Showing posts with label US House. Show all posts
Showing posts with label US House. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 07, 2013

Mark Sanford Wins Back His Old Congressional Seat

It should not come as a surprise to too many that in spite of scandal, ex-Gov. Mark Sanford has defeated comedian Stephen Colbert's sister, Elizabeth Colbert -Busch, in the special election to fill the vacancy in SC-CD01 left by Tim Scott's appointment to the US Senate.

It should not surprise anyone because Colbert-Busch is an adamant Barack Obama supporter, a friend of Nancy Pelosi, another bore rich women who lacks the sense to be in charge of anything significant, but believes she should be regardless,  is in favor of higher taxes, stricter gun control laws, and lenient abortion laws.  Charleston voters are not struck by her Hollywood connections period, but certainly not enough to overlook views like hers.

It should also not surprise anyone because Sanford did not really need a comeback.   He not only completed his term as governor in spite of his overseas extramarital affair, but helped get his protégé, Nikki Haley, elected as his successor.  The South Carolina Republican Party has mixed emotions tonight.  Some merited, some not so much.  Sanford has a legitimate stain on his character, yes, but he has also faced false charges, such as the trespassing accusations brought on by his ex-wife which were actually court approved child visitation.  Not that today’s journalists will bother to dig deep enough to fin that out.

Well, it does not matter a whole lot, anyway.  We will have to do this all again in November 2014.  Although I will bet you Sanford will not face a Democrat opponent.  Welcome to South Carolina.  We do things differently down here.   

Thursday, April 18, 2013

The Sanford Soap Opera Rolls On

The headline coos over savvy Jenny Sanford sabotaging ex-husband Mark Sanford's political comeback.  No, not really. 

It is all actually a matter of the former governor’s mental instability in repeatedly trespassing on his ex-wife’s property combined with Jenny Sanford’s irritation at bein passed over for the Senate seat vacated by the retiring Jim DeMint.   We all have to sufer through the freak show. 

There are not too many who think Sanford will not be ale to win his old seat back regardless.  Ideally, he will lose and another Republican an take on Stephen Colbert’s sister--I did say this was a freak show, did I not?--in 2014.  But this is South Carolina.  The only sure thing that will happen is the other 49 states will scratch their heads over te outcome, whatever it winds up being.

Thursday, April 19, 2012

Formspring Question #398--A House Divided Edition

How hard do you think the Republican majority in the house will be hit in November? Presumably some losses are inevitable now that the fever of 2010 has cooled (and some state-level republicans have over-reached in blue/swing districts).
You should take my answer with an even larger grain of salt than you do with the other subjects I spout off about. Outside of my home state, I can probably name fifteen or twenty House members. Discussing the dynamics involved in 410+ elections all across the country is well beyond my realm of expertise.

Generally speaking, I expect the republicans to take a loss. Voter interest is not fired up right now, and what little enthusiasm there is involves the presidential race. Unfortunately, with a candidate as vanilla as Mitt Romney, I do not expect enthusiasm to grow much between now and November. Somewhere along the line, conservatives are going to have to get excited about defeating Barack Obama.

But I doubt anti-Obama sentiment will translate to House races for three reasons:

One, midterm elections are referendums on the president. The only proactive way to comment on the president‘s performance in a midterm election is by voting against his party’s congressional nominees. In a presidential election year, they can target him.

Two, mitt Romney is not exciting enough to have coattails. Republicans will not be voting for him. As much as hey will be voting against Obama. If Romney campaigns feebly, social conservatives will stay home like they did in 2008. The same bloodbath will ensue.

Three, I do not think the Tea Party has the enthusiasm it did in 2010. Maybe they will get it back by November. The Tea party’s waning influence is fast becoming a motivation for veep speculation. First, it was some suggestion Rand Paul should be the eventual veep choice. Now there are rumblings about Allen West. Why? Because there are fears Paul is too conservative to last in Kentucky and West is too conservative for his new district. People are beginning to realize some Tea Party favorites are not a good fit for their districts. There will be course corrections come November, particularly in swing districts.

