Kagan confirmation vote a sign of future troubles

With yesterday’s Senate confirmation, Elena Kagan is now a Supreme Court justice. She has the intellect and experience to do well in that post.

For the moment, though, I’d like to focus on the fact that 37 senators voted against her confirmation, which is perilously close to the 40 votes that would have been required to filibuster her nomination. I think that’s an ominous sign, confirming a sense that American government is coming close to a breakdown.

As an Obama nominee, Kagan is of course going to be different than, say, a Palin or Romney or Gingrich nominee. That’s how the system works. The right to make such nominations is part of the “spoils of war” that come with winning the presidency. Historically, the Senate has respected that reality.

Kagan is also well within the legal mainstream and eminently qualified for the court. In fact, one of the worst things you could say about her is that she has spent her life and career trying to avoid controversies that might prevent confirmation. Some Senate Republicans have tried to make an issue of the fact that she had never served as a judge, but on that too she falls well within the historical norm. Roughly a third of our Supreme Court justices had no prior experience on the bench, including the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist, who became a conservative legal icon.

So the fact that 37 senators nonetheless voted against an utterly mainstream, determinedly “safe” nominee such as Kagan ought to be taken as a serious warning sign. Most of those votes weren’t against her as a individual, they were a statement of general political opposition and would have been cast against any nominee that Obama was likely to propose.

“We are well on our way to a huge train wreck,” Tom Goldstein, a veteran Supreme Court litigator, told Politico. “I do think this is a corner we won’t be able to turn back [from], or at least there’s no sign the Senate will turn back from, for a long time.” If 60 “yes” votes “is the best anyone is going to have, a Supreme Court confirmation fight could easily turn into thermonuclear war.”

Sen. Lindsay Graham, one of five Republicans to vote for Kagan, is among those worried.

“Things are changing,” he said. “I worry the direction we’re drifting. I don’t question any of my colleagues’ decisions; I would just like to get us back to more traditional ‘advice and consent,’ where the [presidential] election is respected. I worry about where this takes us as a nation with the judiciary.”

In 1986, Antonin Scalia was confirmed by 98-0. Five years ago, John Roberts was confirmed by a vote of 78-22, with 22 Democrats voting for him. In 2006, Samuel Alito was confirmed by just 58-42, with just four Democrats voting for him, indicating that both parties are edging closer to the line. As Graham notes, the trend is ominous, threatening not just future Supreme Court nominees but the overall ability of government to conduct necessary business.

967 comments Add your comment

Doggone/GA

August 6th, 2010
8:55 am

“threatening not just future Supreme Court nominees but the overall ability of government to conduct necessary business”

sounds like it’s right on track to “drown in a bathtub”

Normal

August 6th, 2010
8:56 am

Jay, neither party wants to conduct the necessary business, they only want the other party to fail. We the people will be the ones to feel the brunt of that…

stranger in a strange land

August 6th, 2010
8:56 am

Given that most all political subjects are so polarized these days – are we supposed to be surprised by this, ot what?

Saul Good

August 6th, 2010
8:56 am

There’s no doubt that since Obama was elected that Washington has become even MORE partisan compared to the Bush years. The main driving factor for those on the right up there? Upcoming elections…and they’ve been focusing on them since day one (when they were trounced). They’re SO afraid to be labeled even remotely somewhere in the middle…that they vote more in line with the principle of “party affiliation first”… and what’s for the good of the country and my constituents second.

Doggone/GA

August 6th, 2010
8:58 am

“and what’s for the good of the country and my constituents second”

Second? I’m not sure it’s even on the chart.

USinUK

August 6th, 2010
8:59 am

“So the fact that 37 senators nonetheless voted against an utterly mainstream, determinedly “safe” nominee such as Kagan ought to be taken as a serious warning sign”

Jay, the fact that they would hold up unemployment payments should be a serious warning sign.

The fact that they STILL won’t vote on some Obama nominees (as we come up to the 2nd anniversary of his election) out to be a serious warning sign.

