DOWNLOADS: (216)

PLAYS: (2532)

Embed

Former Bush adviser turned ABC contributor, Matthew Dowd was asked to weigh in during the panel segment on This Week on some the speeches at this years Conservative Political Action Conference, and didn't hold back with continuing his criticism of the decision to invite Sarah Palin to speak at the event.

Two weeks prior, Dowd complained that Palin "wasn't competent enough for Fox News" and "diminishes" CPAC. While I'd agree with him on the former, given the list of the other wingnuts who were invited to speak there as well, there wasn't much left to "diminish." Republicans have been pandering to the Christian right and the TeaBirchers in their party for decades and now that they've taken over the joint, they're complaining.

RADDATZ: Congressman, anybody make you nervous there at 2016?

BECERRA: No, no. I think...

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (57)

PLAYS: (132)

Embed

The House Democrats took a page out of Bill Frist's playbook, calling for an up or down vote on the legislation that passed in the Senate on New Years Eve: House Dem Leaders Call For Vote On Senate Fiscal Cliff Deal:

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) called on GOP leadership to hold a "straight up or down vote" on the Senate-passed legislation to avert the fiscal cliff.

Flanked by Democratic leaders, she told reporters in the Capitol that Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) has a duty to permit a floor vote in order to prevent middle class taxes from rising.

And we're hearing noise on the other side about killing the deal with Eric Cantor saying he's against it: Cantor Opposes Fiscal Cliff Deal:

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) came out against the fiscal cliff deal passed by the Senate, according to Republican members in attendance at a closed-door meeting of the House GOP conference Tuesday afternoon.

And his fellow House members aren't happy about the spending in the bill: Boehner Aide: GOP Members Concerned With Lack Of Spending Cuts In Senate Bill:

House Republicans expressed "universal concern" with the lack of spending cuts in the fiscal cliff deal passed overwhelmingly by the Senate, said Speaker John Boehner's spokesman Brendan Buck.

"The Speaker and Leader laid out options to the members and listened to feedback," Buck said in an emailed statement. "The lack of spending cuts in the Senate bill was a universal concern amongst members in today’s meeting. Conversations with members will continue throughout the afternoon on the path forward."

They're still saying they may vote on the bill tonight. I wonder how long they're going to obstruct the deal if the markets start opening and reacting to what's happened.

DOWNLOADS: (58)

PLAYS: (176)

Embed

Last week, it was Barbara Walters on The View asking Callista Gingrich what she thought about Gen. David Petraeus resigning over his affair. I guess the network decided they hadn't embarrassed themselves enough already, because this Sunday, guess who was the first person asked about the Petraeus affair during the panel segment on This Week. You guessed it -- Newt Gingrich.

Why a professional "scam artist" like Gingrich is a regular guest on these shows in the first place is beyond me, but then, I could say the same thing about most of the guests that are chosen to go on these shows week after week and one George Will who is on this show almost every single week.

Although we did get a break from Will last week. Probably because he didn't want to be asked any questions about his brilliant prediction of a Mitt Romney electoral blowout.

RADDATZ: I think we've made that pretty clear right here. I think we've made that pretty clear. Let's move on to Dave Petraeus. You know he was in these hearings. We have -- we thought this might calm down this week; it has not.

Let me start with you, Speaker Gingrich. Is it a national security risk to have your CIA director involved in an extramarital affair?

GINGRICH: Well, I think Petraeus concluded -- and I think he's probably right -- that he couldn't be effective. I mean, I think what he did is he...

RADDATZ: You don't think it was because he got caught?

GINGRICH: Well, that's what made him ineffective. I mean, I think by definition, if something had remained secret, it would have been secret. He would have had no reason to confront it.

RADDATZ: But the president actually spent 24 hours thinking about it.

GINGRICH: But I think Petraeus, in offering his resignation, was communicating that he didn't think he could lead the CIA, he didn't think he could deal with the Congress, and that he would be consumed -- you're much better off to have people saying, "Gee, he's a great patriot. Isn't it a pity he's gone?", than to have people say, "Let me focus on this, why isn't he gone?"

And I think, from his perspective, he'd have been in a very, very difficult position, if he stayed in office.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (164)

PLAYS: (845)

Embed

ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper says that former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has a harsher stance on immigration than any Republican presidential nominee in decades.

Conservative columnist George Will on Sunday told Tapper that Romney was at a disadvantage with Latino voters because "he has to unring a bell that he rang during the primaries."

"It's interesting that Gov. Romney from New England is much more severe than Reagan, McCain or either Bush presidents were," Will noted. "All four of those coming from border states with more familiarity with it. So [President Barack Obama] has a double advantage here."