Taking a wild guess, I will say the republicans will suffer a net loss of ten or twelve. That is after some favorable redistricting has brought in some new Republicans. South Carolina has a new House district which is split from Joe “You Lie!” Wilson’s district. It is a guaranteed Republican pick up. I assume other redistricted states will be similarly positive. Seriously, is there such a thing as a Democrat controlled area that is actually growing in population?

Thursday, March 29, 2012

Nancy Pelosi on ObamaCare: “We Wrote Our Bill in a Way That Was Constitutional”

Really? This from the former House Speaker who said the bill had to be passed in order to find out what was in it. what exactly does Nancy Pelosi know about the constitutionality of anything?

Every piece of legislation, particularly one so large Justice Antonin Scalia jokes it would be cruel and unusual punishment to read, is drafted by an army of Ivy League lawyers. At least theoretically, these lawyers ought to know the Constitution inside and ought enough to know how to bend the rules enough to suit their agenda. Judging by the three day defense before the Supreme Court, the drafters got so careless with their creativity, they jeopardized the entire healthcare overhaul with legislation so weak, even Justice Anthony Kennedy, whom progressives quietly pinned hopes on serving as the swing vote, is not likely to uphold the individual mandate.

So what is the problem? There is two of them, if you want to consider this post within its scope.

One, legal intellectuals are far more interested in twisting the Constitution to fit a progressive social agenda. Helping people, whatever that means, is more important than determining original intent from that useless old Constitution. Do you believe Barack Obama was given a job as a law professor because he is always the smartest man in the room, or because he has the correct opinions on how outdated the Constitution is for application to modern times? Take your time chewing on that one. In the meantime, realize constitutionality is irrelevant to the political left because they--meaning legal scholars, too--do not see why the law should stand in the way of promoting the progressive agenda.

Two, Pelosi had a job she was grossly unqualified to hold. I understand she rose to House leadership because she raised a lot of money for Democrat candidates. But that is when they were in the minority. What was the logic in electing her speaker? She did not lead her party to victory in 2006. The Republicans lost because of big spending and scandals. Pelosi is not a big thinker, a policy wonk, a bipartisan unifier--she does not even have any sex appeal, so she does not even make a superficial pretty face for the public.

It has been suggested she won out for speaker over Steny Hoyer, a far better choice, because the California delegation voted lockstep for her. This may be at least partially true. I suspect, however, arms could have been twisted to keep her out of the top spot if the Democrats were serious about bipartisan legislation for the good of the country rather than ramming through an unpopular, progressive agenda. If so, then Pelosi is likely an easily controlled dupe. She certainly did not appear to have a grasp on much of anything while Speaker, yet got some nasty stuff passed.

One is inclined to think progressives will do anything to push their unpopular agenda, whether it be burying unconstitutional mandates in a mess of legal jargon or putting a incompetent Speaker of the House front and center to make an embarrassment or herself promoting the agenda.

Wednesday, March 07, 2012

Because Progressives Are Allowed to Fail Upward

The title of this post is the answer to the question of why it took fifteen years to dump Dennis Kucinich, the only mayor to preside over the bankruptcy of a major American city, from the house of representatives.

At least Democrats knew enough to not nominate him for president. Seriously, could you imagine what would happen if they nominated a free spending progressive who bankrupted the country?

Oh, right. You do not have to imagine the scenario. You just have to be paying attention.

Wednesday, February 29, 2012

House Subcommittee Votes to Eliminate Death Panels from ObamaCare

Remember those death panels that were not supposed to have ever been in ObamaCare? it looks like someone finally took Nancy Pelosi's advice and read the monstrosity after it passed, because a house subcommittee just voted 17-5 to kill the death panel provision. The two highest ranking Democrats on the subcommittee allied with republican members. The five opposing votes were all Democrats. One assumes the voting lines will be similar in the full committee and full house, depending on how far the repeal progresses.

The specific ObamaCare provision creates the Independent Payment Advisory Board. (“IPAB.”) The IPAB is the panel of unelected, unaccountable to anyone board of bureaucrats whose job it would be to ration Medicare. Medicare applies to the permanently disabled, elderly, and poor. In other words, this panel would decide who among the less useful members of society are worthy of receiving medical care and who is not.

