of the House is truly in play at 15 open seats in competitive districts. Including Gordon, that number stands at seven. The watch list: Reps. John Spratt (S.C.), Collin Peterson (Minn.), Marion Berry (Ark.), Vic Snyder (Ark.) and even younger members like Chet Edwards (Texas).

2. Resurgent Republic, the conservative polling consortium formed in the wake of the 2008 election, is out with a new poll today surveying 1,000 voters aged 55 or older. The numbers should be interesting for political junkies since older voters usually comprise a disproportionately large segment of the electorate in midterms so what they think about the country and the president matters. On issues, older voters are generally in tune with the electorate as a whole, naming the economy (27 percent), health care (18 percent) ad government debt/national deficit (10 percent) as the three biggest challenges facing the country. Diving deeper into the numbers, older voters are concerned and skeptical about some of President Obama's domestic policy initiatives but are broadly supportive of his recent decision to send more troops into Afghanistan. Sixty-eight percent of the sample said they were "very concerned" about the growing national debt and seven in ten voters said they preferred "smaller government." On foreign policy, the numbers were reversed with nearly two-thirds (62 percent) of voters over 55 supportive of putting 30,000 more troops into Afghanistan and just 32 percent opposed to that strategy. Given that data, you can expect Republicans running in 2010 to focus their criticism of the Obama administration heavily on the fiscal side while expressing support for his pursuit of the war in Afghanistan. Resurgent Republic's number one suggestion for GOP messaging targeted at older voters heading into 2010? "More federal spending may be the agenda of the Democratic-controlled Congress, but it does not address your priority of cutting spending and lowering the deficit."

3. Close watchers of the jockeying for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination may have raised an eyebrow earlier this week when former House majority leader Dick Armey (Texas) showered Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty with praise. Armey told CBS that Tpaw was "standing on the safest ground" among those vying to lead the Republican party. "He has no major disappointments behind him," added Armey. "He has the chance to create a fresh new public understanding of who he is and what he stands for." Armey has aligned himself with the tea party movement -- his Freedomworks organization helped organize some of the protests over the summer -- and, as such, is not a bad friend for Pawlenty to have. Armey's argument boils down to the fact that Tpaw will be the freshest face in the Republican field able to introduce himself to early state voters in whatever way he and his campaign team choose. We largely agree although Pawlenty's fresh-facedness seen in another light is an inexperience with the demands of a national campaign that virtually ensures a few slip-ups -- major and minor -- along the way.

4. Roll Call's Shira Toeplitz has written a great, speculative piece about when embattled Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd (D) might retire -- if, of course, he retires at all. The most interesting question she raises is who would be tasked with asking Dodd to step aside. She offers up Vice President Biden, a close personal friend of the Connecticut Democrat, or former Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chairman Chuck Schumer (N.Y.). One other name to throw into the mix -- White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel who has a long relationship with Dodd and has the right sort of personality (read: bulldog) to tell the incumbent the news he needs to hear. Toeplitz also notes that Dodd's last day to make a go/no-go decision is June 8, 2010 -- when the state's filing deadline arrives. It's far more likely, however, that if Dodd is going to step aside he does so sooner rather than later -- with the time around next year's State of the Union seen as the most likely at the moment. To be clear, this is all HIGHLY speculative. Those who know Dodd insist he has no plans to retire.

5. Democrats in Louisiana and Washington have been pushing hard of late on the idea that Secretary of State Jay Dardenne might primary Sen. David Vitter (R) in 2010. And, Dardenne is doing his part to stoke speculation -- telling the Baton Rouge Morning Advocate that he is "considering" conducting a poll to test his viability against Vitter. Count us as skeptical. First of all, Dardenne has been talking about running in this race for the better part of a year but the best he can do is offer that he is considering taking a poll? That doesn't suggest a candidate ramping up for the race. Second, Dardenne's delay has allowed Vitter to strengthen his hand -- both within the party hierarchy and also on the fundraising front. (Vitter closed September with nearly $4 million in the bank.) Those hurdles would make it extremely difficult for Dardenne to overcome Vitter even if he did decide to run.

