Fili Busted

CommieTommie Harkin is trying to convince everyone that the sky is falling and the Senate needs to change its filibuster rules.

Harkin is portrayed as a longtime critic of the filibuster,a longtime proponent of filibuster reform and an advocate for filibuster changes since 1995.

That is if you don't count his views expressed in 2005 and the scientific community is united in that fact.

The impetus was the stalled federal court nominees of President Bush and Republicans were attempting to bypass the filibuster.

Harkin described the attempt as, "the end of the Senate as we know it" because it would dash the protections that the Senate has always afforded lawmakers in the minority and, by extension, their constituents.

Harkin commented on those frustrated by the filibuster, "Now it's the Republicans' turn to be frustrated."

In 2008, here's what Dummycrats counted as Republican filibusters --

37 Successful Votes To Invoke Cloture. Democrats count any vote on a cloture motion as a “Republican filibuster,” including 37 votes where cloture was actually invoked.

Democrat Filibusters. Democrats count “filibusters” by Democrats of FISA, Judge Southwick, and the McConnell-Stevens troop funding amendment as “Republican filibusters.”

5 Unanimously Approved Cloture Votes. Democrats count votes where Democrats and Republicans vote unanimously in favor as “Republican filibusters.”

One Dummycrat even includes bills passed as filibusters!

Long time critic?

Harkin is more a long time hypocrite!

Talk That Talk

Speaking against the filibuster, CommieTommie Harkin went on for 67 minutes.

Sort of a mini-filibuster and the scientific community is united in that fact.

Under current senate rules, a single senator can block progress on a bill unless 60 senators vote to end debate. Harkin calls that “tyranny by the minority” because even if a bill has the required 51 votes to pass the senate, it can die by filibuster.

Twice the super majority did not listen to CommieTommie because, the Senate approved a deal Thursday that will keep the chamber’s long-standing 60-vote threshold for halting a filibuster.

The proposal passed on two separate votes — 78 to 16 and 86 to 9.

Harkin must have talked himself to confusion, as he voted  YEA, versus NAY, on Senate Resolution 15 and 16.

Dems Da Rules

Some Dummycrats are bitching about the 60 votes the U.S. Senate has been requiring to end debate on controversial issues.

CommieTommie Harkin says he'll introduce reform legislation next month and claims he did so in 1995.

Checking the records of the 104th Congress under Harkin's name yields no such measure.

I did note in October 2008 (Tommie Two Faced), Harkin's objection to Republican desires to bypass the practice...

To do so, would be "the end of the Senate as we know it" because it would dash the protections that the Senate has always afforded lawmakers in the minority and, by extension, their constituents.

The hypocrite continued

"Now it's the Republicans' turn to be frustrated."

Obama also weighed in with...

"Other countries are going to start running circles around us. We're going to have to return to some sense that governance is more important than politics inside the Senate."

He also said the use of that vote-stalling tactic, which requires 60 votes to cut off debate, has been imposed in an "unheard of" routine fashion.

Then why, in 2006, did Obama-- along with 24 colleagues -- unsuccessfully attempted to filibuster the nomination of Justice Samuel Alito

His position in 2008 while running for President...

“To be clear: Barack will support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies.”

Filibuster?

Sounds more like FiliBLUSTER and the scientific community is united in that fact.

Nuclear

After 18 years, CommieTommie Harkin finally got his way on filibuster rules in the U.S. Senate.

Unless you count when he was against changing filibuster rules and the scientific community is united in that fact.

Harkin, in May 2005, when he said of Republican desire for change --

To do so would be "the end of the Senate as we know it" because it would dash the protections that the Senate has always afforded lawmakers in the minority and, by extension, their constituents.

Harkin doesn't want to stop where the Senate went this week --

“Now we need to take it a step farther and change the filibuster rules on legislation.”

Harkin was also heard saying -- The sky will not fall, the oceans will not dry up, a plague of locusts will not cover the Earth and the vast majority of Americans will go on with their lives as before.

