Bernie Sanders Exposes Other Noxious Parts Of Spending Bill

The more one sees what's in this so-called "compromise" spending bill - which is designed to avoid a government shutdown, the more one grasps it's not a compromise at all but the Dems getting their asses rolled again by the more canny Repukes. Will it ever end? Who knows? But it reminds me of the giveaway bill signed back in December, 2013. 

To refresh memories, the Pukes pushed through a sequester bill in which military spending cuts were offset by nearly $21 b more in automatic domestic spending cuts.  This offal of a bill also rendered a Dem-proposed extension in unemployment insurance off the table, even as it also prevented any new tax increases which would have helped to limit deficits by nearly $150 b over two years.

As they are doing now, the pussyfoot Neoliberal Dems called it a "good compromise" when it was in fact a blatant giveaway. It appears these "Dems" wouldn't know a compromise from a conspiracy.  But this is why we more and more depend on clear heads, not "purists" as the clueless media calls them, to point the way to clarity.

Enter then Elizabeth Warren who has clearly explained on the Senate floor why this proposed $1.1  trillion spending bill is poison as long as it includes a Wall Street giveaway that leaves taxpayers on the hook for any future collapse - after the rider has given banks permission to play with citizens' money in the risky derivatives market.   R.J. Eskow in his own blog describes it as a catastrophe waiting to happen, given the last time such deregulation reigned we beheld a $6 trillion economic loss, and a prolonged recession.

That is bad enough, and one reason this spending bill ought to be sunk come hell or high water, unless that reckless amendment is removed. Some may say "we can't because the government will shut down", but I compare that to a person saving his home after a flood, but leaving black mold (stachybotrys) to spread in the basement. Sure, you have your home -but you will soon be dead anyway unless that black mold is removed!

Now, Sen. Bernie Sanders, on a Rachel Maddow segment last night, has exposed even more noxious parts of this bill that Obama, Harry Reid and other Neoliberals want to push through. Sanders ticked down a list of the crap that awaits to 'explode' in this spending bill once it's passed, including:

- Sixty percent of the spending in the bill - that is, over $620 b - is going to military, defense and as Sanders mentioned, "when they haven't even accounted for the money they've already been given".

This is not a new refrain and has been brought up many times before by former Pentagon analyst Chuck Spinney, who in a Bill Moyers 'NOW'  program back in August, 2002, observed the Pentagon still hadn't accounted for over $1.2 trillion. He allowed as long as this persists we aren't living in a democracy.

- Ten times more private donations to campaigns now allowed, up from the earlier $32,000 limit, This will so spread toxic "money speech" pollution through our political system that nearly everyone can now be made a whore, except the most principled.

- Gov't and other workers will now be subject to pension cuts  -of up to 30 percent and possibly even more. (There's your great Neoliberal Democrat 'protectors of the middle class' at work!)

Any of these toxic turkeys by itself would ordinarily be enough to sink this egregious bill - provided we still had sane representatives and not tools of the Corporatocracy.  But we don't. We have too many sellouts, cowards and whores. The "business" that does get done then is all in favor of the elite special interests that pay the political whores' freight, not for the nation's welfare.

And all these together, let's be clear, don't add up to the total toxic quotient in the (credit default)  swaps pushout rule which  got gutted, in legislative language written by Citigroup itself.  See e.g.
http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2014/12/house-dems-need-to-sink-that-spending.html

As Jim Newell notes in his salon.com piece, "when compromise reigns supreme, the people get hosed". But the Neoliberal political imps and their lackeys benefit, as they always will, until we finally slay the two party duopoly. Yes, Elizabeth Warren would make a great President, as would Bernie Sanders (with the other VP) but as long as the Neoliberal virus persists that change will never happen.

See Newell's piece here:

http://www.salon.com/2014/12/12/the_disgusting_cromnibus_spectacle_when_compromise_reigns_supreme_the_people_get_hosed/

Excerpt:

"What’s the go-to defense of this horrid piece of legislation? It’s a “compromise.” Heh, well, that sure is true. You get some things, they get some things. It’s not really that the left gets some things and the right gets some things, mind you. It’s that special interests get paid off, and the country’s citizens get to continue living their lives.

The respective appropriations chairs, went into a room for a few days to hash out a deal covering a year’s worth of legislative battles, and then expected members to pass it within 48 hours. Those members who had the gall to glance at it and think, What the fuck?, were chastised as poor sports.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, for example, glanced at it and thought What the fuck? "

Yes, 'what the fuck?' - a fine epitaph for this country as it now continues to race to the bottom - torturing maggots running amuck, insane giveaway financial bills to raise our debt into the stratosphere,  crumbling infrastructure and all.