6. New polling conducted for the Chicago Tribune shows that state Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias (D) and Rep. Mark Kirk (R) are the favorites to represent their parties in the 2010 open seat Senate race. Giannoulias leads the Democratic field at 31 percent followed by Chicago Urban League President Cheryle Jackson at 17 percent and former Chicago Inspector General David Hoffman at nine percent. Kirk held a massive 41 percent to three percent edge over businessman Patrick Hughes in the fight for the Republican nod. While the Tribune story points out that there is a considerable bloc of undecided voters -- 35 percent in the Democratic primary, 46 percent on the Republican side -- two facts should make Giannoulias and Kirk feel good: 1) there are only 49 days before the state's Feb. 2 primary, meaning there isn't all that much time for the also-rans to catch up and 2) Giannoulias and Kirk have the biggest bank accounts in the races so if the contests do tighten, they have the ability to overwhelm their opponents on television. A Kirk-Giannoulias general election would be a nip and tuck affair, according to public polling data.

7. It's never a good sign for a politician when a 36 percent favorable rating is rightly described as a vast improvement. That's the harsh reality for New York Gov. David Paterson in a new Siena Research Institute poll that finds roughly one-third of New York voters seeing him in a favorable light, a bump up from Paterson's record low of 27 percent in the spring. Paterson's numbers are still disastrously bad for an incumbent, however, with 19 percent saying they would vote to reelect him while 65 percent preferred someone else. And, in a Democratic primary matchup against state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, Paterson trailed by a whopping 44 points. Paterson can't win reelection -- his numbers are too bad and recovering too slowly. But, if he is able to save a bit of political face with a bounce-back (of some sort) in his approval ratings, it might give him a soft landing to bow out gracefully in favor of Cuomo sometime next year.

8. Although it's nearly a year before Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.) faces voters at the ballot box, the airwaves are already thick with ads attacking him. The latest comes in the form of a radio commercial sponsored by the conservative American Future Fund (AFF) that seeks to turn recent comments made by Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (Ill.) about the health care bill into ammunition against Reid. "I'm in the dark almost as much as he is," Durbin said of Arizona Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) about the details of the health care plan. The ad's narrator accuses Reid of hatching a "secret plan to take over health care" and accuses the Nevada Democrat of trying to manipulate the Congressional Budget Office to "give him the numbers he wants." The AFF ads will start today in Washington, D.C. and on Wednesday in the Las Vegas and Reno media markets with a total cost of $50,000, according to a source familiar with the buy.

9. The Fix will be chatting live today -- discussing our rankings of the top 10 Senate races of the past decade, which we unveiled yesterday. What races did we miss? What races were ranked too high? Too low? Make sure to tune in at 11 am.

10. Is there an anti-Twitter backlash building? First, Miley Cyrus -- she'll always be Hannah Montana to us -- canceled her account. Then on Monday Chris Brown followed suit after a weekend of angry tweets about stores not carrying his new album and allegations that he was being "blackball[ed]." The Fix Twitter policy: don't tweet angry. No good will come of it.

By Chris Cillizza  |  December 15, 2009; 6:18 AM ET
Categories:  Morning Fix  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The 10 best Senate races of the decade
Next: Why Joe Lieberman (still) rules the political world

Comments

Posted by: JakeD | December 15, 2009 7:14 PM | Report abuse

Anyone else?

Posted by: JakeD | December 15, 2009 6:24 PM | Report abuse

It's your time to waste.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 15, 2009 6:13 PM | Report abuse

Back on topic, Rep. Chet Edwards (D-TX) is NOT retiring now. He's ready to face the music and lose to the Republican.

Posted by: JakeD | December 15, 2009 6:12 PM | Report abuse

For the record, I will respond to whatever I feel like responding to.

Posted by: JakeD | December 15, 2009 6:08 PM | Report abuse

Jake, I made it as clear as I know how that I don't wish to engage with you here at all. Yet you persist. I don't believe you come here to debate or to contribute and I formally do not acknowledge your pretended role as civility cop. If I post something that you think crosses some line then whine to the "gracious host," assuming his mailbox and voicemail aren't already full from you doing the same all day.

Don't respond to me, troll, because I really have no interest in anything you might say or believe. I regard you and your desperate need for attention as beneath notice and not worth the time, mine or anyone's.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 15, 2009 5:58 PM | Report abuse

I'm hoping he reads these comments, in light of his Friday admonitions. I couldn't care less what you think either.

Posted by: JakeD | December 15, 2009 5:52 PM | Report abuse

Then whine to the "gracious host" and butter him up some more. I am not interested in your opinion.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 15, 2009 5:26 PM | Report abuse

"I see little evidence ... you have one" sounds like a prohibited personal attack to me.

