The brazenness of the GOP never ceases to amaze me:
There are three issues on which I can see a Republican-led filibuster successfully blocking Democratic legislation: card-check, nationalized health care, and taxpayer-funding of abortion. On each of these issues, at least one or more Republican senators will break rank, but there are also a few Democrats who could potentially back a Republican filibuster. These are the kind of votes that could hinge on one mavericky senator from either side.
Republicans and Gregg would be foolish to settle for a Republican replacement who would toe the liberal line on issues like these where the threat of a GOP filibuster actually matters.
Look- in 2004 you called a slim margin of victory a firm mandate to govern, and now, four years latered, you got demolished in the elections, you don’t control the House, you don’t control the Senate, you don’t control the White House, and you don’t control the governorship of New Hampshire. You’ll take whatever you get, there is nothing you can do about it, and the Democrats are total morons if they cave to you.
If anyone could point out any reason to think these guys have any reason to be making demands, I am all ears. For extra yuks, the title of the post at the Weekly Standard is “Are Republicans Going to Get Rolled on Gregg Replacement?”
numbskull
Rinse.
Repeat.
Lola
I hope President Obama does not choose Gregg. This whole scenario does not make any sense.
To answer your question, Republicans remain emboldened to make demands because the media encourages them in their delusions. I think they will be smacked down soon enough by actual people. All liberals should have learned the media with all of its center-right memes does not actually reflect middle america, like they pretend.
Polish the Guillotines
Simple: If a play works, you keep running it over and over again until the other team figures it out — if they figure it out.
The Dems may never figure it out.
Bubblegum Tate
Caving to commence shortly.
srv
I would like to suggest this graphic be adopted for the Clown Shoes category.
h/t reddit
ComradeDread
Because the Democrats got so good at relenting and bending over and taking it up the wazu the last two years, the GOP figures it’s just an ingrained reflex by now.
More cynical answer, because these a$$holes are all in bed with each other and no one wants to rock the boat too much in the good ol’ boys club.
Bell Curve
You know what? I wouldn’t mind if the governor of New Hampshire appointed some fire-breathing, Bible-beating Republican to filibuster everything and oppose Obama at every turn for the next two years. That type of person is much more likely to get trounced in 2010 by a Democratic opponent than a reasonable Republican is. I’m willing to put up with two years of nonsense for at least six of sanity, especially since I don’t think there will be that many successful Republican filibusters anyway.
Athenae
FISA.
Military Commissions Act of 2006.
Just to name a couple.
A.
BombIranForChrist
Republicans make these demands because they know the Dems will capitulate.
Until the Dems grow a spine, the Republicans will continue to do this. Why stop a winning strategy?
Samuel
Specifically in the Senate, because the Dems will let them. There are no leaders in the Senate, on both sides of the aisle–only sheep.
Reverend Dennis
Harry Reid’s industrial-grade kneepads.
TenguPhule
Comrade Cole is not aware of all Democratic party traditions.
low-tech cyclist
What numbskull, Polish the Guillotines, Bubblegum Tate, ComradeDread, Athenae, BombIranforChrist, Samuel, Reverend Dennis, and TenguPhule said.
Genine
@ComradeDread:
I do believe Dread is onto something. Though I’ve thought the same myself, its even more obvious now.
Republicans 100% opposed this bill in Congress and now the GOP in the Senate are threatening to filibuster. They’re playing a game during a not-so-good time, and for what? trying to score cheap political points? But the Dems give up more and more actual good and helpful programs at a time like this to get their support. Why?
The GOP is not working in good faith here. They have no good ideas and they seem more interested in defeating the bill so more people can suffer and (hopefully, on their parts) blame Obama. Its really sickening. The Democrats just need to do what needs to be done.
This is much different than Bush. Bush never tried to reach out to anyone and just did what he wanted to do, despite good arguments on the other side that the Iraq war and other things weren’t good ideas. He ran right over the opposition with malicious glee. If Obama has to do this without GOP support then that’s what he needs to do. He tried, there is a fair amount of documentation of him trying and yet the GOP won’t work with him in good faith.
Which, unfortunately, isn’t surprising with these people. What frustrates me is Dems caving in, trying to go out of their way to please people who do not want to be pleased. They don’t want to govern, they want power. The stimulus has been polling around 70 to 80%. The people want it and a lot of them want the package to be even bigger. Obama should just take his mandate, his good ideas and do what needs to be done.