Elena Kagan is just icing on their “we’re throwing a strop like a 2-year old” cake …

Doggone/GA

August 6th, 2010
9:06 am

“The fact that they STILL won’t vote on some Obama nominees”

I will say this always and forever…and regardless of who is in power at the moment…the Senate leaders need to stop being COWARDS and MAKE the opposition ACTUALLY filibuster everything. Stop letting the THREAT of a filibuster shoot down legislation. Make them stand and and DO it. Make them vote against ending the filibuster. Make them do it over and over and over. Put them ON RECORD, EVERY TIME.

Gale

August 6th, 2010
9:08 am

I read recently that our government is now more partisan that it has been in ?40? years. As Normal put it, each party only wants the other party to fail. I would like to know where our political system stopped trying to be successful. I am reminded of a school yard push fight, neither party wanting to strike a blow they would be punished for, but always seeking to throw the other to the ground. That objective is all they can see and they don’t even care what the fight is about anymore. The object is only to humiliate the opponent.

TaxPayer

August 6th, 2010
9:09 am

All hail Franken for having the courage to call it like it is — a senate circus show, with folks like Mitch playing the part of the turtle-faced clown.

Vinny

August 6th, 2010
9:09 am

She has no experience as a judge! Obama had no real experience managing anything, so their like two peas in a pod.

RW-(the original)

August 6th, 2010
9:10 am

In other news from 1987 the eminently qualified Robert Bork was voted down 42-58 and this whole process was begun. Thankfully Republicans have finally learned how the game is played.

JohnnyReb

August 6th, 2010
9:11 am

The Senate has not said NO enough! We can mainly thank Snow and Collins for that, but that’s another story. If November shows I’m wrong, you can pile it on. However, the evidence for now clearly shows the majority of the country is not in favor of the Obama, liberal, socialist, agenda. And, the underhanded way it has taken place.

Concern for the person being put on SCOTUS is of course due to the way progressives have used the court to enact social agenda’s not supported by the Constitution or legislation.

Our country is in trouble, and it is coming to a head, as the old Southern saying goes. The left is a minority whose social agenda is not supported by the majority of the people. And, that majority is ready to stop the by-passing of their wishes.

The buyer’s remorse over Obama is monumental. His administration is sinking like a rock. I am sure that within they are in full panic.

Aquagirl

August 6th, 2010
9:11 am

Cue right-wing rants on Elena Kagan/Obama/other random subject of right-wing junk in 3….2….1…..

USinUK

August 6th, 2010
9:13 am

“In other news from 1987 the eminently qualified Robert Bork was voted down 42-58 and this whole process was begun”

“eminently qualified” Robert Bork advocates for government censorship …

he’s eminently something … but I don’t think “qualified” is the word we’re looking for …

JohnnyReb

August 6th, 2010
9:13 am

Taxpayer – Frankin is a joke and an embarrassment to Minnesota and the nation. I travel to Minneapolis a lot, the people they elect still amaze me as the business people I meet there are not consistent with how the state votes.

USinUK

August 6th, 2010
9:14 am

“the underhanded way it has taken place”

yep. DAMN THOSE OPEN ELECTIONS!!!

Harry Callahan

August 6th, 2010
9:15 am

“So the fact that 37 senators nonetheless voted against an utterly mainstream, determinedly “safe” nominee such as Kagan”

Bookman…seriously…had the AJC laid off all the editors and proof readers in attempt to stay financially afloat? Kagan is mainstream? LOL. You wouldn’t know mainstream if it hit you upside the head with a 2 X 4. If you had a clue what’s mainstream, maybe your circulation wouldn’t be circling the drain.

Matti

August 6th, 2010
9:15 am

Doggone/GA,

I agree! The party-first party of “No way we’d put America before our own career ambitions” is not solely to blame for this impossible stalemate. The Democrats (as I’ve been saying for years) need to NUT UP, list the facts, and stop trying to placate childish tantrums by offering candy. They need to shine a light on what these self-serving egotrons actually say and do, and should begin by forcing them on the record with every nasty little word of it.

JohnnyReb

August 6th, 2010
9:15 am

Come on USinUK, you may be on the left, but I doubt you can seriously support the antics that put Obamacare into law. Just be ready to get the payback after November.

