******************** THIS BLOG HAS MOVED TO WWW.LEGALINSURRECTION.COM ********************

This blog is moving to www.legalinsurrection.com. If you have not been automatically redirected please click on the link.

NEW COMMENTS will NOT be put through and will NOT be transferred to the new website.

Thursday, January 21, 2010

Democrats Have A Listening Problem

The Democrats' plan to force through an unpopular health care restructuring bill is not dead. Various procedural maneuvers are under consideration to get the bill through, in one form or another, in a manner which does not require another Senate cloture vote now that the Democrats do not have 60 votes:

The Senate Budget Committee Chairman said Wednesday he’s willing to use special rules to force changes to the healthcare legislation through the Senate with a simple majority vote.Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) made clear his openness to applying budget reconciliation to healthcare, a position he opposed prior to this week’s special election in Massachusetts, is contingent on the content of the bill.
Obama and the Democrats in Congress hear quite well, even if they don't pick up the tones.

The problem is that the Democrats are not listening. The Democratic leadership is so out of touch with this country in 2010 that if by hook or crook Democrats pass their healthcare restructuring plans, they deserve everything they get in November, and then some.

Democrats heard what happened in Massachusetts, but they have a listening problem.


(h/t HillBuzz)

--------------------------------------------
Related Posts:
What If The Enemy of My Enemy Is Still My Enemy?
Political Science?
With Advice Like This, Dems Don't Need Enemies

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook
Bookmark and Share

12 comments:

  1. Look no further than the comments made by Barney Frank, who in appearing to have listened to his constituents (who supported Coakley over Brown by only 200 votes)declared the bill all but dead but then later walked back from those comments after the progressive activists and journalists pressed the idea that now, more than ever, health care reform MUST be passed!

    Big Labor has agreed to seeeing the House pass the Senate bill only to have it 'fixed' in the Senate Budget Committee via reconciliation.

    This fight is NOT over and the Dems in Congress will ignore the wishes of those they represent. Do the voters of Nebraska really want Conrad to use reconciliation? I think not.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I would say the progressives who have taken over the Dem Party may have a listening problem. The MSNBC crew may have a listening problem, but I'm not convinced that all Dems are so inflicted. I've heard Obama, Pelosi, Reid and a few others speaking with great bravado over the past few days, but if Pelosi put the Senate version of the health care bill on the table today, I doubt she would even approach the required votes to pass. Brown's victory on Tuesday was more than a big win for the Republicans. It was a win for the majority of Dems, also. More and more of them are expressing their concern with the progressive movement of the left and I strongly believe, going forward, that they will abandon Obama and his gang of thugs. The day of his golden tongue bamboozling are over. Pelosi's iron fist influence is over. Reid's double talking spin cycle is finished and the center left of the Dem Party wll fight to take back control. In the meantime, the Republicans better not just sit back and watch. There's plenty of work to do on our side, too.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Progressives will not 'go gently' and if what you say is true, Moderate and Blue Dog Dems may seek to find common ground with Republicans in Congress. Lanny Davis hinted that moderates should seek out McCain, Graham and other 'thoughtful' Republicans. The GOP has a great opportunity moving forward to bring 'Reagan Democrats' back under the GOP tent but they must do so by adhering to the limited government, fiscally conservative tenets of 'Reaganism'.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Progressives believe the Constitution has been a flawed document all these years. The founders did believe in the common man at their time. The founders turned the constitution in its final draft to the states to ratify. The founders made the language simple, and the people (farmers, ex soldiers) read it and voted on it. We never hear enough about the people (elite and common) who trusted each other in those days.

    My husband's multi great grandfather was one of those people who was chosen to represent his area in the ratification process. He was described as a farmer with the education of an average English boy and it appears served in the war. He voted yes, but not everyone from his state did. Here are the true forgotten men of history. Madison, Monroe, et. al did not force the constitution on the states. Their ultimate audience was the man with an average ordinary education.