Unfortunately, Dems, in general, really suck at this.
Michael D.
I mean, you know they will.
Right?
Keith
They should lead Gregg along, let him resign, and then say "Screw ’em" and go ahead and appoint a Dem anyway. When the GOP inevitably complains, the response should be, "Well, you folks didn’t want to be post-partisan, so kiss my sweaty taint."
Yeah, it’ll piss off the opposition, but it’s not like it’ll result in them voting as a caucas every chance they get.
JGabriel
The Hill, quoting Gov. Lynch on selecting a Republican to replace Gregg:
If it’s so goddamn fucking important, you’d think Gregg could put country over party and take the job without all the drama and backroom dealing.
This is the kind of guy Obama wants to rely upon to run Commerce?
Pisses. Me. Off.
.
Stevenovitch
Well it’s not like Obama’s semi-selection of him in the first place wasn’t some transparent attempt to net an extra senate vote anyway. This is politics.
JGabriel
Stevenovitch:
If that were the case, I’d be lot more tolerant. But since they’re caving on that issue, it’s clearly not the case. Unless they prove otherwise by saying, "Gregg’s being too much of a pain in the ass. We’ll find someone else."
That’s scenario I’d also be happy with.
But to put Gregg in Commerce, and not get anything for it to help the Dems and/or progressives? That’s just idiotic.
Unless someone can make the case that Gregg brings something to the office both unique and worthwhile. Because I haven’t seen anyone make that case yet.
.
Stevenovitch
You’re right, they can’t, and that’s why it’s pretty obvious that all Obama wants out of this is a senate seat. Nevermind that both fivethirtyeight.com and electoral-vote.com called this exact play months before the election even happened, I sincerely doubt that Gregg will end up getting the position once it becomes clear that the governor will appoint a republican in his place… unless he winds up having to do it to save face.
Laura W
Rachel is channeling this whole thread on her show right now, only funnier.
NonyNony
You know John, nothing says "new member of the Democratic Party" than statements like this one.
Seriously – when you were a Republican did you even watch how Democratic politicians did business? Caving in to Republican demands is about #3 on the list of "things Democratic politicians know how to do best" ("make excuses for caving to Republican demands" is #1 and "finding mealy-mouthed ways of justifying the Republican position as the Democratic one" is #2, for the record).
I actually don’t know what Obama is thinking with this one – Gregg doesn’t seem like he necessarily brings anything to the Commerce slot, so I can see how the natural assumption is that this is Obama trying to game the Senate to 60 seats. But somehow, I don’t think it is.
Fencedude
I just figure that in about a month some result of this we can’t see right now is going to swing around and take Mitch McConnell right between the eyes.
Ash Can
But why shouldn’t the Congressional Democrats cave to the Republicans when those GOP buddies of theirs are such financial geniuses? Ladies and gentlemen, let’s have a big hand for
Sarah Palin’sthe State of Alaska’s Excellent Stock Market Adventure.Samuel
@Ash Can:
That’s a lame analogy. A state’s fund investment performance really can’t be correllated to any political party. State treasurers employ investment managers for these tasks to properly invest their money–whether those managers invested funds wisely is another issue–and again, really doesn’t depend on political affiliation.
Look at the Harvard endowment–smartest guys in the room right? Down 22% in 2008, off $8 billion.
How about we pick some states with Democratic governors and see how their states’ funds fared in the market?
Fulcanelli
Historically Republicans work with Republican Presidents.
Historically Democrats work with Republican Presidents.
Historically Republicans do not work with Democratic Presidents, they either try to kill them, they kill them or they they impeach them, so don’t expect them to work with with Obama especially. I really wish the Dems would get hip to this and grow a pair, maybe even a full house. Especially when there’s A Rasmussen poll floating around claiming 80% of these morans want the GOP to be more like Palin. Fnord!
It’s looking more like the Union vs. The Confederacy every day. Queue the "Dixie" banjo music.
Unless a bunch of the Republican governors do some serious arm-twisting of their Republican congress critters we’re stuck with this shit for 2 years. And, yes I really, really hope I’m wrong.