Paul

August 6th, 2010
9:16 am

Last paragraph of Jay’s piece shows it’s both parties. Wonder how long until the conversation centers on Republican opposition to Kagan as the theme?

The parties may well continue on partisanship and bickering. Hopefully the voters will accelerate the trend of voting against incumbents, if the primaries are any indication.

But hey, progress! Just a couple of years and we’ve moved from a current president, then senator voting against a Supreme Court nominee on grounds of judicial philosophy to having a Republican leader voting for that same president’s nominee and calling on the Senate to get back to their ‘advise and consent’ duties.

USinUK

August 6th, 2010
9:17 am

“support the antics that put Obamacare into law”

you mean the fearmongering over “death panels”?? the racist witchdoctor photoshopping?? the out-and-out lies by the opponents about what the bill actually DOES???

no, I don’t support that.

larry

August 6th, 2010
9:17 am

Maybe we need to get rid of the filabuster all together. Or make it easier to break.

Harry Callahan

August 6th, 2010
9:18 am

Bookman, did you see the vote in Missouri where they rejected Obamacare by 71%? But the Obama-bots are “utterly mainstream” right? Classic.

Paul

August 6th, 2010
9:19 am

TaxPayer

“All hail Franken for having the courage to call it like it is”

Evidently Sen Franken doesn’t share your view. He sent a written apology to Sen McConnell.

A private sector employee

August 6th, 2010
9:19 am

Just remember, this little escapade began with the DEMOCRATS. Have a look at past nominee votes:

http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/nominations/Nominations.htm

Look at the last 40 years and see the close votes and which party caused them. Jay didn’t write articles when the Democrats were pulling their stunts. To be clear, all of the votes were mostly unanimous EXCEPT the votes for:
Samual Alito
John Roberts
Clarence Thomas
William Rehnquist

And this does not include the nominees that were refused!

Unless the nominee has some overriding reason NOT to become a Justice, the nominee should get a yes vote. The Democrats started this foolishness of gumming up the works for Republican nominees. Now history is going to take the course that they began.

JohnnyReb

August 6th, 2010
9:20 am

UsinUK, the “death panels” are real. There is already talk of how most of the free medical coverage was taken from Medicare, which means “panels” will decide if Granny gets that hip replacement or Grandaddy that knee, or possibly Johnny that expensive cancer drug that will only prolong his life a year. Yep, that Obamacare is the cat’s meow.

Normal

August 6th, 2010
9:20 am

…And Vinny, you have no experience at objective reasoning…

RW-(the original)

August 6th, 2010
9:21 am

“eminently qualified” Robert Bork advocates for government censorship …

What a complete and utter crock. Why don’t you just quote the entire slanderfest from Kennedy, USinUK?

arnold

August 6th, 2010
9:22 am

The only way it will change is to get rid of gerrymandered districts. Guaranteed voting districts perpetuate our present Congressmen. It’s the only way to vote different parties into office.

Normal

August 6th, 2010
9:23 am

Thankfully Republicans have finally learned how the game is played.

Game RW? GAME? This is our lives you are talking about here. It may be many things but GAME isn’t one of them. For Pete’s sake…Game, y’all.

That says it all.

USinUK

August 6th, 2010
9:23 am

Johnny Reb – “means “panels” will decide if Granny gets that hip replacement or Grandaddy that knee”

dearheart, welcome to the world of health care. these things already go on in hospitals and insurance companies all over the country.

if you think that this is a NEW thing only under the HCP, you’re sadly mistaken and horrendously naive.

larry

August 6th, 2010
9:23 am

Medicare is not free………………..we have been paying into it for years. And insurance companies have death panels just as well.

Taco

August 6th, 2010
9:23 am

Are you crazy you dumb ass. She is not a judge, she is not mainstream, she is an activist which will ignore the constitution. The constitution is to protect us, you stupid bumper sticker philosophers.

Bookman, you must be one of the stupidest journalist I’ve read i a while. You are the classic can’t do math or science guy, so I have to go into either journalism or psychology.

