Lucy’s New Ball

Thinkprogress makes the mistake of taking John McCain at his word.

Look, how many times will people fall for this. The McCain/Lieberman/Graham/Snowe/Collins caucus will always say they are in favor of looking at compromise and policies advanced by the President. But in the end, they always find a reason not to, usually because someone hurt their feelings or they didn’t like the seat they were sitting in at the negotiating table at the White House or because Nancy Pelosi smirked on CNN.






28 replies
  1. 1
    efgoldman says:

    Honest to FSM, cranky old Grandpaw Walnuts is on the teevee box more than the preznit.
    I swear, when he finally kicks off, they’re gonna’ bury a mini-cam and microphone right there in the box with ‘im.

    ETA: And who the fuck gives a fucking rat’s ass what he has to say, anyway. Christ, he’s giving us old people a bad name. Who’s idea was it to elect Grandpa Simpson to the goddamned Senate?

  2. 2
    Maude says:

    Senator Graham is threatening to hold all Obama’s nominations because of Libya.
    I wish the Senate would censor members.
    This has gone on long enough. I don’t care if he’s running for re election. His job isn’t just block nominees.
    There should be a price to pay for this infantile nonsense.

  3. 3
    Baud says:

    “I will not reject new revenues out of hand. I will reject them after giving the idea due consideration.”

  4. 4
    MikeBoyScout says:

    Grandpa Walnuts was on the teevee? It must be a Sunday.

  5. 5
    SFAW says:

    or because Nancy Pelosi smirked on CNN. Michelle Obama “rolled her eyes at John Boehner.”

    Because any bullshit excuse will do.

  6. 6
    pat says:

    OK, this is really annoying. I forget to reenter my name and email address, and my post is gone. FYWP.

    So this is what I want to write to Lindsay:

    Dear Senator Graham,
    Remember this?
    “Bin Laden Planning to Strike in the US.”
    “OK, you’ve covered your ass now.”
    “My Pet Goat.”

    And this jackass has the nerve to ask Panetta if he knows what time the President WENT TO BED that night? How many ways can they imply that the President of the United States is a lazy nnnnnn?

    I detest these people.

  7. 7
    boss bitch says:

    Look, how many times will people fall for this. The McCain/Lieberman/Graham/Snowe/Collins caucus will always say they are in favor of looking at compromise and policies advanced by the President. But in the end, they always find a reason not to,

    This is why I think Rubio will back off immigration. The “bipartisan” group that came out with the outline for reform include McCain and Graham. As soon negotiations get under way one of these pricks will find an excuse and the gutless Rubio will follow. He’s already said that adding rights for same-sex couples will make the bill harder to pass.

  8. 8
    PsiFighter37 says:

    @Maude: He’s a turdball. Combine that with closeted self-loathing and some sort of outstanding daddy issues, and you have a sorry excuse for a senator (much less a human being). I almost wish he’d get primaried out so we wouldn’t be subjected to his assclown whining every weekend.

  9. 9
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    McCain has always been a corrupt pol (think Keating Five) but ThinkProgress should know better than to believe anything that comes out of his mouth, to include “the” and “and”.

    He will never concede so much as a dime designated to go to a Defense Contractor. He’d rather have sailors living in tents on the deck of a aircraft carrier before he’d ever allow General Dynamics or Boeing execs to miss a tumbler of scotch or a roll in the hay with a hooker.

  10. 10
    Maude says:

    @PsiFighter37:
    All that doesn’t matter. He can do this and it is harmful to the US. The Senate is allowing this to go on.

  11. 11
    PsiFighter37 says:

    @Maude: You know very well that Senate rules must be respected because the Constitution says so. Or so goes Republican logic/idiocy.

    Of course, it’s Calvinball when the Republicans are in charge.

  12. 12
    Higgs Boson's Mate says:

    @efgoldman:

    Honest to FSM, cranky old Grandpaw Walnuts is on the teevee box more than the preznit.
    I swear, when he finally kicks off, they’re gonna’ bury a mini-cam and microphone right there in the box with ‘im.

    If his tombstone was a urinal then I’d visit his grave.

  13. 13
    Maude says:

    @PsiFighter37:
    This is the 5th year of blocking Obama’s nominees. It is a serious problem.
    It is interfering with Obama being able to do his job.
    It is a constitutional issue.

  14. 14
    Higgs Boson's Mate says:

    Weathervane McCain knows that he can say any reasonable-sounding thing that he wants to about increasing revenues because the Republican House will never go beyond vague promises to close unspecified loopholes. Said loophole closing at the cost of dismantling more of the social safety net. The only revenues that Republicans are determined to increase are those of the wealthiest among us.

