Why We Don't Have a Surgeon General

What do you do when you can't even get your own party to support you? Well, if you are on the left in todays political climate, the answer is you blame the other guys.

Almost a year ago, Harry Reid called for a vote to repeal the Senate rule of needing a 60 vote majority to break a filibuster, the dreaded nuclear option. Since then, the senate has only needed 50 votes with Vice President Biden casting a tie breaker in order to get just about any nomination confirmed in the senate.

Sure, there was a small flood of nominees that began to get confirmed in the immediate wake of this historic move, but you knew it would only be a matter of time before Democrats would start needing excuses again as to why nothing is getting done.

Enter Ebola, the lethal disease that is presently trying to get a foothold on the U.S. soil. With levels of paranoia being high the attacks rooted in the lack of leadership and clarity coming out of the White House in addressing yet another global crisis have started anew. And just as predictably as Manning calling an 'Omaha' play for the Broncos, the Democrats have done everything they can to blame anyone but themselves.

This meme from Daily KOS is an example of how they reflect their failures back onto Republicans.

The meme is correct, with a potential health threat staring us down, we could use a surgeon generals office that has more then a 'vacancy' sign on the door. But, if reading this meme makes you think back to the second paragraph of this post, congratulations, you have a better memory then most politicians.

Harry Reid does not need permission from republicans or the NRA to bring this vote to the floor, all he needs is 50 of his 55 (including 2 independents caucusing with) democrat senators to vote for the President's nomination.

Take a look at the example of Debo Adegbile. A nominee to head the Justice Departments Civil Rights division. He was lambasted as an extremist by conservative groups by noting his long history with the NAACP and dredging up stories from a trial in which he represented a cop killer in Philadelphia. Harry called for a vote thinking that a behind the doors campaign directed at his own party would keep the democratic detractors low enough to get the nominee through. 

It didn't work, and Democrats felt an embarrassing blow that not has turned into an fumbling attempt to still blame republicans for something that had bi-partisan opposition. 

Harry now knows better, he knows the President, for becoming more and more obvious reasons, chose a nominee that can not get confirmed, nuclear option or not. That reason is to keep the best attack line democrats have going for them intact. That it is republicans in congress that are impeding the hope and change that was promised 6 years ago. That it's republicans that are the reason the administration is fumbling and bumbling responses with indecisiveness and a 'wait and see'  mentality to almost every event that occurs. 

To summarize, this is one of the scariest times, justifiable or not, that we have faced when it comes to public health. The position of power that should be leading a response both in action and public perception is currently filled by nobody. The reason that there is nobody there is because the one and only person who has been nominated for the position in the past year can not get enough DEMOCRAT support to get approved. The reason why the democrats have not changed nominees or called for a vote, both actions within their power, is specifically so they can continue to blame republicans.

Think about this logically and you almost laugh at how stupid it is, see more memes about blaming republicans and you realize how gullible some people can be into believing these lies.

Who's Buying Elections?

It's as sure as the sun rising, Democrats claiming that GOP candidates are trying to buy elections with outside money from billionaire donors and PAC's, yet thanks to campaign finance disclosure requirements, we can see that Republicans aren't the only ones with deep-pocketed friends.

The latest disclosures to the Federal Election Commission indicate the 2014 race for campaign cash is a little different then what a typical voter may think.

In fact, Democrats are actually outpacing Republicans when it comes to total fundraising for the political parties and their committees. Senate Democrats have out raised Senate Republicans, $111 million to $82.5 million. House Democrats are ahead of House Republicans, $146 million to $113 million. Over $60 million dollars difference.

And in my home state of Iowa, that statement is especially prevalent, with Republican Joni Ernst being out raised by Democrat Bruce Braley $2.5 million to $7.1 million.

But it is independent expenditures by outside groups that really rile up the likes of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

Reid has been railing against the libertarian-leaning billionaire Koch brothers for years. They have pledged to spend some $290 million this year to elect conservatives. But Reid's fundraising juggernaut, the Senate Majority PAC, plans to spend $46 million by itself to thwart Republican rivals.

Also, the Democracy Alliance, a coalition of 180 progressive groups and individual millionaire and billionaire liberals who gathered in Chicago this spring to make so-called investment recommendations to their members. They have pledged to spend more than $374 million to help defeat Republicans.

What's more, the AFL-CIO by itself has pledged to spend an additional $300 million to help elect Democrats.

That's not all. In the 10 Senate races where the most outside money's been spent, liberal groups have spent $97 million compared with $79 million for conservative groups.

The Center for Responsive Politics calculates that liberal outside groups have spent $126 million for Democrats and against Republicans this year -- while conservative groups have spent $114.7 million for the opposing purpose.

Add this all up, and you have coffers for Democrats and their supporting groups that well outpace anything that Republican candidates have been able to gin up, by 9 digit margins. The Koch Brothers appear to be less about giving Republican soft money some un-American advantage, and more about trying to let Republicans keep pace.