Balance Our Budget

August 6th, 2010
9:25 am

Bruce Drake
Contributing Editor

The New York City Landmarks and Preservation Commission has cleared the way for construction of a controversial 15-story mosque and Islamic center to be built two blocks from Ground Zero, but New Yorkers oppose the project by 61 percent to 26 percent with 13 percent undecided, according to a Siena Research Institute poll conducted July 27-29.

The margin is a little lower — 56 percent to 33 percent — when the question is asked just of city residents.

While self-described conservatives voice the strongest opposition, a majority of liberals and moderates also oppose the project.

jt

August 6th, 2010
9:25 am

This is a good thing.

Remember, after the fall,

no one will stop ya’ll from sending 90% of your wealth to Steny Hoyer and company and have them make decisions for you. It will be a free country once again.

Yes, freedom.

Gale

August 6th, 2010
9:26 am

If JohnnyReb had his way, the progressive’s social agendas would not be passed. We would still have slavery, women would not be allowed to vote or own property. Oh yes, and Mrs. Cleaver would still be at home making PB&J for the Beaver.

larry

August 6th, 2010
9:26 am

Ahhh, i see the name calling people of day shift has arrived . Hello Taco.

TaxPayer

August 6th, 2010
9:27 am

Evidently Sen Franken doesn’t share your view. He sent a written apology to Sen McConnell.

You are of course free to interpret the exchange as you wish. Franken, in my opinion, has played Mitch quite well.

RW-(the original)

August 6th, 2010
9:27 am

Normal,

Game is a polite word for it.

Paul

August 6th, 2010
9:27 am

Taco

Reading your post, I have to wonder why you’re so hostile towards psychologists…

Bosch

August 6th, 2010
9:28 am

That’s the GOP’s game plan — break down the government because they can’t get their way.

Paul

August 6th, 2010
9:29 am

TaxPayer

You think mocking the speech of a senator holding the floor is proper conduct for a senator acting as the presiding officer?

Normal

August 6th, 2010
9:30 am

Larry,
Taco

August 6th, 2010
9:23 am

Yep, When there are no facts to give, kick dirt.

Bosch

August 6th, 2010
9:30 am

“Make them stand and and DO it.”

Amen and a TESTIFY to that!

larry

August 6th, 2010
9:31 am

no one will stop ya’ll from sending 90% of your wealth to Steny Hoyer and company and have them make decisions for you. It will be a free country once again.

I dont do that in the first place.

Russ555

August 6th, 2010
9:31 am

Do away with the Senate rule requiring sixty votes to bring a bill to the floor for a vote. Filibuster was never intended to prevent a vote by the majority, just to delay the vote until all senators could get to Washington to vote.

Gale

August 6th, 2010
9:31 am

School yard name calling in progress.

Normal

August 6th, 2010
9:32 am

Polite has nothing to do with it RW, and your attitude is part of the problem.

godless heathen

August 6th, 2010
9:32 am

From wiki:

On February 12 2003, Miguel Estrada, a nominee for the D.C. Circuit, became the first court of appeals nominee ever to be filibustered. Later, nine other conservative court of appeals nominees were also filibustered.

On the morning of Tuesday, January 31, Alito was confirmed to the Supreme Court by a vote of 58-42

Bosch

August 6th, 2010
9:32 am

“She has no experience as a judge!”

Did you READ the article? So? So did lot of other, very well regarded justices. What’s the big deal?

Obama had no real experience managing anything —

Again with this nonsense. Just another Obama hater with nothing but sound bites.

Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)

August 6th, 2010
9:33 am

Well, we wouldn’t have these hang-ups if Obama would just nominate people that are against abortion, for big business and against unions, against the greenie-weenies, against guvmint hand-outs, and for war. But he keeps sending the Senate these wild-eyed radicals. What’s a godly Republican Senator suppose to do? Even the ones they think are safe turn into libruls, like this Republican judge the other day that ruled in favor of the gays.

I look for the day when all the offices of judges and and guvmint agencies are empty because no one will vote to confirm appointments. That’s what we’re looking at and it might could be a good thing.

But it might could be that one day the Senate will get rid of the filibuster rule. And when it does I hope it’s my party in the majority. We’ll fill about 3,000 seats with good Conservative people and then the voting in Congress won’t matter. The judges will just overrule any law we don’t like.

