Archive for December 18th, 2009
December 18th, 2009
.Â
 
.
  Republican Sen. James Inhofe, who’s always been a few fries short of a Happy Meal, went to Copenhagen this week to give all those treehuggers at the big global-warming conference a piece of his mind (such as it is).
.
  But alas, poor Jimbo only succeeded in making himself the object of ridicule.
.
  My favorite part of THIS ACCOUNT is where Inhofe opines that the principal purveyors of global-warming theories are “the Hollywood elite.”
.
  The Hollywood elite? He must have thought that the kind of cultural resentments he peddles among the Oklahoma rustics who elected him are going to impress the comparative sophisticates gathered in Copenhagen from around the world.
.
  Or does he actually think that the countless climate scientists with whom he disagrees on anthroprogenic global warming are all members in good standing of the Tinseltown glitterati?
.
  People like Inhofe are beyond satirization.Â
.
  No wonder a German reporter told him he’s “ridiculous.”
.
December 18th, 2009
.Â
  Ideologically, I’m probably on Dylan Ratigan’s side in the matter at issue in the video below. But his rudeness is inexcusable.
.
  Chris Matthews also frequently acts this way. So does Bill O’Reilly, when his guests are political adversaries.
.
  And, of course, cable shows that simultaneously feature two or four guests who don’t see things the same way too often end up as shoutfests.
.
.
December 18th, 2009
 .
 
.Â
  During last year’s presidential campaign, I took to calling John McCain “Jukebox Johnny” because he changed his tune every three minutes.
.
  This tendency was most disturbing when McCain denied having flip-flopped on certain issues, despite solid evidence that he had. At times, he seemed helplessly confused and forgetful.
.
  Unfortunately, the situation hasn’t improved this year, even with McCain no longer facing the terrific pressures of a national campaign. He’s still flipping and flopping all over the place, and he’s still denying having taken certain positions and actions in the past, no matter the record of them.
.
  Consider, for example, an episode from just yesterday. When Democrat Al Franken objected to Joe Lieberman’s request for an extra minute to complete his remarks on something or other (see HERE), McCain took great umbrage and declared that he had never seen such rudeness in all his years in the Senate.
.
  But, in fact, McCain once did the very same thing, as we see HERE.
.
December 18th, 2009
.Â
 
 .
  Steve Benen ASSESSES the situation.
.
  A few excerpts:
.
  By most head-counts, the Senate Democratic health care proposal has 59 votes. Because the Senate can be an absurd institution, legislation with 59 supporters out of 100 members necessarily fails.
.
  The only holdout in the Democratic caucus — the one who continues to hold reform hostage — is, of course, Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska. He not only continues to oppose the bill, he’s prepared to join a Republican filibuster, preventing the Senate from even voting on health care reform at all…
.
  To date, Nelson has rejected compromise language, and compromises on the compromises. As of yesterday, he threw cold water on the idea of approving a bill by Christmas, and even raised the specter of scaling back whole portions of the bill, which would likely delay the process for months, and probably kill it altogether.
.
  What’s interesting, though, is that after reading Nelson’s remarks yesterday, I was inclined to think the game is up — reform by Christmas was an impossibility, and the entire effort may very well die at the hands of a Republican filibuster (with Nelson’s help). But notice: everyone on the Hill keeps working towards the reform-by-Christmas goal. The leadership is well aware of what Nelson said and what Nelson has threatened, but Reid, Durbin, and others continue to work towards their deadline, and occasionally yesterday even sounded vaguely optimistic.
.
  It’s enough to make observers wonder, “Do they know something the rest of us don’t?” The answer, apparently, is, “Maybe.”
.
December 18th, 2009
 .
.Â
  The question is ADDRESSED by Marc Ambinder.
.
  A few excerpts:
.
  Does President Obama have contempt for liberals? No. The administration is virtually infested with liberals. And they’re not inclined to be self-hating.
.
  But the Obama Way harbors contempt for ideologically driven special interest constituency politics. During the campaign, it eschewed endorsements, refused to attend interest group cattle calls, and alienated the DC-lobby-politics community. The activist left was never really on board with the Obama movement until the very end of the primary. And the White House makes a distinction between self-identified liberals — who, polls tell us, still love the president — and the activists who cue those liberals, many of whom are calling into question the entire Obama project…
.
  [W]hile liberals might still remain fans of Obama, they’re much less enthusiastic than they were. The transmogrified arm of the Obama campaign, Organizing for America, tried to make up in volume what it lacked in message; when the president and the Senate bend over backwards to cooperate with industry and the Republicans, it’s going to be hard to convince the Obama base — which is more moderate and independent than the Democratic base — to do much of anything. These activist liberals may be angry, but their anger hasn’t gotten them squat just yet.
.