Obama Displays the Pluck,Courage That Senate Dems Lack

What can I say? President Barack Obama displayed courage and determination tonight in putting forward an executive action for immigration that has all the repukes going batshit crazy.

Obama has shown more than ample pluck in DOING something after the Repugs sat on their asses  for at least a year and a half. Also, Obama presented a welcome image of Democratic strength and cojones in total contrast to the pusillanimity of the Senate Dems (in voting for the Keystone abomination) and especially the timid wimp and weasel Harry REID. 

If you need an alert on Reid's cowardice  see my previous post on how the wussy-ish patsy plans to fully give in to the Reepos no matter what odious legislation they pass. 

At least it looks like we can depend on a re-energized Obama to veto any crap that arrives at his desk - including the Ryan Budget to turn Medicare into a voucher program, drastic Social Security cuts and also the Keystone XL pipeline. We sure can't depend on Reid to prevent R-contaminated laws from leaving Capitol Hill!

Basically, in his 17-odd minute address, Obama announced the extension of protections against deportation for approximately 5 m undocumented immigrants in the United States, many of whom would become eligible for work permits but who would not receive green cards or citizenship.

The measure encompassed migrant parents of children who themselves are citizens or legal residents, as well as an expanded pool of immigrants who arrived in the United States as children.  Obama billed his actions as a step toward “accountability" - which it is obvious they were.   As part of his action he also said hundreds of border agents had been added in the southwest and that the new orders would clear backlogs in immigration courts.


Obama's actions included a program to prioritize deportation of known criminals, individuals believed to pose a national security threat and others. Hillary Clinton and other Democrats welcomed the actions, but Republicans predictably decried the moves as a gross usurpation of power on the part of the president. 

Of course this is balderdash and even former Bush  Jr. AG, Henry Gonzalez- interviewed on CNN last night - was not about to refer to the actions as illegal - given that "the President has lots of discretion on the interpretation of laws."  He was clearly referring to the fact that Obama, contrary to the Repugs' bilge, was not  automatically "legalizing" 5 million immigrants - but only putting them to the very rear of the deportation line. A huge difference!

The Repukes plan to take it to court and some of the more insane are even using the I-word, but let them. They won't get anywhere. Presidents since LBJ have been expanding the warp and woof of executive power and Bush II was the ultimate, with his thousands of signing statements and openly flouting laws (such as the 1978 FISA law,  by using illegal wiretaps) then sitting back while congressional worms made it legit in retrospect.  Obama may not be a beneficiary of the same congressional passivity but at least I am 99 % sure no court will find against him. Even the Roberts' Supremes.

Stay tuned. In the meantime, enjoy the spectacle of a Dem Prez not frightened to use his power against the Rs, despite their hysteria about "lawlessness". Harry Reid, take note! The best defense is a bold offense!

See also:

http://smirkingchimp.com/thread/tina-dupuy/59699/republicans-can-stop-pretending-they-want-immigration-reform

Harry Reid: Another Useless Punk Ass Wimp - As We Suspected.

Why is it every time the Democrats are in the minority, especially in the Senate, they lose spine, become whores....errrrr....worms, and surrender power by refusing to do what the Repukes did when they were in the minority? OBSTRUCT! (In the repukes case it was to obstruct everything, while we need the Senate Dems to block only the most odious legislation - such as the Keystone pipeline and Ryan budget)

We saw this play out before with Tom Daschle's Dems in 2002, as they all rolled over and let the Bushies have their way  - allowing his odious tax cuts to go through (fully realizing how they'd make future funding for social needs problematical) and then approved Bush's illegal invasion in the Iraq War Resolution. It was enough to make a long time liberal puke and launched my departure from the Democrats to become an Independent (member of Democratic Socialists).

According to The Hill:

Reid: 'No desire' to obstruct GOP

By Alexander Bolton

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Wednesday pledged to work with Republicans when they are in the majority and eschew the strategy of obstruction he has accused them of using against Democrats.

“I am ready, Mr. President, to work with him in good faith to make this institution function again for the American people. I saw firsthand how a strategy of destruction was debilitating to our system,” he said, addressing the Senate chair.

“I have no desire to engage in that manner,” he said. ...

With Republicans set to take control of the upper chamber in January, it has raised questions about whether Democrats might seek revenge by blocking Republican initiatives in order to run against a dysfunctional GOP Congress in 2016.

Reid said that would not happen.

“I have been able to strike compromise with my Republican colleagues and I’m ready to do it again. Regardless of how you may interpret last week’s election results, it’s clear the American people want us to join together to get things done for the middle class and all Americans,” he said. ...