Anyhow, while y’all were jabbering, I been stocking up the bars and stores with good beer for your Friday night weird music listening party. And I accidently forgot to load any of the cheap wine that Sister Dusty likes to guzzle while she’s watching the Braves and taking pot-shots at good Christian people on this blog. She’ll get the DTs after awhile like a drug addict that’s run out of his stuff.

Have a good Friday everybody.

JohnnyReb

August 6th, 2010
9:33 am

USinUK – yea, go ahead and chock me up to naive. I would consider throttling back that elitist attitude a little. You are right, however, there are refusals going on now, but if Obamacare stands what happens now will pale in comparison.

What you guys on the left don’t get, the people are not going to accept the tremendous transfer of their wealth and priveleges that is the Obama agenda. If you want what I have, work for it. Dont’ take it from me through the out of control federal government.

The backlash is happening before your eyes, but you think it’s fantasy. The people reject progressive tricks, therefore the close vote on judges. For my part, they should have fillibustered Kagan.

Bosch

August 6th, 2010
9:33 am

“We can mainly thank Snow and Collins for that”

Yes, you can! The Goddess and her Deputy Goddess…..sigh.

Douglas

August 6th, 2010
9:33 am

I did not see Bork mentioned, but that was when Pandora’s box was opened.

jt

August 6th, 2010
9:34 am

I dont do that in the first place.

Just wait.

right before the fall. (USSR was taking 95%. The russkies were pretending to pay their subjects. The subjects were pretending to work. Kinda like government stimulus workers now.)

Jack

August 6th, 2010
9:35 am

Bring on “future troubles” if it means that some of our polititians are aware of our drift toward a liberal wasteland.

JohnnyReb

August 6th, 2010
9:36 am

Hello Bosch, hope you have a smile on your face this morning. If not, just think of what a righwing nut I am and that should at least bring a grin.

pat

August 6th, 2010
9:37 am

She has experience? How many years has she served on the bench? 0. How many days has she spent as an attorney in court? 0 The woman has zero experience. She is the most unqualified individual to ever sit in the court. The left side of congress is obama’s lap dog. The only reason she was confirmed was because obama wanted it. She has no experience and no merits on her own.
She is not main stream she is hard left. She is an extremist and she is an activist. This is what you will see from her on the bench.

Normal

August 6th, 2010
9:37 am

Oh good, we’ve moved from Nazi’s and Hitler to the USSR…remember kiddies, be afraid, be very afraid… :roll:

Paul

August 6th, 2010
9:38 am

JohnnyReb

“the people are not going to accept the tremendous transfer of their wealth and priveleges that is the Obama agenda.”

Do you have any specifics on who ‘the people’ are who are going to suffer a tremendous transfer of their wealth and privileges?

Whose wealth will be transferred? All the people? Lower economic strata? Mid? Upper? Super Duper Upper?

Whose privileges?

And.. who are the intended recipients of the transferred wealth and privileges?

Bosch

August 6th, 2010
9:38 am

Hi Reb!

Yes, it does. :-) I’ve been meaning to tell you — that quote/phrase whatever about “grief is what we pay for love” — someone wrote that in a card to me — and I had gotten to the point where I had stopped opening cards and just looked to see who they were from — but for some reason I opened that one, and that card helped me more than any of the others. So, I appreciate the sentiment from you as well. It is a very true sentiment indeed.

Now, shut up with your silly rhetoric! ;-)

Bosch

August 6th, 2010
9:39 am

Reb,

Yeah! And answer Paul’s questions!

Paul

August 6th, 2010
9:39 am

JohnnyReb

Normally when something is transferred it’s sent from one to something else.

If you really meant ‘transferred’ in regards to privileges, are you saying that someone who has privileges will no longer have them because they’re being given to someone who has no privileges?

TaxPayer

August 6th, 2010
9:40 am

You think mocking the speech of a senator holding the floor is proper conduct for a senator acting as the presiding officer?