I guarantee you two things. One, those five democrats who voted against repealing the provision are adamantly pro-abortion. Two, there are people out there disappointed they may never get a chance to serve on the IPAB. The power of controlling life and death decisions in the name of social engineering? A progressive’s dream, no?

Monday, January 16, 2012

Eric Cantor Kills SOPA

Good. SOPA might have been the death of blogging, among many other online activities.

The support/oppositon for SOPA made for strange bedfellows (Yea: Marco Rubio, John McCain, and Lidsey Graham; Nay: Darryl Issa, Pete Stark, and Nancy Pelosi) but I am glad it is dead even if I did have some unlikely allies in my opposition to it.

I imagine many progressives would rather commit seppuku than express gratitude towards Cantor.

Wednesday, November 02, 2011

US House Affirms "In God We Trust" as US Motto

The Republican controlled US House wisely reaffirms our national commitment to God you will never guess who is not happy about it?
President Obama invoked God Wednesday as he criticized Congress for voting on commemorative coins and a resolution reaffirming “In God We Trust” as the national motto in all public buildings, public schools and other government institutions.

“That’s not putting people back to work,” Obama said. “I trust in God, but God wants to see us help ourselves by putting people to work.”

Obama called on Congress to approve his jobs package.
So according to Barack Obama, we do not need to affirm our national trust in God, but God trusts in his jobs bill. Progressives accuse conservatives of invoking God to pass legislation. What do they call what Obama has just done?

Declaring trust in God is humbling yourself before Him. claiming god endorses your political agenda is the exact opposite. what an overinflated ego it takes to declare God thinks your agenda is more important than His.

Thursday, September 01, 2011

Barack Obama's Job Speech Scheduling: Calculated Plan or Just Plain Incompetence?

So here is some interesting political maneuvering. Barack Obama wanted to address a joint session of Congress over his jobs plan, which is said to be a plan which does not involve Congress, but cast that aside for a moment. Obama wanted to give his speech on Septemeber 7th at the same time a republican presidential debate, which was scheduled months in advance, would be held. The white house got snaky when the scheduling was questioned. The Republican candidates can go back to attacking the president once his speech is over.

Obama has agreed to move his speech to September 8th instead, and he has even agreed to have it at 7 PM so as not to conflict with the opening Game of the NFL season, which pit’s the defending super Bowl champion Green Bay Packers against the 2010 Super Bowl champion New Orleans Saints. You may recall this is not the first time the White House has bowed to pressure from the entertainment industry. There was some concern the State of the Union address in 2010 might conflict with the season premiere of Lost. You know society is crumbling when bread and circuses is not a useful distraction for the government, but one it has to work around in order to inform the people.

“Uh…if you all wouldn’t mind DVRing Two and a Half Men, China just launched a nuclear missile towards San Francisco. Yes, I know its Ashon Kutcher’s first episode, but civilization has about twenty minutes left to exist.”

Anyway, it is no secret Obama deliberately scheduled his speech to distract from the Republican debate., but was it incompetence or an attempt to set up a confrontation with Congressional Republicans that the White house forgot to consult with Speaker John Boehner over the scheduling? Neither would surprise me, but whichever the case, the speech has been moved to accommodate both congress and NFL fans. Double whammy there for Obama. A triple threat if you count how lackluster the final season of Lost was. Not that anyone in his right mind would prefer listening to an Obama speech to watching mediocre Lost.

But Obama has gotten two things he wants out of the rescheduling. One, a complaint that the Reoublicans will not give him an inch, and two, Boehner as the target of progressive ire. The former is not worth it. What kind of fundraising line is a complaint that the president has to rescedule a speech because he did not conslut congress? He is a former law professor, for heaven’s sake. Has he never heard of separation of powers? The latter is even worse when you think about it. How much emotion, pro or con, does Boehner generate? Obama cannot make him into public enemy number one. No one cares enough. What a wild, wacky incident this all was, planned for advantahe or not.