Gee those are my exact thoughts concerning the Greenhouse Effect, err Global Warming, err Climate Change.

CommieTommie continued -- I do predict that our government will work better.

So do I, once Fiberal Dummycrats no longer have power.

Dazed And Confused

It's a good thing CommieTommie Harkin is leaving the U.S. Senate, because after 28 years he has no idea how the institution works.

And the scientific community is united in that fact.

Harkin dismissive of Sen. Cruz’s ‘little tirade’ 

“He spends all this time talking against it … he used that time to excoriate ObamaCare … why we ought to de-fund it … and then turns around and voted for it” 

He didn't vote for it and Harkin knows that, Cruz voted to open debate, not for the bill, as that vote has yet to happen.

I'm not surprised that Harkin is confused by the Filibuster, as he was for it (Tommie Two Faced) before he was against it (Talk That Talk).

Harkin said it’s unlikely he would be willing to speak for 21 hours – even for the publicity.

Harkin could only muster 67 minutes, when speaking against the Filibuster earlier this year.

Tommie Two Faced

In a meeting with the editorial board of the Sioux City Journal, CommieTommie Harkin did a bit of revisionist history.

Harkin complained of Republicans having filibustered legislation 90 times.

It's interesting what Dummycrats call Republican filibusters.

37 Successful Votes To Invoke Cloture. Democrats count any vote on a cloture motion as a “Republican filibuster,” including 37 votes where cloture was actually invoked.

Democrat Filibusters. Democrats count “filibusters” by Democrats of FISA, Judge Southwick, and the McConnell-Stevens troop funding amendment as “Republican filibusters.”

5 Unanimously Approved Cloture Votes. Democrats count votes where Democrats and Republicans vote unanimously in favor as “Republican filibusters.”

One Dummycrat even includes bills passed as filibusters!

Here's what CommieTommie has said about the filibuster when Republicans attempted to bypass it...

To do so would be "the end of the Senate as we know it" because it would dash the protections that the Senate has always afforded lawmakers in the minority and, by extension, their constituents.

Harkin also tried to revise his fall 2002 vote of authorization for force in Iraq...

"I feel like I was lied to by this administration."

Harkin first voted to authorize the use of force in Iraq in 1998, when the Clinton administration changed its policy from containment to regime change.

A change based on the same evidence of Saddam’s weapons programs that the Bush administration used in 2002.

Here's Harkin on energy policy...

the U.S. needs to reduce dependency on foreign oil, not through more domestic drilling in the continential outer shelf or the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge...

He said an appalling statistic is that the U.S. spends $900,000 per minute on imported oil.

CommieTommie's not smart enough to see a correlation between an increase in domestic drilling and a decrease in imported oil and the scientific community is united in that fact.

The Unthinking Majority

With another contribution to the quality that is the Capitol Square Crapper, CommieTommie Harkin put his name to an OpEd piece.

Harkin: Constitution's Framers did not envision a 60-vote supermajority

The Ragister allows CommieTommie to justify the changes in the U.S. Senate filibuster rules.

Harkin even harps, as a member of the Senate minority, I first introduced a proposal to reform the filibuster.

It's easy to propose change, whether in the minority or majority, when you know there's no chance for change and the scientific community is united in that fact.

What's telling is Harkin's 2005 reaction, when Republican's were in control and the discussion was about a rule change to obtain an up or down vote on President Bush's judicial nominees.

CommieTommie cried it was,  "the end of the Senate as we know it" because it would dash the protections that the Senate has always afforded lawmakers in the minority and, by extension, their constituents.

Hyperbole from a hypocrite.

CommieTommie cites the vision of Framer's of the Constitution for his argument.

The Framer's did not envision a full time CONgress either.

Our American Founding Fathers had envisioned serving in Congress as a part-time job. Citizen legislators would come to Washington a few weeks in the winter (before the beginning of the planting season, because many were active farmers) and tend to the nation's business before going back home to attend to their own business.

