Erick at Red State reads the WaPo article we mentioned earlier and slips into victim mode:
Obnoxious. Distorted. False. Intentional. The Washington Post At Work
By Erick
Were it not so obnoxiously partisan, Jonathan Weisman’s article on Republican Senators blocking ethics legislation would be laughable.
Weisman goes out of his way to make the case that Democrats are trying to pass “bipartisan” ethics legislation, but are being stopped by Republicans who want a vote on “an unrelated measure” to give President Bush line-item-veto powers over earmarks.
The article is total crap because it fails to accurately point out that Republicans did not halt the legislation, but demanded further debate time to offer more amendments to further tighten the law. The article is total crap because it fails to discuss Harry Reid, Dick Durbin, and Robert Byrd’s efforts to block tougher ethics restricts. The article is total crap because it fails to mention how these three rushed to shut down debate before the GOP could offer even more amendments to tighten the law on ethics and earmarks.
The GOP is fighting to tighten laws on earmarks, lobbyists, and ethics. The Democrats are using procedural measures to stop them because when the GOP efforts get to the floor, they are winning. Nonetheless, the Washington Post can’t help but blame the GOP.
Damned liberal media!
What is total crap is this ridiculous notion that the Senate GOP is actually concerned with reforming earmarks and the rest of the bit. In fairness, some of them are- Brownback comes to mind as someone who has always fought pork, which is to his credit despite his being all sorts of batshit crazy on social issues. But what they are actually concerned with is an issue. If this really was important to the GOP, they would have done something the past 6 years. They didn’t. They wrote Bush and themselves a blank check, spent like drunken sailors (no offense, drunken sailors), and now that the election is over and corruption was a big issue, they are besides themselves trying to look like reformers so the Democrats can’t deliver their promises and reap the rewards. And because they want the issue, there will be no reform.
Let’s frame this in a way Republicans will understand, and examine something we really do care about. Tax Cuts.
Let’s say that for 6 years the Republicans had the House and Senate and the Presidency and did not pass ONE SINGLE tax bill, even though they are allegedly the anti-tax party. They then lose the election to the Democrats, who begin to pass a bunch of tax cut bills. Republicans stand up, and start shouting- “THOSE TAX CUTS AREN’T ENOUGH. WE NEED MORE, AND WE NEED MORE DEBATE!” They then insert a bunch of silly bills like, say, the abolishment of the IRS and a complete repeal on every tax.
The Democrats pitch a fit, the Republicans filibuster, and guess what? No one gets any tax cuts. The Republicans then have the unmitigated gall to then claim they are the real tax cutters, and blame the Democrats for not cutting taxes.
Now switch the words “tax cut” with “ethics and earmark reform,” and you will see how totally full of shit the Republicans are on this issue.
And, of course, the example is absurd. Why? Because REPUBLICANS CARE ABOUT TAX CUTS. It is pretty much the first damned thing we did when Bush was elected. In fact, I can’t think of anything other than social security reform that we/they wanted to do, but didn’t (for fun, look up S-686). They don’t care about earmark reform, ethics reform, lobbying reform. If they did, they would have done something about it. They didn’t. And they are blocking what the Democrats are trying to do all the while claiming they are the real reformers.
Yes. They are that full of shit. And the worst thing is, they believe it.
*** Update ***
And the stalemate has been broken and the reform has been passed by a vote of 96-2. Which, of course, means that all Republicans but two voted for what just a few hours ago was described as a hideous bill. Go figure.
Otto Man
Was this written as a third-grade book report?
jake
Not only that:
Sam Brownback is fighting hard for gay rights.
Virgil Goode is a champion of religous diversity.
John McCain is…um…sane.
Mwahahaa!
ConservativelyLiberal
Of course they believe it, after all, they are RIGHT, right?
This is yet another example of RedState looking at things through their 180 degree glasses. Unless it makes them look good, it is the Democrats fault. Everything that goes wrong? Democrats. World going to end? Democrats. Their spending like drunken sailors? Democrats. The world going to be taken over by terrorists? Democrats. Anything I did not cover? Democrats. It is all their fault, them and the MSM. Because they are always RIGHT.
Erick posts like he is the one who has been hit by a truck. He seems to be in !!ALARM!! mode in just about every post he makes there. Same with most of their other front pagers. And just about every time it is their twisted version of reality, tell them any different and they will ban you. If RedState is a tool box, they are the TOOLS.
After awhile, it gets pretty predictable. The way they quash dissent is unbelievable. Over time, their intellect has stagnated to the level of inbred hillbillies. Like someone else said, it ain’t worth picking on them. It makes them feel important, it gives them some level of legitimacy, and it would be like beating up retarded kids.
I have seen some pretty sicko religious nutzis who post there all of the time. Ever feel like the world was erupting into a religious war? Well, they are one of the main cheerleaders. On one side, radical islam conservatives wanting to rebuild the world using their twisted views of the Queran. Radical christian conservatives on the other side, wanting to rebuild the world using their twisted views of the Bible.
All the while there are those of us in the middle who are being squeezed out between these nutcases. Good thing that moderates outnumber these nutjobs, now we just need to find some way to put them both out of business…
scarshapedstar
Best. Euphemism for a filibuster. Ever.
