Tag Archives: congress

Dems Inaccurately Claim GOP Blocked Berwick Nomination, Media Happy to Play Along

The GOP as the party of obstructionism: it’s a tried and true media meme, but very often falls a tad short of the truth. Yet on occasion, even stubborn facts are not enough to dispel such accusations. Some in the media have taken President Obama’s recess appointment of Donald Berwick to the head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services as an occasion to bash purportedly obstructionist congressional Republicans. Just one problem: the GOP didn’t hold up the nomination. In fact, Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, which would have had jurisdiction over Berwick’s appointment, said he “requested that a hearing take place two weeks ago, before this recess.” Presumably, Grassley wanted to shine light on some of Berwick’s more controversial positions, such as support for the rationing of care and his advocacy of the use of the health care system to redistribute wealth. President Obama apparently did not want those views examined. He issued a statement on Wednesday accusing “many in Congress” of “delay[ing] critical nominations for political purposes.” Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., echoed this sentiment, claiming in a statement that “Republican lockstep stalling of Don’s nomination was a case study in cynicism and one awful example of how not to govern.” Of course we know, courtesy of a stellar fact-checking job by Jake Tapper, that these claims are bogus. But inaccuracies in political statements from leading partisans are nothing to write home about. But some media outlets simply parroted these claims without bothering to check whether they were, you know, accurate. So while ABCBSNBC chose to all but ignore the story the day after the President made his recess appointments, the New York Times, the Boston Globe, and the New York Daily News all went one step further, and gave an unchallenging megaphone to Obama’s and Kerry’s inaccurate claims. The Times reported : Dan Pfeiffer, the White House communications director, said the “recess appointment” was needed to carry out the new health care law. The law calls for huge changes in the two programs, which together insure nearly one-third of all Americans. Mr. Pfeiffer said the president would appoint Dr. Berwick on Wednesday. Mr. Obama decided to act because “many Republicans in Congress have made it clear in recent weeks that they were going to stall the nomination as long as they could, solely to score political points,” Mr. Pfeiffer said. The Daily News echoed : Berwick supporters scoffed at GOP complaints and accused them of stonewalling. “Republican lockstep stalling of Don’s nomination was a case study in cynicism and one awful example of how not to govern,” said Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.). “Republicans screamed that these federal programs were in trouble, then tried to deny the Administration the capable guy the President had chosen to oversee them.” The Globe printed Kerry’s statement, and noted that “Obama…blamed Republicans for forcing his hand.” But as Tapper noted yesterday, …Republicans were not delaying or stalling Berwick’s nomination. Indeed, they were eager for his hearing, hoping to assail Berwick’s past statements about health care rationing and his praise for the British health care system… White House officials and Senate Democrats argue that Republicans weren’t acting in good faith, that they were hoping to use Berwick’s nomination to demagogue the career of a widely-respected pediatrician praised by myriad medical organizations as well as President George W. Bush’s CMS administrators. Democrats say that the GOP was planning to use this confirmation fight to re-litigate the health care legislation battle, a fight they lost. Is the desire to avoid that debate enough of a justification for a recess appointment? Does using the Constitutional recess appointment prerogative so as to avoid having to expend political energy and capital on a fight one doesn’t want to wage – does that live up to the president’s stated promise of transparency? For many Democrats, the answer is yes. They argue that GOP obstructionism and the desire of certain Republican senators to unfairly assail Berwick as a sort of death panel advocate drove the President to make the recess appointment. In other words, the recess appointment had nothing to do with “obstructionism” and everything to do with Democrats’ fears that the GOP would “re-litigate the health care legislation battle,” and raise the specter of health care rationing, which, contrary to many media claims, is quite real . If those are the reasons for Obama’s choice, the media should report it as such, rather than trumpeting inaccurate claims meant to shield unpopular policies from criticism.

Read more:
Dems Inaccurately Claim GOP Blocked Berwick Nomination, Media Happy to Play Along

ABC, NBC and CBS Mostly Ignore Obama’s Recess Appointment of Pro-Health Care Rationing Doctor to Head Medicare