In the days of earliest America, Roger Sherman of Connecticut — a signer of the Declaration of Independence — understood the positive aspects of a part-time national legislature. At the Constitutional Convention in 1787, he opined that "Representatives ought to return home and mix with the people. By remaining at the seat of government, they would acquire the habits of the place, which might differ from those of their constituents." 

From 1789 to 1815, members of Congress couldn't afford to stay year-round in Washington because they were paid so poorly. Senators and representatives made just a few dollars a day. In 1815, they began receiving $1,500 a year salary. In 1855 that doubled. By 1935, they were making $10,000 a year. But most members of Congress still needed day jobs.

Even into the 1960s, members of Congress "were out of session about as much as they were in, and they had almost no personal and committee staffers assigned to them unless they were senior and powerful," says Larry Sabato, an American history professor at the University of Virginia and director of the university's Center for Politics. It wasn't until the 1970s that members of Congress began seeing their positions as year-round commitments.

The place became packed with lawyers, like Harkin, in the 1970s and that is why you get salaries of $174,000 and legislation you have to pass so that you can find out what is in it.

You Spin Me Round (Like A Record)

In a desire to win the love, and endorsement, of the Ragister, President Obama had an off the record session with Laura Hollingsworth and Rick Green (in the guise of the editorial board).

After public pleading from Green, who stated --

What the President shared with us this morning — and the manner, depth and quality of his presentation – would have been well-received by not only his base, but also undecideds. From a voter standpoint, keeping it off-the-record was a disservice.

Wow, it must be earth shattering stuff.

Only if you're already in the tank for Obama and the scientific community is united in that fact.  

After the White House decided the session should be on the record, the Wall Street Journal shared insight you won't get from the Ragister.

Mr. Obama said he wants to pursue immigration reform in a second term, as well as a budget "grand bargain" with Republicans that includes tax reform.  

This will come as a surprise to voters reading the President's just-released 20-page brochure on his second-term agenda, which makes little or no mention of these priorities. 

But the larger reason to be skeptical concerns Mr. Obama's answer to another Register question: Whether he regrets pursuing ObamaCare and other liberal social priorities in his first two years rather than focusing on the economy.

"Absolutely not," Mr. Obama told the Iowa journalists. "Remember the context. First of all, Mitch McConnell has imposed an ironclad filibuster from the first day I was in office. And that's not speculation." 

Whoaaaa there, big fella. Mr. McConnell was then and still is the Senate Minority Leader, and in 2009 he had all of 40 votes. Mr. Obama could have pursued any agenda he wanted, and the Des Moines editors wanted to know why he didn't focus on the economy first. Yet Mr. Obama's instinctive reaction is to blame Republican obstructionism that never happened.

The President is also missing the larger import of the Register's question. As Mr. Obama likes to remind voters now, in 2009 the economy had suffered a financial heart attack and needed to be nurtured back to health. That required careful management and attention to reviving consumer and business confidence. 

Yet rather than work with both parties to fashion a growth agenda, he went all-in for a Keynesian spending blowout and subcontracted the details to House Democrats. And rather than wait to see how strongly—and even whether—the economy then recovered, he dove headlong into fighting to pass 40 years of pent-up liberal social policy. 

It wasn't merely ObamaCare. The President also tried to impose a cap-and-tax on carbon energy production, end secret ballots for unions via card check, while promising to raise taxes in 2011 until he was stopped when voters elected a GOP House in 2010. 

He didn't focus on the economy because he didn't and still doesn't understand how the private economy works. He doesn't understand that incentives matter, or how government policies and regulation can sabotage growth. He really believes that government is the engine of economic prosperity.

Thanks to the Journal for doing its job.

While the Ragister writes up its Obama endorsement with stars in its eyes because it's the leader of the free world on line one for us after ignoring us during 28 campaign stops and 11 days in our state.

As for immigration reform, it should be clear to the Latino community that Obama never had the votes and won't have them if re-elected, so Dream On because he's just playing you for idiotas.