    Of course today's average ordinary compulsory educated high school graduate American doesn't know much about history, nor tyranny (although they are getting a chance for first hand knowledge). In Scalia's explaination, the bill of rights was designed to prevent tyranny. Jefferson was in France at the time and his contributions where by mail, and from reading the letters he sent back critisms especially of the likelyhood of perpetual office holders becoming despots.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I was so curious about Barney Franks immediate comments too. I went through the numbers in his district, and saw that Scott Brown won 24 out of 29 towns. The 4 towns Scott lost in were no brainers for the Dems win. If you live here you know what I mean. Barney sure is listening now. I pledge to go all out to unseat Kerry, Frank and Markey. When RI is gearing up to dump Patrick Kennedy count on us. Scott Brown has 2 years to walk the talk. I'm afraid both parties have no clue really what the people here voted for. But across the nation we know now that we can and will unseat them all. Scott Brown was the right person, in the right place giving us back our voice---Braveheart 2010--*wink*

    ReplyDelete
  6. Delahunt apparently has backed off his support of healthcare.

    ReplyDelete
  7. That's a great video. If they keep going with the Health Care bill, they're screwed.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Down here in New Jersey, we have our own special non-listener, in the person of U. S. Senator, Robert Menendez (D-NJ).

    As you may recall, Menendez is the Chairman of the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee, (DSCC) and thereby bears a considerable chunk of the responsibility for what may well go down as the biggest single upset in the entire history of American politics.

    It certainly must be the biggest in modern times -- I'd defy anyone to demonstrate another 35 point swing taking place in the course of one month!

    But to Menendez -- who, the day after the debacle, he opened by saying he was not going to try to sugar-coat the results. And yet, the very first thing he did was to risibly try to minimize the results by noting that is was really nothing but a "special election."

    Here is New Jersey's "special" Senator, in his own words, speaking about the results:

    "But it is important to keep in mind that today’s special election in Massachusetts was just that: a special election, with a whole host of circumstances that are unique. I would caution against taking a single unique election and extrapolating what it means for the midterms ten months away."

    Yep. As the "church lady" might say, "Well, isn't that special?"

    It was a "special election," as others have noted, with a higher voter turnout than during the Senate race in the November, 2006 General Election in Massachusetts! That was the last year in which Ted Kennedy won re-election. In that Senate race, a total of 2,243,835 voters participated, according to the official certification of the Secretary of the Commonwealth, William Francis Galvin.

    Of the approximately 4.2 million eligible voters in Massachusetts, the AP's current tally for the “Special Election” shows that 2,249,026 showed up on a snowy day in the middle of January to record their votes!

    That's darn near 54% of the vote! And, it does NOT include all of the absentee or overseas ballots! (Take a wild guess who most of those military guys will have voted for!)

    So, when all is said and done, it will probably be 55% of the total eligible voters who turned out in bad weather to record their votes in the special election, more than opted to vote in the Senate race in the Democrats’ "bell-weather" 2006 vote.

    Gee, that comment from Menendez should certainly assuage the anxiety of all those who may still be standing over there on the larboard side of the political ledger, no?!!

    Heh!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Fascist elitists in a cult dedicated to a narcissist.

    Of course they'll never listen!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Readers may also note that the "no sugar coating" comment of Menendez, has apparently worked it's way into an e-mail fundraising communication that he has just sent out to the party faithful, at least according to writer David Freddoso, who pokes fun at the Menendez faulty sense of timing, when he now claims that:

    "Democrats understand the anger voters feel - that's in large part why we did well in 2006 and 2008.

    Freddoso offers an amendment in his piece, "DSCC head Bob Menendez confuses past, present tense in fundraising e-mail":

    "Correction: In 2006 and 2008, Democrats understood the anger voters felt. That's why they did well.

    They're not doing so well right now."

    ReplyDelete
  11. American have a great sense of fairnes and all along they knew that the Democrats were not playing fair.

    ReplyDelete