Posted by: JakeD | December 15, 2009 5:21 PM | Report abuse

Well you sort of answered your own question. If the person is not Islamic then the person cannot be an Islamic terrorist but could be a terrorist if said person committed terrorism.

==

Make up your mind, presuming you have one. I see little evidence.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 15, 2009 4:12 PM | Report abuse

The high hopes and expectations of Obama and his supporters are crashing down all around them. And those who pronounced the death of conservatism earlier this year look sillier and sillier with every passing month
Posted by: ZOUK
-------------------------------------------
Yes, sillier and sillier. They pronounced death but are completely obsessed and giving life to Palin, et al. Why just not ignore the supposed dead?

Posted by: leapin | December 15, 2009 4:09 PM | Report abuse

So was Seung Cho a terrorist?

No, because he wasn't a Muslim.

(pause)

You must be one of those people who watches Glenn Beck and listens to Rush Limbaugh.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite
---------------------------------------
Well you sort of answered your own question. If the person is not Islamic then the person cannot be an Islamic terrorist but could be a terrorist if said person committed terrorism.

Where can I find info on this Beck and Limbaugh and determine if I am of those people that would listen or watch?


Posted by: leapin | December 15, 2009 4:02 PM | Report abuse

According to a new USA TODAY/Gallup Poll out today, in comparison with the approval ratings for modern elected presidents in December of their first year in office, Obama’s standing is the worst. The latest survey puts the president’s approval at 49 percent, with 46 percent disapproval. That is Obama’s narrowest margin of the year.

As a reference point, when he was inaugurated in January, Mr. Obama scored a job rating of 64 percent approve/25 percent disapprove in the USA TODAY/Gallup Poll. To have seen the gap shrink from 39 percentage points to just 3, all in his first year in office, is staggering; the slide has been both rapid and consistent. And what must worry the White House and Democrats most is that this unprecedented drop is not tied to a single event (like, say, Gerald Ford’s pardoning of Richard Nixon) but rather to Obama’s entire governing agenda, from A to Z. The public is rising up against Obamaism, in almost all its particulars. This administration is therefore weaker than many people think – and if ObamaCare passes, it will be weaker still.

President Obama, like President Clinton before him, will need to make some fairly dramatic midcourse corrections. Whether he does or not is another matter (Obama strikes me as significantly more liberal and ideological than Clinton ever was). In any event, these are difficult days for modern liberalism. The high hopes and expectations of Obama and his supporters are crashing down all around them. And those who pronounced the death of conservatism earlier this year look sillier and sillier with every passing month

Posted by: ZOUK | December 15, 2009 3:10 PM | Report abuse

Foreign or domestic..an Islamic terroist is a terrorist.

==

So was Seung Cho a terrorist?

No, because he wasn't a Muslim.

(pause)

You must be one of those people who watches Glenn Beck and listens to Rush Limbaugh.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 15, 2009 2:38 PM | Report abuse

Fort Hood was not a terrorist attack, it was a domestic mucker. By that reasoning your hero von Brunn was a terrorist too, as was Seung Cho, as was your iconoclast Tim McVeigh.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite
-----------------------------------------
Foreign or domestic..an Islamic terroist is a terrorist.

Posted by: leapin | December 15, 2009 2:25 PM | Report abuse

(4) Over three months longer than Bush without a terrorist attack.
- You forgot about Fort Hood already?

==

Fort Hood was not a terrorist attack, it was a domestic mucker. By that reasoning your hero von Brunn was a terrorist too, as was Seung Cho, as was your iconoclast Tim McVeigh.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 15, 2009 2:21 PM | Report abuse

Reality check:
(1) Russia and China on board with sanctioning Iran. Bush couldn't pull that off
(2) Major healthcare reform on the way
(3) Timetable for Afghanistan, instead of the endless commitment by a president more concerned with appearing weak than coming up with useful policy
(4) Over three months longer than Bush without a terrorist attack.
Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite
-------------------------------------------
(1) Russia and China on board with sanctioning Iran. Bush couldn't pull that off
-Iran goes on its merry way
(2) Major healthcare reform on the way
-No reform, just pass anything per Rham “It Home” so we can have neocom statist paradise by the holidays
(3) Timetable for Afghanistan, instead of the endless commitment by a president more concerned with appearing weak than coming up with useful policy
- Afghan youth to join Taliban else they will be slaughtered in 18 months
(4) Over three months longer than Bush without a terrorist attack.
- You forgot about Fort Hood already?