So Reid is a punk ass, weak-kneed weasel. We ought to have forecast as much with his tinny little weasel voice you can barely hear when he speaks.

If this is the tone and tenor that we can expect from him come January then it's time for the Dems to replace him with someone with real balls, like Elizabeth Warren. Someone who will give no quarter to the Reepos and expect none. Someone with a spine who is willing to fight for us, and not roll over for the poppets who he refers to as "the American people" - in actual fact, those yahoos that came out in their numbers while Demos slumbered.

As one smirking chimp blogger put it, reacting to the Hill story:

"Harry Reid is up for re-election in 2016, along with 33 of his millionaire buddies. Feel like un-rewarding him? "

Damned straight! This is exactly the problem (money influx from corporations, lobbyists removing the balls of pols) and why we need to weed out useless weeds like Harry Reid, who have outlived their usefulness - to the real citizen, or the nation. If he wants to be a punk or the Reepos' bitch, let him do it on someone else's time and dime.

I don't know how much more clearly I can express myself on this!

See also (for more seedy Reid connections via his aide, David Krone):

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/22/us/politics/as-democrats-work-to-unify-a-top-reid-aide-causes-a-rift.html?&hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

Dem's "Nuclear Option" Long Since Overdue to Rein in Repukes

As the media whiners exhibit their usual shtick, which is abundant cluelessness, the Dem Party and Sen. Harry Reid merit commendations for finally growing a pair in the (52-48) passage of the so-called "nuclear option" (another media term). Does the nuclear option imply blowing up everything with a tactical nuke? Of course not! It merely means putting sense and rationality back into the Senate Filibuster - which the Reepos have used to block most of Obama's judicial appointments.

At this rate, and if somehow these rabid warthogs take the Senate next year, it would mean none of Obama's current appointees get through. Hence, Reid had little  choice other than to exercise this filibuster change. Even so, despite the media's hysterics - as on 'Morning Joe' this morning- the filibuster change is limited: it only applies to current appointees, not to any Supreme Court nominees, and not to any legislation. In other words the Reeps still have 90% control over who and what gets through.

Reid's measure was also needed to show that government is not totally paralyzed, and believe me it is if a sitting President's own nominations can't get through because the other side has opted to be 100 percent obstructionist.

Nearly 5 months ago I also warned about this, and that some kind of change was necessary. ('The Nuclear Option? PLEASE Use it, Dems!', July 16).  As I wrote:

"Why the hell is this even an issue? ANY president merits having his nominations, especially for crucial federal agencies, positions, to be approved without obstruction. But the Repukes have made an art of impeding thanks to a bogus filibuster rule only implemented relatively recently that demands a super majority of 60.

This is plain nuts!"

And it is! Given Obama's appointments have been blocked at a rate far exceeding any other president's.

How has it come to such disruption?

The process over time became perverted from the intent of the framers of the Constitution-  who viewed the filibuster only as an extreme measure to disrupt or impede the passage of legislation.  They also envisaged  would only be used sparingly so they demanded the Senator(s) who would prevent legislation actually stand on the Senate floor and occupy time by discoursing at length about their reasons- or  reading from some extensive source. For a fictional portrayal, see the Jimmy Stewart movie, 'Mr. Smith Goes To Washington'- wherein Stewart's character had to speechify until literally blue in the face to attempt to halt a vote.

And now? The requirement that an objecting Senator "hold the floor" has gone the way of coonskin caps and muskets. Today, in these times, an objecting Senator need only place a cell phone call from his jacuzzi in the Senate gym and make clear his "intent to filibuster".  The expedient and efficient has overtaken Constitutional principle and the result? Gridlock!

Made worse, is the demand for a supermajority  of 60 votes - as opposed to the 51 always required before.

Does the "nuclear option" really blow up the filibuster? Hell no! It merely requires the simple majority of 51 to get a filibuster through. In other words it removes the insanely high hurdle of 60 votes which amounts to a blatant vote obstruction - used by a rabid minority to try to eviscerate the nominations of a president they despise. 

In their screeching the hyper-ventilating media insists this will "come back to bite the Dems" and that may well be. If so, we will cross that bridge when we get to it.  The point is we can't  NOW have 76 Obama nominees, already held up an average 147 days, ending up in a limbo - essentially neutering Obama's administration for the rest of its duration.


The Reepos, true to their lying ways - insist they "will lose leverage" but that is bollocks. They can have any leverage they want so long as it passes muster at the 51 vote level.