Barack Obama’s decision to make a recess appointment of Dr. Donald Berwick to run Medicare has been vastly ignored by the mainstream news media, despite the fact Berwick has made controversial statements favoring rationing of medical care. As CNSNews.com’s Terry Jeffrey reported Dr. Berwick, at a talk celebrating the 60th birthday of Great Britain’s National Health Service, told the audience to be wary of returning to a free enterprise based system as he warned: “Please, don’t put your faith in market forces,” and urged them “I hope you will never, ever give up on what you have begun” and rallied the crowd: “I hope you realize and affirm how badly you need–how badly the world needs–an example at scale of a health care system that is universal, accessible, excellent and free at the point of care–a health system that, at its core is like the world we wish we had: generous, hopeful, confident, joyous and just.” Berwick even ominously told his audience at Biotechnology Healthcare, “The decision is not whether or not we will ration care, the decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open.” So given Berwick’s rather outspoken faith in socialized medicine the news that Obama is planning to circumvent Congress with a recess appointment, to have him head Medicare, had to be big news, right? Well not according to NBC, CBS and ABC news, as there was no mention of the President’s decision to make the recess appointment on Tuesday night’s NBC Nightly News, CBS Evening News or ABC’s World News. In fact the embargo on the information continued through Wednesday morning as there were zero mentions on ABC’s Good Morning America and CBS’s The Early Show. Only NBC’s Today show mentioned the news as Lester Holt, in an 8am EST news brief on the July 7 show, told viewers the following: President Obama is expected to appoint his choice to oversee Medicare and Medicaid today, while Congress is in recess. This means Dr. Donald Berwick won’t have to undergo Senate confirmation hearings. Republicans had wanted to question the Harvard professor and healthcare policy expert about comments he made on rationing medical care. A scant 20 seconds from the NBC’s Today show, as of Wednesday morning, is all the three major broadcast news networks have devoted to the news that Obama has just named a health care rationing doctor to run this country’s Medicare system. To read more about Berwick please read CNSNews.com’s coverage.

See the article here:
ABC, NBC and CBS Mostly Ignore Obama’s Recess Appointment of Pro-Health Care Rationing Doctor to Head Medicare

Decline of Larry King, Rise of TV ‘Cretins and Crackpots’ Is Blamed on the Blogosphere

The decline and fall of Larry King Live on CNN is depressing Washington Post TV writer Tom Shales , who lamented on Tuesday that “Larry King’s show got to be an increasingly lonely outpost of humane civility in a mephitic menagerie of hotheads, saber rattlers, cretins and crackpots.” “Mephitic” is a ten-dollar word for “sulfurous stench.” Shales predicted: “What we’ll probably see more of in the weeks and months of remodeling ahead is more of that carping, contentious talk that thrives on competitors Fox News and MSNBC, where personalities like Bill O’Reilly and Keith Olbermann (arguably two sides of the same coin) hold forth.”  He blamed all this on…the blogosphere: What has brought on the wave of harshness and calumny that saturates public conversation in the 21st century — so far? The Internet, with its mob rule and forums open to every conceivable variety of nut, has arguably been a principal cause, elevating trash speech to the level of published commentary just because there’s room for it — here, there, everywhere. Maybe Larry Kings cannot thrive or even survive in a world where the norms for discourse are rage, vehemence and character assassination. King wanted to be liked, not feared; admired, not loathed. The veteran broadcaster has no apologies to make, either. For 25 years, he made a radio format work on television, and certainly without being another pretty face. The ugliness might lie ahead, especially if CNN tries to out-shout the boors and demagogues representative of Fox News Channel and MSNBC. Not that every person who helms a talk show on these networks is guilty of coarsening the conversation. But the big noises, the most prominent personalities, seem also to be the most shrill and hostile. They set the standard, substandard though it may be. Shales even recirculated the unproven, never-found-on-video claims of Tea Party protesters yelling the N-word at black Members of Congress on Capitol Hill during the ObamaCare debate: And what happens on television invariably affects — and sometimes infects — American life, manners and mores. In March, Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) was shocked to be jeered and vilified by anti-health-care-reform demonstrators on Capitol Hill who used the most vile of racial epithets when screaming at him. “It surprised me,” Lewis said afterward, “that people are so mean, and we can’t engage in a civil dialogue and debate.” If he’d watched more cable TV, Lewis might not have been quite so surprised.