So let's scratch those evil rich republicans buying elections off the list of reasons why Democrats are going to loose the Senate this midterm. Do not fret, that still leaves the ;War on Women' and the 'Race Card'.

Nuclear Empowered Senate

"In order to break down the separation of powers and ram through their appointees to the judicial branch, President Bush and the Republican leadership want to eliminate a 200-year-old American rule saying that every member of the Senate can rise to say their piece and speak on behalf of the people who sent them here." - Harry Reid, 2005

"As I said at the time, the nuclear option was the most important issue I've ever worked on in my entire career, because if that had gone forward it would have destroyed the Senate as we know it," - Harry Reid, 2009

“The Senate is a living thing, and to survive it must change, as it has over the history of this great country,” Harry Reid, 2013

Not since people trounced on President Bush's inability to enunciate like a proper N'eastener has Washington had so much buzz over a nucular nuclear issue.

The US Senate, under the leadership of democratic majority leader Harry Reid, just pushed the proverbial big red button and passed the so-called “nuclear option,” which makes executive branch and judicial nominees at all levels under the Supreme Court of the United States no longer subject to filibuster. The new rules only requiring a simple 51 person majority over the higher bar of 60 votes.

Like so many other laws and regulations that get passed in D.C. Nobody is actually coming forward and claiming that they wanted this new rule. Time is instead spent blaming others for forcing their hand to do something they didn't want to do. 

Harry Reid is blaming Republicans, calling them obstructionists. An accusation that hasn't been thrown out in the senate chambers since about 5 minutes beforehand. Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell is blaming people who don't want to listen to opposition, when asked to clarify, Sen. McConnell replied "What?" John McCain is blaming the babies of the senate, which by his interpretation is anyone born after 1918. President Obama is blaming insurance companies, then someone corrected him that this wasn't about Obamacare, then he blamed a few bad apples in the IRS, people again said he was mistaking this for the IRS targeting scandal, the President then said it was a program that began under Bush's Department of Justice with the name "Wide Receiver", when the same people in the room started to correct him again, the President became flustered and said "Whatever it was that just happened, I didn't know about it until I will read about it in the paper tomorrow." before storming off the stage.

What does this move mean for the American people? Well, it establishes that rules in the senate don't actually mean anything, so the next time a senator says "We can't do that, it's against the rules." You know it's hogwash, or 'malarchy' as Biden would say. They just need 51 people to want something bad enough to break the rules, by which of course I mean change the rules. Also, this could also usher in a new era of political appointees being held on a shorter leash, since the process of replacing them would be considerably easier. Finally, it's another step towards setting a precedent that minority parties have no real power in congress. Merge those two guiding principles together and you have a form of government that seems a far cry from a constitutional republic.

And if Democrats think it's a win-win to get their nominations through, I'd like to see how they react when people from both parties in either chamber attempt to sit down at the negotiating table next month to has out the next short term grand bargain to avoid another shut down. With the President vowing to veto pretty much anything the house passes and the senate saying today they have no more need for a minority party. The stage is set for cold shouldering that will make the last set of negotiations over a government shutdown seem like an epic battle between the Human Torch and barrel of napalm.

For a final thought, what are the guesses as to how quickly the same majority will vote to re-invoke the 60 person rule if the Democrats loose enough seats in next year's election to place Republicans back into the majority? My guess is that will make this new Appellate Court vetting process seem like a Baywatch beach running scene by comparison.

A Race to the Bottom

Obama insisted today that Congress pass a bill that would prevent wide spread suffering for many Americans that both parties can agree to, and then He and congress can focus on the items which they disagree.

Wait-a-minute, that wasn't today, that was last summer when Obama called for an extension of the middle class Bush-era tax cuts while they continue to debate the merits of raising taxes on the upper class (fast forward clip to about 8:30 for the specific part I'm referencing). What happened today was a complete role reversal, when the Republican dominated House brought up a bill that would have funded  the National Institute of Health (NIH), which had to put on hold a series of medical trials for the treatment of cancer that has 200 children now waiting on potentially lifesaving care.

Upon passage of this bill in the House, Senate Majority leader Harry Reid was asked if he would have the provision brought to the Senate floor to be voted on. His response raised a few eyebrows.

“Why would we want to do that?”

He also threw in a cheap shot questioning the intelligence the reporter who would ask such a question, mumbled something about how they've already addressed this issue. Then tried to explain that the House of Representatives didn't have the right to decide what the government spends money on (Double Checking Article I Section 7 of the Constitution, yeah, they kind of do). He also tried to compare Federal workers taking unpaid leave with children dying of a terminal disease.

In summary, this was potentially the worst press conference by a politician in the history of press conferences held by politicians, and he got through all of these points in just over a minute.