RSA
The phrase , “The best is the enemy of the good,” comes to mind. If Republicans were sincere and trustworthy (hah!), we might say that they’re trying for a good bill (hah! again) and unwilling to settle for a merely okay bill. But, of course, they had six long years in which they could have done any and all of this work on reform. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds. If the Democrats argue that the amendment is unrelated, then the Republicans should try to get it passed independently. I won’t hold my breath.
Keith
Second what scarshapedstar said. Is the author talking about the filibuster or maybe complaining about the inability for GOPers to submit amendments in the first 100 hours? If it’s the latter, we got a saying around here: ‘Get used to it, Hitler’ (and no, this is not some GOP-Nazi comparison; it’s a TV reference). If it’s the former, holy shit, how in the name of NAMES can a supporter of the GOP-led Congress champion a filibuster as merely wanting to debate an issue?!?!?!
Pooh
John, you do the Lord’s work by reading Red State so that we don’t have to. Honestly, though, what more needs to be said then “shut up, you silly man.”
Gump
So couldn’t the democrats just kill the ethics reform thing as an ammendment, vote on whatever the main bill is, and then reintroduce the amendment as a real bill, and then vote on it? Don’t they win both way then?
Or they could just pass the amendment and move on.
They should just have a rule where you can’t amend a bill with a totally unrelated issue.
I would give someone $10 just to introduce that rule as an amendment to a bill on the floor.
SeesThroughIt
Spot on from top to bottom, John.
Pooh
The problem is how does one define “unrelated”
AkaDad
The conversion is now complete, and I thouroghly enjoyed watching it happen. =]
Mike
This has been going on since the beginning of the country and the Congress. I used to believe that they shouldn’t be allowed to do this either, but now I think that we should not stop the practice since it slows down the overall amount of legislation they can pass. And that is for the best I think.
Jackmormon
Erick is a professional Republican online whip. This is his job.
Pb
Great analogy, John. And whatever happened to the famed “upperdown vote”?
Gump
I’m pretty sure my state (Maryland) has just such a rule. I don’t know the exact wording, but it seems to work well enough here. And if it does have the effect of slowing down how much can get through congress then I’m all for it.
Zifnab
Shorter Erik: “Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! Why won’t anyone impliment pork reform now that the Democrats are in power?! Doesn’t everyone know that Democrats are so mean and partisan?! Why is being the minority party so unfair?! Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!”
Zifnab
These bills all need to come out of committees, correct? And the committees are sorted by subject in such a way that only certain committees handle certain affairs – the Committee on Intelligence doesn’t handle the funding issues that Ways and Means controls – so why not just limit what can be inserted into a bill by committee? You can’t pass highway legislation in a war bill because Armed Services and Transportation And Interior are two seperate committees. If you wanted to go the extra mile, you could bar anyone outside the committee in general from adding amendments.
Would that work?
Andrew
See, now I’m back to hoping that Hillary wins, ’cause the vindictive bitch in her will make life a living hell for the brain refugees at RedState.
Andrew
See, now I’m back to hoping that Hillary wins, ’cause the vindictive bitch in her will make life a living hell for the brain refugees at RedState.
Dave
brain? red state? bwahahaha. Yeah those two words should not be used in the same sentence.
bago
But voting twice won’t help.
TenguPhule
Fixed.
TenguPhule
Easy enough.
Empress Hillary will make you all her bitch using the same rules you dipshits came up with to gangbang the Democrat minority. You have only two choices to make now. No Lube or Less then No Lube.
jake
Lobbying Reform passed. How long will it take RedState to claim a Republican Victory? Tick tock, tick tock.
Side question: Am I the only one who assumed Red State was a Russian or possibly even pro-Communist blog?
Zifnab
The irony was only enhanced when they had the big “Democrats Take Congress” with Hammer and Sickle graphic behind it.
ConservativelyLiberal
I see that RedState is crowing about how they made the National Journal’s list of the top ten blogs used by those on capitol hill. Then Erick goes on to say:
I read the article and link from it to another one. Nothing in there says anything like this, so Erick must be pulling that out of his ass (like everything else he says).
Right of center, riiiight…
More like:
Fixed.
Mike P.
As a drunken sailor, I was itching to be offended by your comparison, until you made it right, John. Comparing us to Republican Senators is despicable. The senators have a lot more money.
David
I think this has been trumped for Red State hubris.
According to Mark, that accusation is “the most repugnant, vile, and distasteful statement yet made by an elected Democrat about the president and the war.”
Also, I hear some of them *gasp* didn’t vote for Bush in 2004. Such sedition is unheard of!
orogeny
A question:
The Post article says that the rescission power was a “measure long sought by President Bush”. Have I missed something? In the last six years, I don’t recall this coming up.
Don
Lest we overlook who the two folks were who voted NO on this bill, they are Orin Hatch and Tom Coburn.
cleek
in the wonderful world of the blogoshpere, RedState is a dank little pool of mud, scum, and still water, slicked overtop with the chemical runoff and oil which concentrates a little more each day, festering in a low spot, cut-off even from the nearby slow-moving stream, so diseased that not even mosquitoes will breed there, contributing nothing to the world but disease and the smell of rotting vegetable matter.
dreggas
Gee didn’t this administration admit this was nothing more than a political move?