Posted by: leapin | December 15, 2009 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Accumulating evidence emerges as Hillary Rodham Clinton concedes that U.S. has little to show for nearly a year of diplomatic engagement.

Just another on the long list of failures for this present ident.

==

Reality check:

(1) Russia and China on board with sanctioning Iran. Bush couldn't pull that off

(2) Major healthcare reform on the way

(3) Timetable for Afghanistan, instead of the endless commitment by a president more concerned with appearing weak than coming up with useful policy

(4) Over three months longer than Bush without a terrorist attack.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | December 15, 2009 2:07 PM | Report abuse

That's right, bsimon. Armey is PRECISELY the kind of politician who was entrenched and 'in power too long' -- precisely the kind Glen Beck rails against and the teabaggers loathe.

Posted by: drindl | December 15, 2009 12:25 PM | Report abuse

Accumulating evidence emerges as Hillary Rodham Clinton concedes that U.S. has little to show for nearly a year of diplomatic engagement.

Just another on the long list of failures for this present ident.

Posted by: ZOUK | December 15, 2009 12:15 PM | Report abuse

"Wasn't Armey was one of the people who originally helped organize and sponsor the Tea Party groups?"


Yes, which is amusingly ironic. Armey is to Tea Parties as McCain is to Palin. Without Armey/McCain the Tea parties/Palin would still be around, but they wouldn't have nearly the clout they do now. Neither Armey nor McCain have much control or influence over the tea people or Palin.

.

Posted by: bsimon1 | December 15, 2009 11:46 AM | Report abuse

TO: "Gallenod" @ 11:13 a.m.

Well, the "Springtime for Hitler" musical number in Mel Brooks' "The Producers" also was "strangely entertaining."

So if the dialog here brings to mainstream media attention the silent, covert torture, impairment and subjugation of unconstitutionally "targeted" American citizens and their families via a cell tower/satellite-based microwave/laser attack system, so be it.

Notice how Joe Lieberman today is using the Fort Hood issue to try to burnish his sorry image. Dodd could rehabilitate his reputation by taking up the cause of unconstitutionally, extrajudicially targeted, tortured and subjugated American citizens (such as this journalist). In fact, I am pleading with him to do so.

http://nowpublic.com/world/obama-wrong-unaware-u-s-does-torture-its-own-citizens OR http://NowPublic.com/scrivener (re: "GESTAPO USA")

Posted by: scrivener50 | December 15, 2009 11:40 AM | Report abuse

Why do I find the spectacle of Jake debating Scrivener strangely entertaining?

Jake: If the Democrats decide to pull the plug on Dodd, it will be Biden who makes the phone call, privately, to his old buddy to tell him not to embarrass himself any longer and step aside. He won't walk back publicly, but if it gets so bad that Blumenthal is compelled to run in the primary White House support of Dodd will drop to neutral, at best.

bsimon1: Wasn't Armey was one of the people who originally helped organize and sponsor the Tea Party groups?

Posted by: Gallenod | December 15, 2009 11:13 AM | Report abuse

"Sen. Kerry (D-MA) was for the war before he was against it, and you didn't have a problem with that."

Sen Kerry, while mumble-mouthed, was being fiscally responsible with this change. As amuzing as the quote is, Sen Kerry was for the $87 billion when there was a funding source tied to the expenditure. He voted against the funding when the Bush Administration & GOP led Congress decided to borrow the money from the Chinese instead. So, to summarize that vote:

Kerry: fiscally responsible, tying revenue to expenses*
GOP: Borrow-and-spend irresponsibility.

Posted by: bsimon1 | December 15, 2009 10:27 AM | Report abuse

You're right about that, bsimon. Talk to any teabagger. They all know who Glen Beck is, he's the de facto head of this cult. But ask them if they have ever heard of Dick Armey... probably not. They like his free buses and lodgings, but him, bot so much.

And here's how Glen Beck feels about the GOP:

'Yes, Sen. Graham, that's true. But the problem isn't us angry white guys, it's you Obama-lite guys. It's not even that, it's you corrupt politicians that have been there too long.

Let me ask you this: Is anyone drinking Diet Coke because it's their favorite-tasting soda? Come on! They drink it because they don't want to be a big fat fatty. The first time you tasted Diet Coke it was horrible, right? But, slowly, you become accustomed to it.

Well, I'm here to tell you that Coke is it — look for the real thing!

