SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Obama - Clinton Disaster -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: longnshort who wrote (8586)3/6/2009 5:53:22 PM
From: pompsander  Respond to of 103300
 
Profanity flies in heated Dem session
By DAVID ROGERS | 3/5/09 7:58 PM EST Updated: 3/6/09 5:27 PM EST Text Size:


Senate Dems have pulled back from completing action on a giant omnibus spending bill.
Photo: AP





After an angry, swearing late night meeting among top Democrats, Congress voted Friday to give itself another five days to try to complete a long-overdue omnibus spending bill that had become a growing embarrassment for party leaders and President Barack Obama.

Senate Democrats had abruptly pulled back Thursday night after finding themselves one vote short of the 60 needed to cut off debate. The action infuriated Speaker Nancy Pelosi so much that the California Democrat wanted to abandon the $409.6 billion measure and instead push through a stripped-down continuing resolution to keep the government operating through Sept. 30.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D.-Nev.) and his deputy, Majority Whip Richard Durbin (D.-Ill.) were called to Pelosi’s office late Thursday night and ultimately prevailed in their argument that Democrats should try to salvage the bill, which includes critical spending increases for vital agencies. But the heated, sometimes profane, exchanges were described as “ugly” by Democrats on both sides of the Capitol. Staff, kicked out in the hall, could hear the yelling, and Pelosi herself seemed a little abashed the next day, joking that nothing her leadership could say to her now would match the night before.

The speaker’s anger was directed primarily at Senate Republicans, who withheld their support even when they had substantial interests in the measure. Pelosi feels that Republicans are gaming the Democrats, who have to be tougher in turn by forcing them to live with the consequences of what she sees as obstruction.

The speaker’s scorched earth alternative, killing the omnibus, was too much for some in her own leadership. But Pelosi’s anger is shared by many House Democrats along with the fear that the Senate debate is being dragged out by Republicans as part of a concerted campaign to pummel Obama even as the young president tries to keep the nation focused on his economic agenda and budget going forward.

With funding running out Friday, Pelosi finally called her members back to Washington to pass the five day extension on a 328-58 vote. Ironically enough, this came after a 218-160 vote in which Democrats killed a Republican alternative that would have cut about $17 billion from the omnibus and come closer to the stripped down alternative the speaker herself had been threatening.

See Also
Steele pushes back; rivals gripe
Banks get clobbered on Hill
Empty Treasury: Geithner alone
By prior agreement, the Senate cleared the House bill immediately, but Reid still has a climb ahead as he works toward another attempt at cloture Tuesday night. He has promised Republicans about a dozen amendments, but his challenge is to defeat each so the omnibus measure can go straight onto the White House.

The whole episode left Obama exposed to another weekend of Republican calls on television news shows, demanding that he veto the package which contains thousands of parochial projects for members of both parties.

Thus far, the White House has refused to give in, citing the importance of the measure to major agencies, now frozen at last year’s spending levels. But going forward, Obama is under pressure to better spell out his policy toward earmarks, either in the form of tighter caps or singling out individual projects to be denied funding.

“Discretion is the better part of valor,” Reid quipped when abruptly pulling back from the vote Thursday night.. But for a man so skilled at counting votes, there were ample warning flags that he was rushing events.

Behind the scenes, Reid had to struggle with one in his own leadership, Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), who was upset with Cuba-related provisions in the bill. Efforts were under way to try to win back the New Jersey Democrat with a letter from Treasury addressing his concerns, but these appear to have been unsuccessful.

The bigger dynamic was on the Republican side, where Minority Whip John Kyl (R.-Ariz.) appeared to play a greater than usual role in pulling back votes from the Democrats.

Reid complained privately that a last minute Republican switch left him exposed after announcing the 8:15 p.m. vote. But in an interview with POLITICO earlier in the day, Mississippi Sen. Thad Cochran, the ranking Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee and someone working with Democrats to pass the bill, had predicted more time –and an extension—would be needed.

Part of the confusion may be explained by the fact that so many top senators, including Reid, spent so much of Thursday at a White House summit on health care reform. The normal face-to-face floor exchanges didn’t happen until the evening, and the episode reflects the strain on Democrats— so busy looking forward with Obama’s agenda that they can trip over their own.

In fact, a solid bloc of Republicans—including some in the party leadership—are prepared to help pass the bill but remain shy of voting with Democrats until their colleagues have had a chance to offer more amendments.

politico.com



To: longnshort who wrote (8586)3/6/2009 5:55:12 PM
From: pompsander  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 103300
 
That is your answer? What about how McCain would have dealt with the banks. With AIG? What form of stimulus would McCain/Palin have pushed (if any).

You honestly think "confidence" would have been high enough with the guy who famously said "the fundamentals of the American economy are strong" to justify at least a 40 P/E on the Dow right now?

Why? How?

Come on, provide a real answer.