Paul, I think Franken’s graphic representation of the mockery the Republicans have chosen to make out of the Senate is apropos. Again, you are free to formulate your own opinion of the exchange. I take it “I Object!” sums it up for you. As for me, Franken is doing a most excellent job. I would vote for him if he were my senator.

Intown

August 6th, 2010
9:40 am

Yep. It’s a sign that if even if the Dems are merely weakened in the Senate and House, Obama will have a hard time getting anything done for at least the next 2 years. This is why many folks are so upset that Obama put healthcare and other priorities ahead of a comprehensive climate change/energy bill. They knew he may have only had 2 years to change the world and the direction of this country toward a bright future.

JohnnyReb

August 6th, 2010
9:42 am

Paul, I am an example. The wife and I have income that puts us in the higher tax bracket. We are not trust babies, both bluecollar who have worked extremely hard to get what we have. If we want our money to go to someone else, we will give it to them.

As to privaleges, just look at how Medicare will change – all to give helathcare to those who have not positioned themselves in life to support themselves.

If your reply is to include how minorities have been held back, etc. don’t bother to reply. I have heard enough about racism. We are now in a stage where whites are being discriminated against.

RW-(the original)

August 6th, 2010
9:42 am

Good for you, Normal, but blind subservience just ain’t my thing.

larry

August 6th, 2010
9:43 am

The russkies were pretending to pay their subjects. The subjects were pretending to work. Kinda like government stimulus workers now.)

Well, jt, ill ask the Windstream workers if they are pretending to work when they start upgrading our broadband capabilities here in this county and in four other counites here in NE Georgia. Thanks to the stimulus.

Del

August 6th, 2010
9:44 am

Kagan is a anti-military left wing activist with less than satisfactory credentials to serve as a Supreme Court justice. The 37 that voted against her conformation were well justified in their vote.

jt

August 6th, 2010
9:44 am

Ignore at your own peril Normal.

Remember, when storing survival food, store the food that you DO NOT like. It will last longer.

It will also be good to barter with after we “pop” Iran when the Fed’s house of cards come tumbling down.

Normal

August 6th, 2010
9:44 am

Intown,
Good analysis…indeed.

Herd

August 6th, 2010
9:45 am

You left and right idiots will be the end of all of us. And when I say all of us I mean your 30% combined plus the other 70% of us.

Normal

August 6th, 2010
9:46 am

jt,
I wouldn’t want to live in your world if you held a gun to my head. I’d just make you pull the trigger.

JohnnyReb

August 6th, 2010
9:47 am

I would love to hang around and debate you guys some more, but work calls. One parting shot, if the latest rumor comes true it will split the Nation. That is, Obama is considering telling Fannie and Freddie to forgive the “underwater” portion of the millions of people who can’t pay their mortgage. That is so wrong on so many levels I hope it stays a right wing radio rumor. If it comes true, God help us.

Kamchak

August 6th, 2010
9:47 am

THE BACKLASH AGAINST THE BACKLASH IS COMING!

jt

August 6th, 2010
9:47 am

larry

If it needed to be done, it would have been done.

Now it will be inefficiently done by stealing money from someone else. You get YOUR upgrade, someone else doesn’t get HIS upgrade.

I know that that concept is hard to grok.

jasperite

August 6th, 2010
9:48 am

Good column Jay. And I am afraid you and Senator Graham are correct.

Here is what we need. We need on the next issue that deals with the operations of any part of the government for the Senate leadership to go ahead and allow a filibuster. And if it runs on for months so much the better. And if it shuts down government for months, wonderful. It is time for the country to really see what they have been sending to congress to represent them. It is time for the Senate to get back to the job of helping govern the country.

There was a time, we old guys remember, you younger guys do not know what I am talking about, when the Senate debated an issue and voted on that issue. Each Senator voted for what he thought was in the best interest of the country as a whole. So you had Scalia with a 98 – 0 vote for confirmation. Now you have Senators voting in the best interest of their party.

The real kicker to the Kagan vote was that she is replacing the most liberal member of the court. Her confirmation actually moves the court to the right from where it was with Justice Stevens on the court. We conservative watchers off the court are actually feeling pretty good this AM. We know who Obama could have nominated and who the Senate could have confirmed.