Sorry, Senator Graham. I know you want to expand the GOP and reach out, but who are you reaching to? People who believe, like you do, that amnesty is for all illegal aliens? People who want more Marxist social justice cap-and-trade programs? People who want wise Latinas that can make better judgments than old white guys in court?

Senator "I investigate sports more than health care" Specter? Tim "cap-and-trade" Pawlenty? John "my political idol is a giant progressive" McCain?

That's fantastic, but sounds like the Democrats.'

The seething racism is encoded in every spittle-flecked word.

Posted by: drindl | December 15, 2009 10:27 AM | Report abuse

bsimon1:

You are right.

Posted by: JakeD | December 15, 2009 10:17 AM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin was for a certain bridge before she was against it. She either is or is not a birther too, take your pick.

Jenny Sanford is what Republicans wish they had in Sarah Palin.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 15, 2009 10:15 AM | Report abuse

Gallenod writes
"Armey endorsing Pawlenty is a smart strategic move by Armey, though it illustrates the bias of many the Republican Party's Old Guard establishment against more conservative populists like Palin or Huckabee. If Pawlenty wins, he owes Armey for shoring up his conservative credibility and could be pulled rightward. If someone beats Pawlenty, it will likely either be someone to Pawlenty's right that Armey can live with and support or Romney, who Armey isn't fond of and wouldn't have any leverage with anyway."


I don't think the people in the TEA movement are looking to people like Armey for direction. I think they're looking to groups like Freedomworks for help organizing, but the nature of the movement is not one where they're waiting for leadership to tell them who to support. They're going to make up their own minds. Having said that, a lot of their info comes from sources like Glen Beck; so if Armey can get Beck to come around on Pawlenty, that'll be a boon to Tim's candidacy. Whether Beck plays ball with Armey remains to be seen.

Posted by: bsimon1 | December 15, 2009 10:13 AM | Report abuse

The Fix should read the comments more. Yesterday I linked to a report covering the story of how the Iowa tea party leader has a low opinion of Pawlenty. Dick Armey may like him, but he may not have as much control over his minions as he'd like to think. Point being: if the TEA party becomes a stronger influence on the GOP, which seems likely, and the TEA leadership in Iowa doesn't like the golden boy from next door, the golden boy's Presidential campaign will start and end with a fizzle in the Iowa caucuses.

Posted by: bsimon1 | December 15, 2009 10:08 AM | Report abuse

margaretmeyers:

Sen. Lieberman (I-CT) is a thinking person as well ;)

Posted by: JakeD | December 15, 2009 9:58 AM | Report abuse

Here is what a petty, mean-spirited hypocrite Lieberman is. This is wht he was for 3 months before he was against it:

In the vid, Lieberman appeared to go further than the current Senate deal, which would expand Medicare to those aged 55-64, saying he supported the idea of expanding it to people aged 50 and over. Lieberman referenced his proposal along these lines during the 2006 campaign, and added:

“My proposals were to basically expand the existing successful public health insurance programs Medicare and Medicaid…

“When it came to Medicare I was very focused on a group — post 50, maybe more like post 55. People who have retired early, or unfortunately have been laid off early, who lose their health insurance and they’re too young to qualify for Medicare.

“What I was proposing was that they have an option to buy into Medicare early and again on the premise that that would be less expensive than the enormous cost. If you’re 55 or 60 and you’re without health insurance and you go in to try to buy it, because you’re older … you’re rated as a risk so you pay a lot of money.”

3 months ago he realized that when people 50+ lose their jobs and health insurance, there's a good chance they will never get another job with benefits, because in the corporate world, unless you are a CEO, 50 is the hiring ceiling. Which means they will not have health insurance again unless they can manage to live without healthcare until they get to Medicare age.

3 months ago he realized that, but now, out of childish pique, he's stomping his feet and whining for attention.

Posted by: drindl | December 15, 2009 9:57 AM | Report abuse

Watching Ron Paul and Judd Gregg argue over the role of the Fed, the merits of a return to the Gold Standard and other Republican Red Meat pieces was a lot of fun this morning. Still laughing about it.