But what really pisses me off is that after 28 years of ever mounting Republican deficit spending these pissant pig-fuckers might get any traction claiming to get back to their "roots" as the party of fiscal responsibility by blocking the stimulus package because of some of the shit that really doesn’t belong in there at this point in time and the assholes in many of their gerrymandered districts are so fucking poor and stupid they’ll never know the difference and think they’re righteous demi-gods while the rest of the country circles the drain.
Nobody said this was gonna be easy…
Fulcanelli
@Samuel: Hell, State Investments and pension funds are one of the biggest reasons we got stuck with going along with the bank bailout. If it was just private investors’ money, I’d say fuck em’ you lose. Thanks for playing.
TenguPhule
Dear Republicans Senators, Please DIAF. Now if not sooner.
You thought Daschle was a tax cheat? This is fucking Highway robbery.
Jay Ballou
Well it’s not like Obama’s semi-selection of him in the first place wasn’t some transparent attempt to net an extra senate vote anyway….it’s pretty obvious that all Obama wants out of this is a senate seat.
It’s pretty obvious that you can’t distinguish your imagination from reality.
Jay Ballou
@Samuel: You’re full of shit. Try actually reading and comprehending the article.
Phoenician in a time of Romans
If anyone could point out any reason to think these guys have any reason to be making demands, I am all ears.
Blackmail.
An awful lot of American politics can be explained by the idea that the Republicans have a larger and active blackmail operation aimed at Democratic legislators.
Ash Can
@Samuel (and everyone else): Didn’t get a chance to get back here last night, but on further review I recognize that I was wrong to single out Alaska for something that all the other states were doing. I bitch about Republicans/right-wingers making half-assed strawman arguments, this time I did it myself. I’ll crab about other things Samuel writes, I’m sure, but this time around he’s right.
kay
@Phoenician in a time of Romans:
Blackmail.
An awful lot of American politics can be explained by the idea that the Republicans have a larger and active blackmail operation aimed at Democratic legislators.
I’ve considered that. I’m discouraged. I followed Holder’s confirmation. I read a lot about him.
These are the facts. Holder is qualified. He’s better qualified, on paper, than any AG in my memory. Despite the fact that both Holder and Obama are black men, they aren’t "friends". That’s BS. It wasn’t a crony appointment.
Holder isn’t political. That isn’t his reputation, and he has a long, really stellar record. He’s a great lawyer. Holder quietly assembled an absolute army of credible backers, from law enforcement to business interests.
Almost 27 hours in hearings, the best AG nominee in my memory, and 21 Republicans voted against him. Not because he’s "liberal", because there’s no indication he IS, but because a Democratic President put him up.
This is going to be tough. They’re going to fight Obama at every turn, if Holder is any indication.
Samuel
Agree 100%
@ Ash Can: True–most if not all the states were investing their funds with Wall Street’s paper. And not to get off the thread topic, but J.Cole’s post this morning about the ratings agencies was dead-on. If you’ve got the Goldman, Morgan and Lehman guys covering their eyes and pointing at Triple A investments to put in their clients portfolios, imagine what the pencil-pushers at states’ treasuries were doing. They’re just going off what some broker is telling them to buy–"Triple A rated? Sure–let’s put ALL of the pension fund in it…"
Here in NJ–its a wonder why they’re not handing out rocks for us to suck on for nourishment, the state is so inept, the treasury is basically bankrupt–and our governor used to RUN goldman sachs–morons….
timb
Look, that idiot at the Standard is echoing Patrick Ruffini’s comments regarding the same issue. Ruffini ‘s sole interested in governing or America is GOP winning. He has NO interest in Gregg or whomever replaces him. What he cares about is making the demand, so it’s rejected and he and others can take Obama’s bi-partisanship cred from him, e.g. "see, we tried to cooperate, but they tried to appoint someone to lose in 2010 rather than a Republican. Democrats are just playing politics."
This is one of the only ways to "fire up the white guy base" AND make a play for the right of center middle.
He wants you to take the bait and nominate a RIN, so he can bitch and fund raise about it.
IMHO, they never should have agreed to replace him with a Republican anyway. Obama should have told Gregg to choose either the cabinet post or choose to lose in 2010 (after enduring months of fund-raising and labor).
Somehow, i think the chance for personal enrichment and a seat at the head of government would have won him over.