TaxPayer

August 6th, 2010
9:48 am

“The Leader thought I was disrespectful while he was giving his speech on General Kagan,” Franken said in a statement to The Hill. “He is entitled to give his speech with the presiding officer just listening respectfully. I went directly to his office after I was done presiding to apologize in person. He wasn’t there, so I’ve sent him a handwritten note.”

This exchange reminds me of that time that Franken put McCain, the hypocrite, in his place on the floor too. hehehe

joe matarotz

August 6th, 2010
9:50 am

Folks, let’s have a big round of applause for today’s ‘Captain Obvious” award – Jay Bookman.

Finn McCool

August 6th, 2010
9:51 am

I bet Franken will be in the Senate for a long long time.

Bosch

August 6th, 2010
9:51 am

jasperite,

“The real kicker to the Kagan vote was that she is replacing the most liberal member of the court. Her confirmation actually moves the court to the right from where it was with Justice Stevens on the court.”

Funny how far right conservatives are these days — Justice Stevens considered himself a conservative.

RB from Gwinnett

August 6th, 2010
9:51 am

“Jay, the fact that they would hold up unemployment payments should be a serious warning sign. ”

Saul, this is dishonest and is EXACTLY what’s wrong in politics. You know darn well the issue the R’s were holding this up for is asking the D’s to PAY for the extension with cuts somewhere else, but you conveniently leave that tidbit out because it’s doesn’t fit your “everything D good, everything R bad” agenda.

I’d like to have a new Mercedes SL500 and I do need transportation, so I should have it right? No, if I want it, I need to find a way to pay for it within my budget. Same for you and every other American and we should expect our government to behave the same way.

Paul

August 6th, 2010
9:51 am

TaxPayer

I was referring to Sen Franken’s behavior in his role of presiding officer of the Senate. I think such immaturity is part of the larger issue of Jay’s thread.

JohnnyReb

I don’t want to get too personal here, but the income tax changes aren’t supposed to affect households making less than $250,000 a year. That’s 95 percent of all households. I’ll grant there are some other areas of tax policy I find troubling, such as the 55% rate on estates valued over a million (that’s just four times the annual income, accumulated over a lifetime, of what Dems consider middle class)

So for the vast majority I don’t see the income tax wealth transfer as a big issue, especially as it returns rates to essentially where they were when Pres Bush was in office.

As far as Medicare, do you mean Medicaid? Medicare applies to practically all folks receiving Social Security, even if they were hedge fund managers earning a billion a year. Medicare is based on income and assets, and for many people who qualify – say they go into a nursing home. The gov’t takes their Social Security check to contribute to covering expenses.

But if you mean extending Medicare to low income folks – I don’t see how that’s a new privilege at the expense of someone else. We’ll always have poor people.. The question is, what’s the best way to handle them?

I just don’t see any other ‘privileges’ being taken from people who now have them and given to people who don’t.

larry

August 6th, 2010
9:53 am

jt, the upgrade will help these counties and communities compete for jobs which the money will be paid back through the jobs they will create. It works better than blindly cutting taxes for companies and people that will not invest in this country or this county.

I know that that concept is hard to grok.

Paul

August 6th, 2010
9:55 am

Bosch

Your 9:51 – Jasper has a cult following? Me, I’d go for the Alice cult. Or Esme. Mmmmmm……….

USinUK

August 6th, 2010
9:56 am

“yea, go ahead and chock me up to naive. I would consider throttling back that elitist attitude a little. You are right, however, there are refusals going on now, but if Obamacare stands what happens now will pale in comparison”

oh NOES!!! Not ELITIST!!!

please.

it’s just another example of being caught in a lie (or at least a propaganda-induced delusion) then calling the person who called you out on it an “elitist” for pointing it out to you.

“What you guys on the left don’t get, the people are not going to accept the tremendous transfer of their wealth and priveleges ”

sorry, bubba, but we’ve been soaked for the last 30 YEARS in the transfer of money and priveleges from the middle class to the “elites” you supposedly hate. Since the 1980s, the middle-class income has remained unchanged, while the top 1% has increased 30% …

but, yeah … you’re fine with the transfer of wealth, as long as it goes upwards …

Bosch

August 6th, 2010
9:58 am

Paul,

Hehehehehe. I didn’t think of it that way, but yeah, I guess soo — and Alice fer sure.