See more here:
Decline of Larry King, Rise of TV ‘Cretins and Crackpots’ Is Blamed on the Blogosphere

Oh, No! On Independence Day, CBS Frets Congress Becoming ‘Paralyzed’ Over ‘Fear of the Deficit’

West coast viewers got to see a July 4 CBS Evening News on Sunday, and those who tuned in saw CBS’s interim “report card” on Congress’s performance so far. Under the headline of “unfinished business,” correspondent Wyatt Andrews and his sole expert, Politico’s Jonathan Allen, both fretted how Congress is now “paralyzed” due to a “growing fear of the deficit.” Many Americans are probably wishing Congress had become “paralyzed” a few trillion dollars ago. Andrews rued that supposedly job-creating “stimulus spending” may be sacrificed if enough congressmen feel deficit spending is now “political Kryptonite.” Many members of Congress especially those in tough re-election campaigns are home right now, trying to figure out the spending issue: Will voters support more stimulus spending if it directly leads to jobs, or has deficit spending itself become political Kryptonite? CBS’s main example of congressional indecision, however, was an urgently-needed Afghanistan war funding bill that the Senate has nearly doubled with additional spending, pushing it from $33 to $60 billion, and that has ballooned in the House to $80 billion. That doesn’t sound like a Congress that is becoming cowed by the need to throttle back spending. Here’s the transcript of the piece from the July 4 Evening News; you can watch video at CBSNews.com: ANCHOR RUSS MITCHELL: Congress has had some notable successes this year in health care and education reform along others. But members have a lot of catching up to do when they return from their holiday recess in a week and a half. Wyatt Andrews has more. CORRESPONDENT WYATT ANDREWS: As members of Congress streamed from the Capitol Thursday night, they were leaving for a ten-day break, but escaping a long list of unfinished business. Despite repeated demands for final action- REPRESENTATIVE JOHN LEWIS: Do not be afraid to vote with your heart, and your conscience. ANDREWS: -action was hard to find. The extension of unemployment benefits, funding for the war in Afghanistan, funding for 100,000 teachers, Wall Street reform, and campaign finance reform were all either stuck, or stalled, or rejected and presumed dead. [to Jonathan Allen] How much of that did they get done? The POLITICO’s JONATHAN ALLEN: They got absolutely none of it done before the July 4th break. ANDREWS: Zero? ALLEN: Zero. WYATT ANDREWS: Jonathan Allen of Politico, who’s covered the Hill for eleven years, calls Congress unusually paralyzed this time because of a growing fear of the deficit. ALLEN: You see that paralysis in Congress where there are these sort of conflicting impulses of, ‘We’ve got to do something to help,’ but ‘We can`t do that because it cost too much money.’ ANDREWS: The latest example is funding for Afghanistan. The administration asked for $33 billion, but the Senate bill totaled $60 billion by tacking on spending for veterans — and the House bill, by adding extra money for teachers, totaled $80 billion. Because the two bills are different and bitterly contested, money the Defense Department said it needed to fight the war now is on hold. SECRETARY OF DEFENSE ROBERT GATES: We begin to have to do stupid things if the supplemental isn’t passed by the Fourth of July recess. WYATT ANDREWS: Many members of Congress especially those in tough re-election campaigns are home right now, trying to figure out the spending issue: Will voters support more stimulus spending if it directly leads to jobs, or has deficit spending itself become political kryptonite? Wyatt Andrews, CBS News, Capitol Hill.

Read more here:
Oh, No! On Independence Day, CBS Frets Congress Becoming ‘Paralyzed’ Over ‘Fear of the Deficit’

Open Thread: Democrats ‘Deem’ A Faux Budget Was ‘Passed’

Refusing to actually create a real budget for 2011, Democrats on Thursday ” deemed ” they already passed one: Last night, as part of a procedural vote on the emergency war supplemental bill, House Democrats attached a document that “deemed as passed” a non-existent $1.12 trillion budget. The execution of the “deeming” document allows Democrats to start spending money for Fiscal Year 2011 without the pesky constraints of a budget. The procedural vote passed 215-210 with no Republicans voting in favor and 38 Democrats crossing the aisle to vote against deeming the faux budget resolution passed. Never before — since the creation of the Congressional budget process — has the House failed to pass a budget, failed to propose a budget then deemed the non-existent budget as passed as a means to avoid a direct, recorded vote on a budget, but still allow Congress to spend taxpayer money.  Thoughts? 