The nattering nabob of negativity, Rick Santelli lost his temper (again) and declared a new era of stagflation, starting today. Meanwhile, but American manufacturing Industrial output has improved for a change, even while a tiny uptick in the CPI has Wall Street in profit taking mode. The dollar is strong as Europe faces a double dip recession. Austria declared one of its banks critical and nationalized another even as Greece faces a disaster of Iceland proportion. Bottom line? No political ramifications embedded in the economic news, not today.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 15, 2009 9:57 AM | Report abuse

P.S. to scrivener50:

I hope you aren't disputing the "conspiracy" part as well. By definition, a military/intel apparatus targeting " THOUSANDS OF U.S. CITIZENS WITH NATIONWIDE SILENT MICROWAVE/LASER, CELL TOWER/SATELLITE 'DIRECTED ENERGY' WEAPONS SYSTEMS " is a conspiracy, since one person could not possibly do that alone. So is "Bush planted demolition charges at the World Trade Center". Cf. one mother registering the out-of-State birth of her son is not necessarily a conspiracy. Do you at least see the difference?

Posted by: JakeD | December 15, 2009 9:55 AM | Report abuse

geez, Jake *I* was for the war before I was against it.
Then I found out that the Bush administration had orchestrated a lot of wishful thinking and poor research into a bunch of lies and I c h a n g e d my mind about the war. That's what thinking people do when they realize they have been mislead.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | December 15, 2009 9:55 AM | Report abuse

Exact quote:

"I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it."

GOLDEN OLDIE!!!

Posted by: JakeD | December 15, 2009 9:50 AM | Report abuse

drindl:

Sen. Kerry (D-MA) was for the war before he was against it, and you didn't have a problem with that.

Posted by: JakeD | December 15, 2009 9:46 AM | Report abuse

Even Zelaya doesn't buy into your CONSPIRACY theory (no more "fact" than the moon is made of green cheese ; )

Posted by: JakeD | December 15, 2009 9:43 AM | Report abuse

"Here’s some video of Joe Lieberman only three months ago appearing to endorse the Medicare buy-in idea — in seeming contradiction of his decision to bail on the Senate deal.

Lieberman discussed the Medicare buy-in a meeting with the Connecticut Post in September, according to an article in the paper at the time, as TPM noted today. But the article only paraphrased Lieberman.

I asked the paper to send over the video, and it’s worth watching, because it gives you Lieberman’s actual quotes — which seem at odds with the Lieberman camp’s claim today that he has real problems with the approach:"

http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/health-care/video-watch-lieberman-endorse-medicare-buy-in-three-months-ago/

Posted by: drindl | December 15, 2009 9:41 AM | Report abuse

TO: JakeD @ 9:16 a.m.

HIGH-TECH SILENT MICROWAVE/LASER TORTURE, ENTRAINMENT AND POLITICAL SUBJUGATION: FACT, NOT THEORY

This is fact, not theory. The microwave/laser, cell tower/satellite directed energy weapons system, installed under the cover of "national security" as a terrestrial "Star Wars," is operational in every county of the United States, as well as in many industrialized nations. It is being used against civilian populations as an instrument of silent torture, control and punishment -- worldwide.

This is a high-tech crime against humanity that has managed to remain below the radar of the nation's civilian leadership, many of whom refuse to believe that an allegedly "defensive" technology could be turned against the American people. That naivete has enabled the emergence of an American police state...

...and these weapons are being used as tool of POLITICAL oppression -- just ask deposed Honduras President Manuel Zelaya.

Politics becomes nothing more than window dressing when our civilian leadership cannot fathom that a security/military/intel complex is entraining, subjugating, torturing and "slow-killing" potential opposition.

http://nowpublic.com/world/govt-tortures-me-silent-microwave-weapons-ousted-s-prez
http://nowpublic.com/world/obama-wrong-unaware-u-s-does-torture-its-own-citizens

OR NowPublic.com/scrivener RE: "GESTAPO USA"

Posted by: scrivener50 | December 15, 2009 9:39 AM | Report abuse

LOL scrivener50. Sen. Dodd is not going to be re-elected, much less buy into your conspiracy theory!

Posted by: JakeD | December 15, 2009 9:16 AM | Report abuse

The teabaggers are sheep, so it's hard to know who they will listen to-- ARmey, a politician and his industry front group, or Limbaugh/Beck and their other hate radio heroes.

"Armey, whose tea party movement is already shedding its non-partisan veneer to officially support Republican candidates, is attempting to “purify” Pawlenty’s record to make him more palatable to the base. But given that Pawlenty has violated so many tea party principles, Armey’s declaration of support is all the more perplexing:

– Pawlenty endorsed the Wall Street bailout package in 2008. Tea party groups often trace their interest in activism to the beginning of the bank bailouts.