If they had any sense, they'd understand this bespeaks the opportunity for the  "bipartisanship" they are always yapping about. After all, if they can get even 4 Dems to vote with them - say from the conservative phalanx that includes Max Baucus et al, they can get their filibuster.  They just can't use 60 votes as a permanent threshold to block any and all nominees.

If they don't like it, fuck 'em! That goes for the corporate media blabbers too!

The "Nuclear Option"? Please USE it, DEMS!

Another kerfuffle has erupted in D.C., this time around Harry Reid and the Dems "changing the filibuster rules" to allow a simple majority of 51 Senate votes to pass legislation and especially, allow eight of Obama's nominations (some of which have been pending for 2 years) to go through. Why the hell is this even an issue? ANY president merits having his nominations, especially for crucial federal agencies, positions, to be approved without obstruction. But the Repukes have made an art of impeding thanks to a bogus filibuster rule only implemented relatively recently that demands a super majority of 60.

This is plain nuts!

How has it come to be that our government is essentially tied in knots, and a measure (filibuster) once used sparingly (as intended by the Founders) is now used at every opportunity by the opposition GOP – and requiring 60 votes to pass anything? The answer is a re-interpretation and casting of the filibuster - from an actual act which one had to perform in public (e.g. reading from the D.C. phone book for 14 hours on the Senate floor) to a passive “intent to filibuster”. As comic George Carlin often framed it: “And since when did this transpire? No one has informed me, no one has told me of this new way of doing things!”

Well, it appears it transpired some years ago in some secret Senate Cloak room where a tacit agreement was made by the corporate-owned Senate sleazebags that “henceforth we shall not actually demand you to get up and filibuster- but shall stand in awe and abeyance as you merely threaten to do so. And we shall call it 'intent to filibuster' and it shall replace the actual standing up and doing!”

No wonder the government is damned near paralyzed across the board.

Now, finally, after Reid punked out back in January and refused to alter the rules when he had the optimal chance, he's determined to finally do it now. Of course, just like the Edward Snowden whistleblowing, the corporate media is going bat shit crazy with hysteria and referring to it as "the nuclear option". Nuclear what? It's the sensible option! It ought to have been done ages ago!

Does the "nuclear option" really blow up the filibuster? Hell no! It merely insists those who would tie up the business of the Senate, or block presidential nominations get off their fat duffs and actually stand and talk as the filibuster had always been intended! (Think Wendy Davis recently in the Texas State Senate over an egregious abortion bill that would prevent it even in the cases of rape and incest.)

Thus, Reid's strategy is merely to force the Reeps to actually get up off their asses and FILIBUSTER, as opposed to phoning in the "intent" from their personal spas! Make them read their bibles, the DC phone book, "War and Peace"….whatever. No MORE “intention to filibuster”!

If you threaten to filibuster, say against a bill mandating a climate change provision for EPA or a health reform bill, or a presidential nominee,  then you are obliged to actually get out on the Senate floor and do it – for 57 hours or 57 days (as the Rs had to do it in 1964 when they sought to prevent the Civil Rights Bill from passage))  The weasly acceptance of the intent to filibuster as a true filibuster destroys the basis of functional government and can no longer be tolerated.

The Republicans are lying, therefore, when they assert the Dems are "trying to destroy a centuries old tradition". NO, they are not! They are simply returning that tradition to what it always had intended: that Senators stand up and speak at length to block legislation or nominees, not merely phone in an "intent". Jeezus peace, what have we come to as a nation? Has all the remaining logic, rationality been hurled out the window? Are we no longer capable of parsing BS from actual historical facts? Evidently, for the Rs, we aren't, (But let's also make clear the Ds have been part of this "intent" meme as well, so they can't be fully let off the hook, despite their protestations.)

Will actual filibustering make things messy and take longer to get to the objective? Of course, but that’s the way it was meant to be – and WHY it’s historically been used so infrequently. When you make filibustering neat and tidy – so any idiot can invoke it any time and by long distance-  you not only trivialize it but tie up government to serve a bastardized agenda via whim or special (read: corporate) interest mandate.

Reid is supposed to have more "meetings" with the 'pukes and Mitchie McConnell, but he and his lot must not now punk out like they did 7 months ago! Ignore the media's howling "nuclear" this and that, and just do it! The Dems finally need to return the filibuster to what it was meant to be: an actual ACTION requiring active participation - using phone books, bibles, long novels…whatever. Where REAL Senators had to stand up and babble on for hours or days, not even being able to use restrooms (well, ok- they could relieve themselves in glasses.)

Do not let the Reeps or the media force you to back down, Harry! Grow a pair for once and fight for that "nuclear option" because in the end it's the only common sense option to get out of protracted government dysfunction and paralysis!