Thursday, June 16, 2011

Anthony Weiner Resigns from Congress

Anthony Weiner has resigned from Congress under the rationale the distraction of his scandal is getting in the way of doing his job. In other words, he still thinks his job performance pushing a progressive agenda should excuse his extracurricular activities and is angry his critics believe otherwise. You did not have to be psychic to see this turn of events coming, but i his resignation and his mindset on resigning days ago.

Several observations are in order.

First, it is incredibly pitiful for Weiner to be taken down by a sex scandal that did not involve actual sex. Weiner engaged in the kind of behavior fifteen year old kids and weird pedophiles--not to excuse him of being the latter--have been doing for years in AOL chat rooms. It is a sign of gross immaturity to not only send a photo of your genitalia to a female, but to expect her to be impressed by it. Weiner is a man who had attained a career many people only dream of having. Whether you think he deserved it or not, he was a prominent lawmaker in the most powerful country on earth. Yet his maturity level was that of a horny junior high kid. Yet he had defenders, which reiterates the idea that you can say or do just about anything you like as long as you diligently pursue progressivism.

Second, he still does not think he did anything wrong. Oh, he has hung his head in public and said all the right words. He has also slinked off to rehab in order to plausibly find redemption. But the bottom line is that was all part of the pageant. In his mind he broke no law, therefore his critics are being unfair. This rationale is indicative of the progressive mindset there is no hour principle than that which government establishes. Laws are written by government, therefore law is the ultimate judge of right and wrong. It is fascinating to see the way progressives think laid out right before our eyes.

Finally, it is also fascinating to see how the public reacts to such scandals. I have spoken more than I ever cared to about progressive reaction to Weiner’s scandal, but the general public bears mention, too. Most wanted weiner to resign, likely because they were either repulsed by his behavior or drew the conclusion he is too immature to wield he power his constituents have given him. While the public wants weiner to go away, we are still fascinated by him. The major news networks cut away from Nancy Pelosi, a House leader, speaking on unemployment, which is the biggest issue of the day, in order to cover weiner’s resignation speech. Granted, you are not missing anything by skipping out on anything Pelosi says. She was more than likely reading her speech for the first time to see what is in it herself. But the cutaway speaks volumes about what we value as important news.

Saturday, June 11, 2011

Anthony Weiner Not Yet Roasted

More proof today of what I speculated last night regarding the progressive mindset on Anthony Weiner's actions:
“Anthony Weiner deserves to be supported and hopefully he will be mayor of New York one day. I’m serious. He is a Democrat [who] actually fights for the things liberals and progressive and rational people care about. I don’t know why he’s being thrown under the bus. He hasn’t done any — he hasn’t broke any laws.”
(Via The Other McCain via The Hill)

Those are the words of C-list comedian, D-list actress, and unreasoned progressive Janeane Garofalo. Nevertheless, they represent the sentiments of both Anthony Weiner and his supporters. He has been reliably progressive in the past. He will most certainly continue to be so. In that case, it does not matter that he, a married adult man, is sending photos of his penis to women via Twitter. Garofolo hastens to add Weiner has not broken any laws in order to legitimize her viewpoint, but I can virtually guarantee she completely dismissed bill Clinton’s felony of lying to a grand jury over the Monica Lewinsky scandal and said it was only a matter between him and his wife. So I am betting she does not care if Weiner committed a crime, either. Such would be a minor blip in a long record in the cause of holy progressivism.

The rest of the weiner affair is playing out just as predictably. In one breath, Nancy Pelosi says he can stay in the House. In the other, she changes her mind because other Democrat House leaders think he should go. Weiner is going to check into rehab to heal his ambiguous sex addiction or whatever they are calling it. He will have some sort of spiritual epiphany in rehab, watered down enough to satisfy secular progressives, but plausible enough to not be questioned by others, and resume where he left off.

I am curious to know who is going to pay for Weiner’s stint in rehab. He cannot afford it. I cannot imagine his wife is going to spring for it under the circumstances. This sounds like a gift from a concerned Democrat supporter. If so, I would like to know who, particularly if his long term plan for Weiner involves becoming mayor of New York City.