When millions of Americans are at risk of seeing their tax rates raising to a level that was still, by Obama's own admission, lower then when Obama took office. The Republicans buckled, the President got what he wanted, and as we all know, no discussions ever arose after the great fiscal cliff deal of 2013 about lowering tax rates for the wealthiest Americans. We are still waiting for the economic boom this was supposed to usher in. However, when hundreds of suffering children are denied a potential life saving treatment, holding on to the principle that just last year, when the stakes where that much lower, THIS is when Democrats hold firm. Ironically enough in the name of healthcare reform. Couple this with the Honor Flight incident where the White House denied a request that would have classified the visit as a First Amendment demonstration and avoided the first in what is now becoming several embarrassing displays of power and ignorance. Who is causing the suffering now?

If the last election taught us anything, it's that no matter how bad things get, no matter how horrible this President fails, his constituents will never abandon him. I personally feel that he is now exploiting this fact. He knows that both sides will suffer from this fiasco. He is making the calculated move that all this pain, all this suffering, all this stupidity, will drag down the republican side much more violently then it will the democratic one. Let's call it year round negative campaigning. It may work too because people like you and I are getting sick and tired of all of it. All of it! And the side that pays attention and is disgusted with all of it is a lot less likely to vote incumbent in 2014 then the side that seems to blindly follow and point blame to only half of Congress.

Ted Cruz Was Against The Bill, Before He Was For It.

A lot of people are a bit confused about the course of events that are presently taking place in congress. Most people perceive that a piece of legislation passed the House of Representatives and now must go to the Senate to be approved or rejected. The sad truth is that is simply not the way it works in Washington, hasn't for some time. Any more, Washington rules for passing a law are more akin to playing the game mouse trap then what we all learned about in 3rd grade social studies class, so let’s take a moment and try to piece together exactly what is going on what the possible outcomes of the latest and greatest budget battle are.

The House of Representatives passes this Continuing Resolution, which according to most people over there anymore is just as good as a budget without all that paperwork and number crunching that is typically associated with trying to figure out how best to spend $3.5 Trillion dollars. This particular one would fund all the government programs through the end of next year with one minor exception. The American Care Act (i.e. Obamacare, or the ACA) was left out of the bill because the three people in congress who have read it really don’t like it. Then this resolution goes to the Senate, where they have a collection of arcane parliamentary rules that are more messed up and non-sequital then watching Andy Dick do Shakespeare in the Park. The wrench in the cogs here is that in the Senate, senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee, along with a few others are trying to force Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to get 60 votes in order to make any amendments to the House passed bill, namely an amendment that would stick the part of the House bill that de-funds the ACA. 60 votes is typically needed to get anything through the senate anymore, but once passed, a parliamentary vote could be called for an amendment to the bill that effectively changes it into something completely different, kind of like when you ask for the Big Mac combo at McDonalds, then wind up with a half-eaten breakfast burrito instead, even though they stopped serving breakfast 8 hours ago.

In order to enforce this 60 vote requirement, Senator Ted Cruz is stating that he will use a little rule called the filibuster, where Ted will take over the floor of the Senate and will then begin yapping about anything from how much he loves Canada to how much he loves Texas, it doesn't really matter, the important aspect being that as long as Ted holds the floor, nothing can be voted on at all. If he gets a few people to join in, they could hold government at a standstill for days, though it seems that an appropriate metaphor for that would involve a molasses on a cold day versus a molasses in a blizzard.

The kind of jacked up aspect of this is as such, Ted Cruz is going to have to stop a vote on the bill itself, as is, if he doesn't get the 60 vote agreement now in order to avoid a parliamentary vote on any amendments to the bill later. He is trying now to avoid a scenario from playing out where a simple majority in the Senate can expo facto send the legislation to a joint committee of house and senate members where it is expected that republicans from the house will cave and allow the amendment that would keep funding for Obamacare to stand.

Got it? So Ted Cruz is going to be against the bill, before being for the bill. But unlike another Senators failed attempt to straddle the electorate, an informed public will know why before, during, and after any vote occurs. There is some evidence that a pretty nasty smear campaign against Senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee is getting underway in order to undermine their attempt to derail the derailment of the debt and allow the government to keep moving along after the soft Oct. 1st deadline when we apparently are no longer able to use accounting tricks to keep up our funding charade.

Visual Aid on How Congress Works

So why haven’t they started this whole mess then? What’s the hold up? Well, other than some pretty exciting football games over the weekend, there are a lot of things going on behind the scenes from Senator Reid’s side to try and get ready for this battle. First of all, the aforementioned smear campaign to get some public support for his side, secondly, a dream scenario would be to get some moderate republican Senators like McCain and Graham over to his side, enough of these votes and Reid could potentially agree to Senator’s Cruz demand and still get his way as far as the bill is concerned. And of course, lastly, Obama is hoping for something else to go horribly wrong in his foreign policy that will take the spot light off of Cruz as he actually takes a stand for his beliefs and what he feels is a degradation of traditional America. Could you imagine if that kind of attitude caught on with the general public?