See the rest here:
Open Thread: Democrats ‘Deem’ A Faux Budget Was ‘Passed’

‘Real World: Boston’ Alum Sean Duffy Running For Congress

Duffy, who is a district attorney in Wisconsin, is backed by former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin. By Josh Wigler Sean Duffy Photo: MTV News Former “Real World: Boston” castmember Sean Duffy is looking to move from reality-television star to congressman. Duffy, a conservative district attorney, is considered a strong contender to win the Republican primary in Wisconsin’s Seventh Congressional District, according to a report in the Los Angeles Times. The position is currently held by outgoing democrat David Obey. Duffy was thought of as a long shot to win, since Obey has maintained the position since his election in 1969, but the incumbent congressman announced his decision not to seek re-election in early May. Duffy’s campaign website includes the politician’s stance on key issues like the economy, health care, education, national defense and agriculture. He has received endorsements from notable GOP figures including onetime vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin and former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty. When Obey was still a candidate for Congress, Palin likened Duffy’s campaign as an example of the “many daring Davids [taking] on entrenched Goliaths” across the United States political landscape. “We’ve had 2,100 online contributions over the course of our campaign, which means we’ve had great support not just here in Wisconsin, but great national support,” Duffy said in a video message posted to his website June 21. The Times reports that Duffy has raised $600,000 during his campaign. Duffy has served as Ashland County’s district attorney since 2002. Outside of politics, he is best known as a veteran of MTV’s “The Real World: Boston.” His wife, Rachel Campos-Duffy, is also a “Real World” alumnus; she appeared during the show’s San Francisco-set third season, and the two met during “Road Rules: All Stars” in 1998. Would you vote for a “Real World” castmember for Congress? Share your thoughts in the comments!

Read the rest here:
‘Real World: Boston’ Alum Sean Duffy Running For Congress

MSNBC’s Ratigan: American’s Don’t ‘Give A Damn’ About Iraq and Afghan Wars; Calls for Draft

On Thursday’s The Dylan Ratigan Show, MSNBC host Dylan Ratigan went after the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and complained about the lack opposition to the conflicts: “Why isn’t there an alarm that we’ve been perpetrating this war?… there aren’t enough people in this country that honestly give a damn. No one really cares.” His solution to the supposed apathy? A draft. Ratigan began his rant by describing the financial and human toll of the wars. He particularly highlighted “the innocent civilians that our bombs are killing. As many as 105,000 dead in Iraq, the number in Afghanistan approaching 13,000, that we have killed.” He argued: “We might even be creating more terrorists….being there may be doing more harm than good.” On his May 13 program , Ratigan condemned the U.S. military for “dropping predator bombs on civilians willy-nilly.” Describing the limited number of Americans who have loved ones on the front lines, Ratigan proclaimed: “…it’s a way for the politicians to isolate on the poorest and the most isolated group of soldiers they can get and protect themselves from our society, were they to understand how violent and oppressive the actions we are taking against our own people are in perpetrating these wars.” Ratigan then proposed: “…we have to raise the stakes on this to decide whether we get out or keep going. And the only way I can see to do that is to return the draft.” He further declared: “Maybe if the sons and daughters of more Americans families, like those of our politicians, were either being killed in combat or facing the stresses of endless repeat deployment, our policymakers would start questioning why we’re still there…” After a discussing the topic with a panel of military experts, Ratigan admitted: “I’ll be the first to tell you, I’m the most ignorant at the table when it comes to the strategic analysis of this topic.” Even so, he concluded: “…the solution is still fairly simple….Either you’re on the side that is with this and is for it and is in there supporting it, or you are there making a strong case not to be there….that means that you, if you’re willing to go, are willing to send yourself and your family members into combat. And on the flip side, in my view, are not willing to do that and as such wouldn’t want to send a fellow citizen.” An on-screen graphic read: “Get Out or Get In! End the Wars or Bring Back the Draft.” Here is transcript of the July 1 segment: 4:30PM DYLAN RATIGAN: Well, day four in our ‘Fix It Week’ garage. And today we tackle a true matter of life and death in this country, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. One of them, already America’s longest war. The other, unfortunately, not far behind, long and costly. $731 billion spent so far in Iraq. $280 billion in our efforts in Afghanistan with no clear end in sight at the end of the deadliest month in the history of the war. The cost in American lives 4,396 soldiers dead in Iraq. 1,125 killed in Afghanistan. And then there are the innocent civilians that our bombs are killing. As many as 105,000 dead in Iraq, the number in Afghanistan approaching 13,000, that we have killed. There are two main problems with what we’re doing overseas, as I see it, and why we’re not doing it well. The first, we have no political will to shift from a strategy that has been repeating itself for years with no apparent end in sight. And two, there may not even be an honest understanding of our enemy and what a modern day insurgent war strategy is, let alone, how to actually fight an effective counterinsurgency. We all know about the heroin, the bribery, the rampant political corruption. But what about our overall strategy? And what we’re doing? We might even be creating more terrorists. Our leaders may not even understand the insurgency that they are fighting against. Think about how difficult it would be to launch a so-called counterinsurgency strategy if you haven’t been able to be truly honest about how a modern day insurgency works. Very few people, unrelated, using the internet and communications to disrupt society. Bottom line, us being there may be doing more harm than good. So why isn’t that conversation taking place in our Congress and in our homes? Why isn’t there an alarm that we’ve been perpetrating this war? Well, quite simply, like the cheap price of oil, there aren’t enough people in this country that honestly give a damn. No one really cares. They may say they care. But the politicians know, there’s no – the phone’s not ringing. No one really is expressing themselves. In fact, the number of active duty troops in Iraq and Afghanistan is at the lowest level since World War II. Which means the percentage of us that are exposed to the realties of war in this country, that we’ve been fighting for a decade, is the smallest it has ever been. Why is that? Well, more than a third of our soldiers have been sent back to the front lines multiple times. Some of the same soldiers sent back five and six times to the same war. Why is that? Well, it’s a way for the politicians to isolate on the poorest and the most isolated group of soldiers they can get and protect themselves from our society, were they to understand how violent and oppressive the actions we are taking against our own people are in perpetrating these wars. It means that the fewest number of Americans are truly feeling the brunt of our wars. Meanwhile, those who are feeling it, feel it harder than any troops in American history. I think we have to raise the stakes on this to decide whether we get out or keep going. And the only way I can see to do that is to return the draft. Maybe if the sons and daughters of more Americans families, like those of our politicians, were either being killed in combat or facing the stresses of endless repeat deployment, our policymakers would start questioning why we’re still there and come up with a different way to deal with insurgent warfare in the 21st century. [PANEL DISCUSSION WITH MILITARY EXPERTS] RATIGAN: I’ll be the first to tell you, I’m the most ignorant at the table when it comes to the strategic analysis of this topic. It’s why I asked these gentlemen to join me and benefit from it. But politically, for me, the solution is still fairly simple. I don’t see how, after all these years and all this time, we can continue these types of strategies without an either ‘get out’ or ‘get in’ strategy. Either you’re on the side that is with this and is for it and is in there supporting it, or you are there making a strong case not to be there. [ON-SCREEN GRAPHIC: The Fix Solution: Get Out or Get In! End the Wars or Bring Back the Draft] And explaining, not emotionally, but from a policy standpoint, why that is. And that means that you, if you’re willing to go, are willing to send yourself and your family members into combat. And on the flip side, in my view, are not willing to do that and as such wouldn’t want to send a fellow citizen. Either way, you have to let your politicians know how you feel. We, the people are critical to this process. Dylan.MSNBC.com has contact information for each and every member of Congress. Remember, you can get mad – or you don’t get mad, I should say, if you don’t get involved. This is a classic example.