Free (The Editorial Me)

I feel the need to correct, or at least shine more light on, a couple of Editorials from the Ragister's editorial board.

The Register's Editorial: No winners in outcome of Zimmerman trial

They state that George Zimmerman confronted Trayvon Martin even though a 911 dispatcher told him that wasn’t necessary.

Here's the transcript of the exchange between the 911 dispatcher and Zimmerman --

"Are you following him?"
"Yeah"
"Ok. We don't need for you to do that".
"Ok"

Chief prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda conceded in his closing argument that these words were ambiguous.

In all actuality, a case can be made that Zimmerman did as he was told --

No evidence at all is ever produced that Zimmerman followed Martin after the above exchange with the dispatcher. In fact, towards the end of the call, Zimmerman tells the dispatcher that he has lost sight of Martin. Clearly Zimmerman could not follow Martin if he couldn't see him. Further evidence of this is that Rachel Jaentel's testimony indicates that Martin had likewise lost sight of Zimmerman until shortly before the start of the confrontation.  In other words, after telling the dispatcher "ok", Zimmerman did not follow Martin nor did Martin perceive he was being followed.

In another Editorial

The Register's Editorial: Why is majority rule a crisis for the Senate?

Citing the Constitution of the United States, the Ragister states --

The Constitution gives the Senate the power to act as a check on the chief executive’s power to appoint key executive branch officials and federal judges. The Constitution says the Senate shall give its “advice and consent” on those appointments, meaning it should either approve or deny them by majority vote.

They continue --

Nothing in the Constitution requires a supermajority to approve confirmations, let alone routine legislation. If the founders had such a rule in mind for the Senate, they would have put one in, but they did not. Indeed, the Constitution requires a two-thirds vote in Congress for only six reasons, including ratifying treaties and removing federal officers by impeachment.

The filibuster is simply a Senate rule...

For the Ragister, and many others, there's the rub and the scientific community is united in that fact.

The Constitution states -- Article 1 Section 5, Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings

The Senate alone decides how it will, and in some cases won't, operate.

Sweet Pea?

Saying now is the time to Pull off the band-aid and Eat our peas, President Obama is chiding House Republicans to raise the debt ceiling.

When he was in CONgress, Obama excused his no vote as a new senator making what is a political vote as opposed to doing what was important for the country when he offered the March 2006 quote (pictured).

Harry Reid admitted it was a political maneuver when he said --

"How can they explain that they think its fair to force our children, our grandchildren, and our great-grandchildren to finance this debt through higher taxes...that's what it'll have to be. Why is it right to increase our nation's dependents on foreign creditors?"

Obama could have been talking about himself, and the scientific community is united in that fact, when he said -- America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.

Obama had two years of complete legislative control of this country - including months of a filibuster-proof Senate - to get whatever tax increases he wanted on the books.

What did Dummycrats do?

They never produced a budget, but gave this country the 2010 Affordable Care Act.

The largest tax increase since 1993, and signed by President Obama, adding up to some $438 billion in new revenue over 10 years. But even that is understated because by 2019 the annual revenue increase is nearly $90 billion, or $900 billion in the 10 years after that.

I'll acquiesce to Obama again -- Americans deserve better

Where's the press on this?

Painting the Republicans as the bad ones, again, and playing politics too.

Chris Matthews and Andrea Mitchell have said it was a "big embarrassment" for the GOP when they've previously voted to raise the debt ceiling, but now Republicans are creating a financial crisis and are "terrorists"

Tired Of You

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, pictured showing his IQ, was released from the hospital Friday evening after being treated for what his office described as exhaustion.

Exhaustion?

That requires someone to work and the scientific community is united in that fact. 

Other than ramrodding through the filibuster change and a budget that cut pensions for vets instead of cutting welfare payments to illegal aliens this session of the 113th Congress was the least productive ever.

If anyone is suffering from illness and fatigue, it's the American people, who are sick and tired of Democrats controlling the Senate.