  15. 15
    SFAW says:

    @Maude:

    It is a constitutional issue.

    Yeah, sounds like they’re giving Aid and Comfort to our enemies. Article III, Section 3, anyone?

    All it would take is one trial to get them to stop being dickheads.

  16. 16
    Poopyman says:

    @efgoldman: A bunch of old people, obviously, what done retired to Arizona.

  17. 17
    SFAW says:

    @Higgs Boson’s Mate:

    The only revenues that Republicans are determined to increase are those of the wealthiest among us.

    Like those super-rich retirees whose pensions got stripped out by their former employers. They should consider themselves fortunate that they can afford cat food, not everyone can.

    (Of course, Cole seems to be able to afford as much as the rest of WVA, based on Tunch’s, um, “svelte” figure.

  18. 18
    Higgs Boson's Mate says:

    @efgoldman:

    At this stage of life I’d think that McCain would want to retire and spend time in his lovely homes with his lovely wife. He could join her in her study of the Necronomicon.

  19. 19
    efgoldman says:

    @Higgs Boson’s Mate:

    He could join her in her study of the Necronomicon.

    Or watch from the other room while she hosts lingerie parties for other trophy wives.

    [Cheap shot. I’m sorry.]

    [No, no I’m not.]

  20. 20
    jp7505a says:

    @pat: I’m sure the next question will be did the president wear his winny the pooh jammies or the snoopy jammies with the feet in them. ALl of this is vital information to protect national security. The sequester gutting government spending, including defense spending, not so much!

    Everythime I think Congress has reached a new level of stupid, they go out and prove me wrong. At this point I would sign a petition to the White House to dissolve congress and rule by executive authority!

  21. 21
    catclub says:

    I have two questions: 1) What is the total amount of this year’s planned sequester? My vague understanding is about $110B spread over the $2.1TR of the government that is not SS, medicare and medicaid. I have heard numbers as high as $1.5Tr with no mention that that is the ten year figure.

    I also heard that part of the New years day deal nixed about $24B of sequester. 2) If the sequester is delayed and delayed, will the amount stay the same, or will it be applied to an ever smaller portion of the total fiscal year? 2b) if they delay it so long, will they just punt it into next fiscal year?

  22. 22
    catclub says:

    @efgoldman: There is a zombie movie out where the voiceover of the zombie’s thoughts is saying:
    “Don’t look creepy, don’t look creepy, don’t look creepy.”

    That may apply in this case also.

  23. 23
    Ted & Hellen says:

    @pat:

    Dear Senator Graham,
    Remember this?
    “Bin Laden Planning to Strike in the US.”
    “OK, you’ve covered your ass now.”
    “My Pet Goat.”

    The real problem is that while the republicans will do anything to “win,” there is no nationally prominent Democrat willing to raise issues such as the above in retaliation (or even in real time, when it would be most useful to do so).

    Why is that?

  24. 24
    Ted & Hellen says:

    @Villago Delenda Est:

    He will never concede so much as a dime designated to go to a Defense Contractor. He’d rather have sailors living in tents on the deck of a aircraft carrier before he’d ever allow General Dynamics or Boeing execs to miss a tumbler of scotch or a roll in the hay with a hooker.

    Ooh. Well stated.

  25. 25
    Kathy in St. Louis says:

    @PsiFighter37: My, aren’t you the optimist. No, if he’s primaried out of office, he’ll become, “The Thing That Wouldn’t Die”, and be a contributor on Fox, or CNN, or some other worthless right wing front. Once the Washington media has granted that you have “gravitas” and that you are a “credible spokeperson” for the loyal opposition, you can go on forever and ever. Besides, he’s just get a lucrative gig at some think tank and never go home to the wife and kids (cough) anyway.

  26. 26
    pattonbt says:

    @Maude: censure?

  27. 27

    […] John Cole: Thinkprogress makes the mistake of taking John McCain at his word. Look, how many times will people fall for this. The McCain / Lieberman / Graham / Snowe / Collins caucus will always say they are in favor of looking at compromise and policies advanced by the President. But in the end, they always find a reason not to, usually because someone hurt their feelings or they didn’t like the seat they were sitting in at the negotiating table at the White House or because Nancy Pelosi smirked on CNN. […]

  28. 28
    Haydnseek says:

    This is a test

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] John Cole: Thinkprogress makes the mistake of taking John McCain at his word. Look, how many times will people fall for this. The McCain / Lieberman / Graham / Snowe / Collins caucus will always say they are in favor of looking at compromise and policies advanced by the President. But in the end, they always find a reason not to, usually because someone hurt their feelings or they didn’t like the seat they were sitting in at the negotiating table at the White House or because Nancy Pelosi smirked on CNN. […]

Comments are closed.