– Pawlenty proposed his own cap and trade system and signed an ambitious law cutting carbon emissions. Tea party groups regularly deride both ideas as a “government takeover.”

– Pawlenty’s top economic adviser has toured his state, touting its success and the “tangible results from this funding.” Tea party groups angrily opposed the stimulus.

– In 2007, Pawlenty signed an anti-predatory mortgage law crafted in part by representatives from ACORN. Armey and other tea party leaders have attacked similar laws on the national level as “unnecessary regulation” and that the free market should “address concerns about sub-prime mortgages.” In addition, ACORN is one of the leading bogeyman of the tea party movement.

Hate radio talkers like Glenn Beck have jettisoned Pawlenty for his past transgressions, like pushing for cap and trade. To Beck, Pawlenty and other politicians who have supported the bailouts “sound like Democrats.”

Posted by: drindl | December 15, 2009 9:11 AM | Report abuse

CRITICAL MISSION FOR DODD: RESTORATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN AMERICA

Senator Dodd needs to champion the restoration of human rights in America, so as to disarm critics who nitpick about VIP mortgages to deflect attention from his effectiveness as a voice of the people. Senator, start here:

***


URGENT TO: TEAM OBAMA, JOHN BRENNAN, DENNIS BLAIR, A.G. HOLDER, SEC. NAPOLITANO, SEC. GATES
cc: D. AXELROD / R. EMANUEL / V. JARRETT / R. GIBBS / JAY CARNEY

Your security/military/intel apparatus is committing human rights atrocities and civil liberties infringements against unconstitutionally "targeted" American citizens -- many of whom were "put on a list" as "dissidents" or undesirables. When will you act to stop this?

SECRET MULTI-AGENCY FED PROGRAM TORTURES, IMPAIRS, SUBJUGATES THOUSANDS OF U.S. CITIZENS WITH NATIONWIDE SILENT MICROWAVE/LASER, CELL TOWER/SATELLITE 'DIRECTED ENERGY' WEAPONS SYSTEMS; FED-ENABLED, POLICE-PROTECTED VIGILANTISM: VETERAN JOURNALIST

== Did This Rogue Program Target, Incite Ft. Hood Shooter? ==

TEAM OBAMA, CONGRESS MUST ASK: What do the
y know -- and when did they know it?

• Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan
• FEMA Director Craig Fugate
• NSA Director Lt. Gen. Keith Alexander
• Former JSOC Commander Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal
• DIA Director Maj. Gen. Michael Maples
• DOJ Asst. Atty. Gen./National Security David Kris
• CIA Deputy Director Stephen Kappes
• FBI Director Robert Mueller

http://nowpublic.com/world/obama-wrong-unaware-u-s-does-torture-its-own-citizens
http://nowpublic.com/world/gestapo-usa-govt-funded-vigilante-network-terrorizes-america
nowpublic.com/world/govt-tortures-me-silent-microwave-weapons-ousted-s-prez OR NowPublic.com/scrivener RE: "GESTAPO USA"

Posted by: scrivener50 | December 15, 2009 9:10 AM | Report abuse

drindl:

At least Republicans aren't lamenting the lack of an actual bloody physical attack on Lieberman.

Posted by: JakeD | December 15, 2009 9:08 AM | Report abuse

Lieberman gets called on the carpet like the sad old dog he is...

"An editorial in the Connecticut Post demands that Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) explain why he backed off his earlier support of a Medicare buy-in. The paper proclaims, “He should drop this charade and come up with a coherent explanation for his recent behavior. He should not join a filibuster against the bill.”

Posted by: drindl | December 15, 2009 9:04 AM | Report abuse

There's no magic number like 15 either. At least our gracious host is right about the NY race: "Paterson can't win reelection -- his numbers are too bad and recovering too slowly."

Posted by: JakeD | December 15, 2009 9:03 AM | Report abuse

The democrats still have one less person retiring then the Republicans and even if that number doubles it will still be around how many people retire from each party every midterm.

Also it looks like the Democrats have their group back in order to pass healthcare by christmas, and it looks like they will have no public option but will have a trigger attached. I wonder if with that situation if you will see Olympia Snowe or Susan Collins to jump ship and vote for the bill. That would create a HUGE amount of cover for some moderate GOP members in the house (BTW, are there any of those left). In addition, it will allow Obama to push that he got a bipartisan solution.
I would be willing to bet that Joe Biden is on the phone this morning to his old collegues shoring up that possibility if he can. Also Snowe would then hold a HUGE marker for a future favor from Reid or Obama. If I were her I would do it, with a promise from Reid that she could sit in on the conference committee with the house version.