The rest is here:
MSNBC’s Ratigan: American’s Don’t ‘Give A Damn’ About Iraq and Afghan Wars; Calls for Draft

Dylan Ratigan Condemns ‘Arizona’s Anti-immigration Law,’ Calls for Mob Rule to Overhaul System

You have to hand it to Dylan Ratigan. The MSNBC bloviator melded immigration reform, the military industrial complex, and congressional gridlock into a scatter-brained diatribe at the top of his eponymous program on Thursday. In the wake of President Barack Obama’s speech on immigration reform earlier in the day, Ratigan railed against “Arizona’s latest anti-immigration law” and praised Obama for “doing a good job, and a better job that almost any politician I’ve seen in a long time, in drawing our nation’s attention to the major broken systems in this country.” The former CNBC anchor who fancies himself a financial guru also babbled about a “War on Drugs that feeds money into the military complex but does nothing to defeat drug use or, for that matter, protect the border.” Then, interviewing Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-Calif.), Ratigan excoriated a Senate full of “weasels” that perpetuates an “utterly frozen process that allows the special interests to destroy our country and freeze our government.” Not surprisingly, Becerra, a strident supporter of comprehensive immigration reform, concurred with the unhinged talk show host: “Dylan, I don’t know if I could have said it better.” While claiming to criticize both sides of the aisle, Ratigan continued to cheerlead for the Democratic president, asking Becerra, “How do we – how do I in the media, how do you in the Congress – help this president try to lead us?” Without missing a beat, Becerra suggested dismantling one of America’s most treasured safeguards against tyranny – the Senate’s super-majority threshold for closing debate – and replacing it with what the Founding Fathers derided as “mob rule.” “Dylan all we have to do is get the public to tell the Senate to let us go back to majority rule,” proposed Becerra. Ratigan proved it is possible to misrepresent a popular state law, posit outlandish conspiracy theories about the military, and undermine the foundation of republican government over the course of a five minute rant. The transcript of the relevant portions of the program can be found below: DYLAN RATIGAN: A problem, of course, made more pressing by the controversy over Arizona’s latest anti-immigration law. The government expected to file a lawsuit, in fact, against that law in the coming days. First the president drew our attention to health care. All of our attention, whether we like it or not, remains on our financial system, corrupt and destroying our country as it is. And now immigration. While short on true fixes, at least Obama is doing a good job, and a better job that almost any politician I’ve seen in a long time, in drawing our nation’s attention to the major broken systems in this country. So when and if will we actually see reform? Will our lawmakers actually step up and do better on this effort when it comes to immigration, or will we just get another example of nothing more than “reform in name only” that perpetuates the most profitable aspects of illegal immigration, in this case cheap labor, and of course a War on Drugs that feeds money into the military complex but does nothing to defeat drug use or, for that matter, protect the border. Joining us now, California Congressman Xavier Becerra, an outspoken advocate for immigration reform. He’s also Chair of the House Democratic Caucus, excuse me. You have to be pleased with the president at least drawing everybody’s attention to this, and approaching honesty by acknowledging the mess, not only in immigration in this country, but in Washington and its total denial and inability to lead us to a solution. Do you agree with him? Rep. XAVIER BECERRA (D-Calif.): Dylan I do agree with him, and it takes courage to say those things to the American public because right now the public is so very frustrated. RATIGAN: How do we – how do I in the media, how do you in the Congress – help this president try to lead us? How do we come together in a way that resolves this in a way that is closer to fair than not? BECERRA: We shouldn’t let anyone kick the can down the road, as the president said. Everyone should be held accountable. In Congress, we need to see not just Democrats, we’re ready to go to work on this, but Republicans as well. And we know they’re out there. They were there three years ago. We know that there are some votes in the Senate that would want to do something but right now we need to see some courage on the Republican side in the Senate. Unfortunately right now, the Senate has become the graveyard for good ideas because Republicans are holding hostage any vote that doesn’t get to 60 in a house of 100. So you have to have the super-majority vote, and it makes it very difficult, if not impossible to get good ideas into law. RATIGAN: Should we throw out all the senators in November and start over? BECERRA: Well there’s some very good senators who are trying to do some things here, so no no. RATIGAN: How do we tell the difference, how to we figure out who the weasels are? Don’t tell me it’s the Democrats and the Republicans because I’ve been doing this long enough to know there are just as many weasely Democrats as there are Republicans. The trick is trying to tell which is which within the party. BECERRA: Dylan all we have to do is get the public to tell the Senate to let us go back to majority rule. In November, we’re going to operate on majority rule. Whatever individual wins more votes than the other, that person becomes the next congressman or the next senator. But in the Senate, you can have a majority and still not pass a bill to the president’s desk. So majority rule and we get a lot done. RATIGAN: So you would argue that the very same corrupt system that is bankrupting California, the need for a super-majority to do anything, and obviously nobody gets it, so special interests just continue to torch that state. And now the Senate has a duplication of that same utterly frozen process that allows the special interests to destroy our country and freeze our government. Is that basically what we’re dealing with here? BECERRA: Dylan, I don’t know if I could have said it better. Take a look at the Wall Street reform bill. The Senate is making it almost impossible for us to get there. There are more than 58 votes for a bill and we still can’t get it to the president’s desk. Hopefully soon the senators allow this bill to go the president and stop holding it hostage. –Alex Fitzsimmons is a News Analysis intern at the Media Research Center. Click here to follow him on Twitter.

More here:
Dylan Ratigan Condemns ‘Arizona’s Anti-immigration Law,’ Calls for Mob Rule to Overhaul System

Debunking the GOP Claim that Cap and Trade is an "Energy Tax"

Yesterday, I noted that a debate on cap and trade hosted by Salon produced the same predictable arguments from the “right” perspective — that cap and trade is “a job-killing energy tax” and so forth. I had a little fun with the regurgitated, keyword-laden arguments laid out by Steve Everley of American Solutions , and called them misleading. This evidently drew his ire (or it could have been because I misspelled his name — sorry about that). Either way, he responded to my post with a lengthy rebuttal in th… Read the full story on TreeHugger

Go here to read the rest:
Debunking the GOP Claim that Cap and Trade is an "Energy Tax"

Today on Planet 100: Planet BP Scam (Video)

Go here to read the rest:
Today on Planet 100: Planet BP Scam (Video)