Friday, June 10, 2011

Evaluating the Anthony Weiner Scandal

I am going to have to narrowly focus my post Politics and Perversion away from generalizations about politicians in general and focus more on Anthony Weiner specifically. I have been chewing over the scandal more as new developments occur. The matter cannot be defined as broadly as previously thought.

For instance, I was unaware Weiner has never held a job outside of politics. He was a legislative aide for a while before successfully winning a New York City council seat. Such a career, particularly, but not exclusively for progressives, warps one’s mind into believing he is part of the ruling class elite. The ruling class elite, who believe they have sacrificed much in order to serve the public good, are entitled to perks because of said sacrifices. Considering the often sociopath trait’s a career politician develops in order to remain in a place where he can continue to promote the general welfare, crminal acts are not out of the question.

The big question is whether Weiner is clinging to his job because he has no other employable skills to fall back on, or if he feels he really has not done anything wrong because he is part of the political culture that says getting caught is far worse than indulging in the first place.

The former possibility is a likely one. Weiner is 47 years old with nothing but a bachelors degree and twenty-five years experience of taking credit for work done by overburdened staff. He obviously cannot rely on his wife at this point. No matter how sociopath he is, I doubt he is stupid enough to force her to support him while he sits at home all day and…well, surf the internet, I suppose. We know he has a penchant for it. Lobbying is probably out of the question. So is journalism, unless keith Olbermann takes pity on him.

Do not discount the possibility, either. The latter question of whether Weiner thinks he did anything wrong has become prominent in my mind not so much because of anything he has said, but things said by other progressives. Chris Matthews claimed Weiner is the victim of culturally backward Christian conservatives. Alec Baldwin, an actor, but wannabe politico, claims the problem is that people do not understand the modern man. In other words, what I said above--the elites have sacrificed, for you. Therefore, they can get away with spoils.

Whichever the case for Weiner, neither speaks well of him. Either he is willing to cling to his job because he has nothing else to do, thereby diminishing his ability to represent his constituents because of lost clout, or he believes his service in the cause of progressivism excuses immoral indulgences. In that case, he genuinely believes the prudes ought to get off his back. He helped give you healthcare your great-grandchildren will be paying for, after all. What is a little dirty talk to a 17 year old girl in light of such a gift?

Monday, February 21, 2011

Is US Rep. David Wu Crazy?

Yes, yes he is.

His staff thinks so, too. They tried to have him committed shortly before the mid term election, which he won in spite of obviously being nuttier than squirrel poop.

Thanks, Oregon.

Friday, February 18, 2011

House Votes to Defund Planned Parenthood

Will "racist" Republiocans get credit for defunding an organization whose founder declared its purpose was extermination of the black race?

Of course not. Such would not fit the progressive marrative.

Wednesday, January 19, 2011

US House Repeals ObamaCare: 245-189

I am skeptic the House vote will lead to anything significant, but it is a campaign promise that has been kept.

How often do you see one of those in politics these days?

Saturday, January 08, 2011

From the Fevered Minds of Marginal Men

Events are still fluid, but I feel like writing about them now. I have had the television on in the background while changing channels between 24 hour news networks, but I have been paying the most attention to online sources. It does not appear any media resource has been particularly accurate or responsible on its reporting. How can any respectable news outlet report for hours US Rep. Gabrielle Giffords is dead when she has not, particularly considering family members are out of state and not getting firsthand news about her at the time?

What we do know: Giffords was shot through the head during a gathering with constituents at a Safeway in Tucson, Arizona. She survived brain surgery and is currently in critical condition, but surgeons are optimistic she will survive. I doubt I need to add life as she knew it is almost certainly over regardless. At least six people are dead, including federal Judge John Roll and an unnamed nine year old girl. At least twelve others are wounded, all seriously.

The shooter is allegedly 22 year old Jerod Lee Loughner. I say allegedly out of custom. According to his YouTube channel, he is a certifiable fruit loop who wrote his profile information in the past tense, as if he expected his attack on Giffords to be a suicide run. The above link will most certainly be removed before long in the same manner his Myspace page has gone down the memory hole, but Loughner rants about government mind control conspiracy theories, the need for a third currency based on gold and silver, Christianity, and ’conscience dreaming,’ whatever the heck that is. Loughner viewed himself as unusually literate and enlightened. In other words, a kook.