Posted by: AndyR3 | December 15, 2009 9:02 AM | Report abuse

"Resurgent Republic's number one suggestion for GOP messaging targeted at older voters heading into 2010? "More federal spending may be the agenda of the Democratic-controlled Congress, but it does not address your priority of cutting spending and lowering the deficit.""

That's some original thinking! I hope they get paid a lot for it. Now, let's see, how does that fit in with the inevitable more tax cuts, hmm?

And where will republicans be cutting spending? Medicare? Social Security? That will sure resonate with older voters.

Posted by: drindl | December 15, 2009 9:01 AM | Report abuse

Gallenod:

I don't see (Acting) President Biden driving that bus. He went "all in" for Dodd at a recent campaign event. Besides, look how well it went for the White House "convincing" NY's governor to step aside ; )

Hang in there, Dodd!!!

Posted by: JakeD | December 15, 2009 8:59 AM | Report abuse

This again? Pretty much everything you say disproves your chosen Narrative.

"Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Chris Van Hollen (Md.) acknowledged there would be "some more" retirement within his ranks between now and the end of the year but added that no "flood" of vacancies was on the horizon"

So?

"Most Democratic insiders who closely monitor the House playing field put the tipping point at which control of the House is truly in play at 15 open seats in competitive districts. Including Gordon, that number stands at seven. "

Seven is not 15. If it ever got to 15, then you would have a story.

But you don't. Just wishful thinking.

Posted by: drindl | December 15, 2009 8:56 AM | Report abuse

Armey endorsing Pawlenty is a smart strategic move by Armey, though it illustrates the bias of many the Republican Party's Old Guard establishment against more conservative populists like Palin or Huckabee. If Pawlenty wins, he owes Armey for shoring up his conservative credibility and could be pulled rightward. If someone beats Pawlenty, it will likely either be someone to Pawlenty's right that Armey can live with and support or Romney, who Armey isn't fond of and wouldn't have any leverage with anyway.

Don't count out primary challenges to Vitter, Dodd or other incumbents/favorites (Crist, etc.). if they look early next year like they have too much baggage or are bleeding into the water. Both parties will be very intent (desperate) on weeding out weakness in their candidate pool even if it means throwing incumbents under the bus.

Posted by: Gallenod | December 15, 2009 8:45 AM | Report abuse

bsimon1 is right about Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty (and Dick Armey is wrong). I also hope that Sen. Dodd (D-CT) does not retire.

Posted by: JakeD | December 15, 2009 8:39 AM | Report abuse

So the drumbeat begins. The liberal demise is going from lurking to overt. Barry has set back the democrat party decades and the inept pelosi and Reid houses have revealed the confused and ineffective liberal ways.

Want a job? Vote R

so simple even a lib can get it.

Posted by: snowbama | December 15, 2009 8:27 AM | Report abuse

CC, one of your friends, Charlie Cook, says Chet Edwards' CD "leans D". It does for Chet. It would not without him.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | December 15, 2009 8:11 AM | Report abuse

bsimon1 has pointed out a number of ways in which TP's gubernatorial reign was a failure of some magnitude.
Signing the spending bills and vetoing the tax increases
was a cheap shot heard round the state, apparently, and would be heard round the world if he runs for national office.

Is there a counter view to be heard from any Minnesotan who reads this blog?

Posted by: mark_in_austin | December 15, 2009 7:50 AM | Report abuse

It's obvious 2010 and beyond will be tough for Democrats to retain their current advantages. But getting heath care done and out of the way will be a boost for both the president tnd the party as a whole. How long that lasts is debatable.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: parkerfl1 | December 15, 2009 7:40 AM | Report abuse

If Chet Edwards retires, that CD goes R.

I have not heard any rumors that he is thinking of quitting.

Statewide, health care reform is supported, in general:

http://www.texastribune.org/blogs/post/2009/dec/15/polling-center-public-option-universal-coverage-divide-texans/

but it probably is not in Chet's CD. If that is correct, Chet could vote for UHC, especially without a public option save for a replication of fed employees' health care, and then have no baggage running for a statewide office.

I hope he stays in the House, and that his CD is not eager to lose an effective congressman.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | December 15, 2009 7:35 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company