"I think empirically, Peggy, he's the most conservative nominee on the issue of illegal immigration and the Mexican border than any Republican nominee we've seen in the last 20 or 30 years," Tapper pointed out to Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan.

"Yeah," Noonan agreed. "And I don't suppose he thinks he can make real numeric progress with the Latino vote."

Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-CA), who is chair of the House Democratic Caucus, noted that Romney should have been able to make inroads with Latino voters because of the sluggish economy if it were not for his immigration policies.

"The difficulty for Mitt Romney is he was so vicious in going at the issue of immigration that he locked himself in," Becerra explained. "It was very telling in Miami -- the heart of Republican Latinos, where you find more of them than anywhere else -- Mitt Romney goes and speaks to a crowd, he gets polite applause. Barack Obama goes into Miami and he gets standing ovations from a crowd of mostly Latino elected and appointed officials, Republican and Democratic."

"And so it's become clear that for Mitt Romney, it's trying to sketch his way out of what he said in the primaries," the congressman added. "He went so far to the right. He still associates with these guys that are so conservative."

During the Republican primary battle, Romney had courted conservative voters with anti-immigration positions. He called Arizona’s tough immigration law a “model” for the country; he promised to veto the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act; and he said that undocumented immigrants should self-deport.

DOWNLOADS: (363)

PLAYS: (1332)

Embed

Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-CA) did a nice job this morning on Fox News Sunday of explaining why Social Security should have never been offered up as part of the negotiations over raising the debt ceiling even though he supported making sure it stays solvent for the long term as a member of the Simpson-Bowles commission. He also shot down nicely Bret Baier's attempt to paint the Social Security trust fund as full of worthless IOU's that have already been spent because the government borrowed against the program to pay for other things.

BAIER: Congressman, you were on the president's debt and deficit commission, the Bowles-Simpson commission, and you voted against the recommendations at the end. But during the meeting, one of the meetings, you said this, quote, "As you just said here, I don't want to leave the table because I started off the first day saying everything must be on the table" -- what you just said.

But as the negotiations in the debt ceiling increase have continued, you said this week, quote, "I don't see why I would support any plan that would cut benefits to seniors to pay for the reckless fiscal policies that led to us these massive deficits." That seems like a big change.

So, now, there are some things that are off the table for you.

BECERRA: As when I was on the fiscal commission and when any proposal comes before me for a vote, I would take a look. As much as I believe that Social Security should not be on the table because Social Security hasn't contributed 1 cent to the deficit that we face today, nor 1 cent to any of the national debt, the $14.3 trillion.

So, why should Social Security, why should seniors have to pay to balance the budget through Social Security cuts? But it should be on the table. I would fight to take it off the table, but it should start off on the table and then what should remain on the table are the things that really drove us into this deficit. And most folks know what drove us into these deficits. When you don't pay for two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and you borrow all the money from China, you're going to have to pay for it at some point.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (282)

PLAYS: (494)

Embed

The House Rules Committee debated the reconciliation bill this weekend. Rep. Paul Ryan touted his budget proposals to Rep. Louise Slaughter and after filibustering the meeting for some time she finally got Rep. Xavier Becerra to put a fine line on just what Ryan would like to do with Medicare, and that is privatize it and have vouchers replace the system we have now.

Ezra Klein has more on what Ryan would like to do with Medicare. Ryan had a whole lot of double speak to offer when questioned about whether he wants to privatize it or not during this meeting.

I'm looking forward to Ryan and the rest of the GOP defending him wanting to privatize Medicare and Social Security if they think that's a winning issue. I don't think seniors will be so thrilled if they actually get a good look at what they're proposing.

Rep. Paul Ryan's daring budget proposal:

The White House's 2011 budget is only the second-most interesting budget proposal released recently. First prize goes to Congressman Paul Ryan, the ranking Republican on the House Budget Committee, who's released a budget proposal that actually erases the massive long-term deficit. [...]

But Ryan's budget -- and the details of its CBO score -- is also an object lesson in why so few politicians are willing to answer the question "but how will you save all that money?" [...]

That's a bit of a slog, so here's the translation: The proposal would shift risk from the federal government to seniors themselves. The money seniors would get to buy their own policies would grow more slowly than their health-care costs, and more slowly than their expected Medicare benefits, which means that they'd need to either cut back on how comprehensive their insurance is or how much health-care they purchase. Exacerbating the situation -- and this is important -- Medicare currently pays providers less and works more efficiently than private insurers, so seniors trying to purchase a plan equivalent to Medicare would pay more for it on the private market.

Go read the whole thing for Ezra's analysis.