A kook, yes, but not a political kook. He may count The Communist Manifesto and Mein Kampf among his listed favorite books, if you can make heads or tails out of his insanely schizophrenic ranting, God bless you, because I cannot. I could not honestly label him anywhere on the political spectrum, but I note even after all this information about him has come to light, people still are labeling him.

I am judging that to be the case largely from this afternoon’s Twitter feed. That does seem to be the pulse of the internet these days. Early on, the left was trashing Sarah palin for placing Giffords in the crosshairs in a campaign push to unseat her for supporting obamaCare and pinning the attack on the Tea Party. Those doing so when silent late in the afternoon as conservative breathed a sigh of relief while pointing out Loughner’s obvious mental illness transcended political ideology.

Both narratives are incredibly irritating. Credit where credit is due: Palin removed that map with Giffords’ district in the crosshairs off her web site and a daily Kos blogger removed an article he wrote months ago saying Giffords was dead to him as a progressive. Both the advertisement and article were unwise, classless acts that have contributed to the coarseness of politics today. Six people are dead, including a nine year old girl, but too many people are ignoring the tragedy of it all in favor of pointing fingers across the political aisle.

Remember, people--crazy is not a political ideology. It does not matter if Loughner memorized The Communist Manifesto or railed against the fed like a ron paul acolyte, you cannot in good conscience call him indicative of the left or right, nor can you blame any popular politician or political movement for him. His is old fashioned insanity, which does little more than confirm for me the Calvinist belief in the total depravity of man. Days like this make is easier to differentiate the saved from the damned.

Wednesday, January 05, 2011

The 112th Congress Convenes

Which meansd the republic has survived another two years. Barely.

The 112th Congress convenes today with the largest Republican majority in over sixty years. New Speaker John Boehner plans a number of largely symbolic votes on undoing the damage Barack Obama and the Democrat controlled 111th Congress inflicted upon not only the American people, but with it astronomical levels of spending, generations of grandchildren and great-grandchildren yet to be born. It will be a dauntin task which I frankly do not believe can truly be done.

Do not mistake my skepticism for pessimism. I am actually being a realist. House Republicans are already wavering on their pledge to cut $100 billion in spending for this year. Any effort to repeal ObamaCare will serve only to paint a “Don’t Vote for Me” target on the back of any Democrat up for reelection in 2012 who votes against the measure, but voters are not likely to keep that target fresh in their minds for two years. Plus, the House Republicans may get frustrated enough to pile on investigation after investigation against the Obama Administration. Such a move backfired against Bill Clinton, and though Obama lacks Teflon Bill’s political skills, he is quick with the race card. He also has a media ready to circle the wagons around him. I am nervous failure to achieve lofty goals may prompt the GOP into such a quagmire.

So, yes, we are in more dangerous times than optimistic ones. Surely you feel that way, too. Are you really as thrilled to say hear Speaker Boehner in the 112th as you were Speaker Gingrich in the 104th? I cannot imagine that you are outside of the relief of not hearing Speaker Pelosi in the 112th instead.

On the bright side, we are getting rid of Pelosi, at least as Speaker. This woman recently said the 11th Congress was highly concerned with controlling the deficit, but also that it would have passed ObamaCare even if everyone in the country was satisfied with their healthcare coverage. Either she is incredibly stupid, or things we are. Whichever the case, here is hoping she, as House Minority Leader, leads Democrats into an even smaller minority in 2012.

Thursday, November 18, 2010

Flotsam & Jetsam

This has been a no news week as far as I concerned. Not much has been worthy of individual posts, so here is a flotsam and jetsam dump of various points of interest.

You know it is a slow news week when the three major stories of one day involve three different members of the palin family. Sarah claims she can beat Barack Obama in 2012. I like the prospect, but am not yet sold on the reality. Bristol is doing well on Dancing with the Stars and it is just killing progressives. Willow used a homophobic term on her Facebook page. Have any of her critics ever seen a typical internet flame war between teenager/ Compared to most, Willow sounded like a miffed Veggie Tales character.