TaxPayer

August 6th, 2010
9:59 am

I was referring to Sen Franken’s behavior in his role of presiding officer of the Senate. I think such immaturity is part of the larger issue of Jay’s thread.

I see his behavior as a reflection of the Republicans in the Senate and I also agree that such immaturity is part of the larger issue of Jay’s thread. Also, part of Franken’s feedback to the esteamed senator is that he does not have to sit there and take no crap from his senior while he’s presiding. Franken for president, after Obama has finished his eight years.

Bosch

August 6th, 2010
10:00 am

And Paul, your 9:51 to Reb —

We need to somehow get that on a t-shirt or make sure it is mandatory reading for all who are eligible to vote. Can we put it on flyers and drop them from planes?

Bosch

August 6th, 2010
10:01 am

And this:

“sorry, bubba, but we’ve been soaked for the last 30 YEARS in the transfer of money and priveleges from the middle class to the “elites” you supposedly hate. Since the 1980s, the middle-class income has remained unchanged, while the top 1% has increased 30% …”

Yeah, that needs to be on our flyer we drop from planes too.

larry

August 6th, 2010
10:02 am

Time to enjoy the day off

( And so he (Bush) lied).

USinUK

August 6th, 2010
10:02 am

Bosch – 10:01 – I’d just be happy if it was on the FOX news crawl … (if only to watch their little heads a’splode)

pat

August 6th, 2010
10:04 am

Can anybody point to any judicial decision this woman has ever made? Just one will do…

jt

August 6th, 2010
10:04 am

larry

Sorry to be a downer in your keynesian fantasy.

History, USSR, Argentina, Rome, etc………..proves you wrong. What taxes do not steal, inflation will.

With respect, I’m out.

Pennsylvanian

August 6th, 2010
10:05 am

The Senate of the USA has become dysfunctional. Statesmanship has died. Senators are now souped up, 3 term representatives.
Step 1 – Repeal the 17th amendment! Return the selection of senators to the state legislatures.
Step 2 – Voters of the USA; NEVER,EVER elect President, Senate majority, and House of Representatives majority from the same party. Neither Republicans nor Democrats can be trusted with that much power.

USinUK

August 6th, 2010
10:06 am

USinUK

August 6th, 2010
10:07 am

pat … tell you what … why don’t you tell US what judicial decisions Louis Brandeis or William Rehnquist made before their appointments …

Curious Observer

August 6th, 2010
10:08 am

Medicare is based on income and assets, and for many people who qualify – say they go into a nursing home. The gov’t takes their Social Security check to contribute to covering expenses.

Medicare itself isn’t based on income and assets—Medicaid is—but you are right that nursing home care can involve forfeiture of Social Security benefits as well as assets.

I still am amazed that the Senate and the House both refused to settle the problem of the medically uninsured simply by subsidizing Medicare coverage for them, instead of developing this abortion of a law that enriches private insurance companies and enrages most people who have existing health insurance coverage. I think it’s a prime example of how health insurance and pharmaceutical industry dollars essentially bought legislation. Instead of a straightforward solution to the problem of people who cannot afford health insurance, we got the worst possible solution. And single-payer didn’t even make it to the committee floor.

And after disputing Hillary Clinton’s assertion throughout the primary campaign that medical insurance coverage would need to be compulsory, Obama folded like a cheap tent and went along with forcing people to buy medical insurance coverage. He deserves whatever he[[ he endures from Congress after the election. He showed absolutely zero leadership, turning the entire healthcare debate over to Congressional people who are bought and paid for by the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries. I’m about as liberal as they come, but I don’t see this health insurance law as the way to go.

USinUK

August 6th, 2010
10:08 am

as you say … just one will do …

g’head … we’ll wait

Bosch

August 6th, 2010
10:09 am

USinUK,

Drat! My identity is out! :-)

Nope, I make power tools, spark plugs, and cool ass refrigerators.