Charles Rangel shed some crocodile tears while begging for mercy, claiming he may not live much longer. What a tawdry, blatantly manipulative move. It is further evidence of his low character. My advice--if he really is on his last leg, expel him from the House so he can spend his final days in blissful retirement away from our tax dollars.

If we could just racially profile like the Israelis do, we would not have to debate full body scanners or pat downs. But as long as we value political correctness over national security, we cannot whine much about what happens to our junk before boarding a plane. Sorry to depart from many of my civil libertarian brethren there. If it makes you feel any better, I only feel that way in general principle. I am confident these safety measures violate the Fourth Amendment.

jim DeMint is a gentleman, but I hope he does not make amends with Lisa Murkowski. not that he has any to make. Politics is a tough game, Princess Lisa. Deal with it.

There are journalists in the united Kingdom who sole job is to be a “royal watcher.” I thought there could not possibly be a more uselessly offensive career than a sports agent, but I was wrong. Royal watchers take the cake. How can they sleep at night knowing the oxygen they suck up could go to someone more important/

Speaking of sports agents, Dan Uggla’s landed him a spot as the new 2nd baseman for my beloved Atlanta Braves. The Florida Marlins could not afford to keep the power hitting, gold Glove winning, All Star. Or any other decent player, for that matter. Yet the team has been tweeting the arrival of its new players like they are all All Stars. Kind of pitiful, really. But I am happy to have Uggla as a Brave. The team’s power really petered out there at the end.

I cannot think of anything else interesting.

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Nancy Pelosi and the CBC Come to Terms Over Jim Clyburn

The crisis between Nancy Pelosi and the Congressional Black Caucus has been averted. Last night after a meeting with Pelosi, the CBC announced the make busy job to be created for Jim Clyburn will be sufficient. Presumably, the CBC voted lockstep for Pelosi as Minority Leader today. She clobbered Heath Shuler 150-53.

Shuler is not doing a whole lot to avoid a dumb ex-jock reputation, is he?

I hate to be grossly cynical here, but Clyburn’s new job is to serve as liaison to the Democratic congressional campaign Committee and the Appropriations Committee. Neither of these positions gives him any real power. Certainly, he will have less than he did as Majority Whip. He will, at best, brief Pelosi on the activities of the committees. I am sure she will be on pins and needles anxiously awaiting those.

While I suspect the creation of a new leadership post for Chuck Shumer in the Senate eased any accusations Pelosi was patronizing Clyburn with a useless job, it still sounds quite useless. I am confident Clyburn pitifully appealed to the CBC not to screw up his only chance at power, no matter how p[iddling, and they acquiesced. Frankly, it would not be the first time he has settled for an empty title to satisfy his ego.

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Patronizing Jim Clyburn Costs Nancy Pelosi CBC Support

I wrote a few days ago how Nancy Pelosi was patronizing blacks in that typical way Democrats take the black vote for granted by appointing Jim Clyburn to a do-nothing job. The Congressional Black Caucus knows they are being insulted and have withheld support for her to become Minority Leader.

This is a brilliant flex of muscle to prove to Democrats in general and Congressional Democrats specifically how they cannot simply jerk around the black vote. Pelosi’s actions truly are an insult. While I confess I do not think much of Clyburn as a politician, he was previously Majority Whip. The position gave him real power and influence. Now Pelosi wants to give him a meaningless title and hope neither he nor his supporters realize he has been relegated to the kiddie table.

Pelosi is not likely to become Minority Leader without CBC support. I am not aware if the Cbc has visions of running someone from their group for the role, holding out for another candidate, or are attempting to wrangle a better deal for Clyburn, but no matter what, it is a delicate situation. One I must confess amuses me. If nothing else, the situation is a mess of Pelosi’s own creation. Therefore, it is further proof of her ineptness as a leader. Assuming you needed more.

If Heath Shuler believes he can ride his football fame into the Minority Leader position, then he is just about as clueless as Pelosi. But as we have noted, being clueless is not a particular detriment in seeling power among Democrats.