DOWNLOADS: (127)

PLAYS: (744)

Embed

Conservative radio host Laura Ingraham -- who once accused opponents of the Iraq invasion of trying to "subvert America" -- is now blasting the The Wall Street Journal for beating the "war drums" because the editorial board expressed support for President Barack Obama's use of drones.

Fox News host Chris Wallace on Sunday asked Ingraham what she thought of the split within the Republican Party after Sens. John McCain (R-AZ) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) criticized Sen. Rand Paul's (R-KY) filibuster of CIA Director John Brennan over speculation that President Barack Obama might target citizens inside U.S. borders with drone strikes.

"John McCain, Lindsey Graham and The Wall Street Journal editorial board, extremely dismissive of Rand Paul," Ingraham pointed out. "Wall Street Journal said, 'Calm down;' said, 'You don't have to do more than fire up impressionable libertarians in their college dorms.'"

"I thought to myself, when is the last time a Republican managed to capture the imagination of young people, some people on the left, Mitch McConnell, John Thune, John Cornyn, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio?" she added. "There was a wide range of Republicans and people on the left who said, 'You know something? I think the attorney general should be able to answer a simple question [about the use of drones] with an unequivocal yes or no.' He couldn't do that, and Rand Paul served an enormously important function during that filibuster. He wasn't waving his hands and ranting and raving, contrary to what the Journal condescendingly said."

Liberal contributor Juan Williams argued that the targeted killing policy needed to have transparency and judicial review, but Paul was "grand standing" with his filibuster.

"But the fact is that no U.S. citizen has ever been targeted or killed by a drone on U.S. soil," Williams explained. "And secondly, the Constitution gives the president authority to go after a U.S. citizen if that U.S. citizen is somehow involved in colluding with an enemy of the United States."

"I just want to say that I love the fact that we have the hawk, Juan Williams, and the dove, Laura Ingraham," Wallace snarked.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (123)

PLAYS: (150)

Embed

After the Senate rejected another proposal by Republicans to make it harder for employees to form a union in their workplace, Sen. John Thune made a visit to Fox's Neil Cavuto this Tuesday to complain about those "big union bosses" getting their payback from Democrats, because heaven forbid we're not going to allow companies lots of time to intimidate, harass and potentially fire their employees who would like to unionize.

From the AFL-CIO -- Republican Attack on Fair Union Election Rule Fails in Senate:

Congressional Republicans today failed in their latest attempt to roll back workers’ rights. The U.S. Senate defeated (45-54) a measure (S.J. Res. 36) to kill a new National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) rule that makes modest changes in the procedures for workers who want to vote on whether to form a union. It also would have banned the NLRB from ever issuing any similar fair election rule. [...]

Christine Owens, executive director of the National Employment Law Project (NELP), said of the Republican proposal:

It is disappointing that in the face of growing income inequality and stagnant wages for all but the highest earners, lawmakers would fail to stand by workers who seek only to exercise their legal rights in an atmosphere free of intimidation and retaliation.

The rule is due to take effect April 30 and it will help alleviate the delays, inefficiencies, abuse of process and unnecessary litigation that plague the current system. Under current rules, workers can be forced to wait months or even years before they are allowed to vote on joining a union and then begin bargaining for a fair contract. The new NLRB rule eliminates many of those roadblocks by reducing current delays and eliminating frivolous litigation.

Contrary to the vitriolic attacks by Republican lawmakers, the new rule does not encourage or discourage unionization and it applies to elections to form a union and elections to decertify a union.

AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said the Republican attack on the NLRB ”is just the latest in this relentless series of nationally coordinated assaults on workers and collective bargaining rights.” [...]

In November, House Republicans approved a bill that gives employers new tools to combat and delay elections by workers who try to form unions. It was a direct response to the new NLRB election rule. The Senate didn’t take up the measure.

Congressional Republicans have made nearly 50 separate assaults on the NLRB since last year by holding hearings, issuing subpoenas and proposing bills to gut the agency’s funding and eliminate its ability to hold employers accountable for violating workers’ rights, according to American Rights at Work (ARAW). Click here for a detailed look.

Thune's interview with Cavuto below the fold.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (550)

PLAYS: (6628)

Embed

Jon Stewart hit the hypocritical Republicans this Tuesday night for their apparent problems with basic math and their opposition to passing the Buffett rule after attacking the money spent on Planned Parenthood:

STEWART: So, let's see if I can get this straight. $47 billion in millionaires’ money is less than $300 million in mammograms and birth control.

They might care about the public noticing their blatant hypocrisy if they were capable of feeling shame, but they've made it obvious over the years that they are not.

DOWNLOADS: (588)

PLAYS: (5901)

Embed

Keith Olbermann talked to the Huffington Post's Amanda Terkel about the tables being turned on these Republican members of Congress who just two years ago were urging their constituents to get out there and make their voices heard at local town hall meetings. Back then, it was these AstroTurf "tea partiers" out there screaming about the health care bill. Now as they discussed, the tables have been turned and Republicans are starting to get the message that their constituents aren't too happy with talks of privatizing and making cuts to Social Security and Medicare.

As they noted, Sen. Chuck Grassley just an earful at one of his recent town hall meetings -- Grassley, Who Is Pro-Privatization, Says He Knows Just ‘One Member Of Congress’ Who Wants To Privatize Social Security:

During a town hall in Carroll, Iowa last night, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) fielded question after question from constituents who were furious at Republican efforts to weaken Social Security. Midway through the event, one Iowan stood and told Grassley his personal story about retiring in 2008 just as the stock market cratered, decimating his IRA and 401k retirement plans.

He implored Grassley not to privatize Social Security, asking if he should expect “to live on whatever the stock market leaves me?” After the crowd gave the constituent loud applause, Grassley responded that he only knows of “one member out of 535 who wants to privatize Social Security.”

Grassley was also asked by a small business owner why Social Security taxes are capped at $106,800.

Sen. John Thune also seems to be getting the message on cuts to our social safety nets, but as Terkel pointed out, how members of Congress behave and vote when they return from vacation will tell us if they're actually paying attention to their constituents or not. Here's more on that from Think Progress as well: Thune: Top Message I Got From Town Halls Is ‘Don’t Cut My Social Security And Medicare’.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (280)

PLAYS: (2918)

Embed

Sen. Pat Leahy did a great job of knocking down his fellow member of the Unites States Senate, John Thune after he went onto the floor and pretended like this "cut, cap and balance" nonsense that we saw passed in the House was either something responsible to get our economy back on track, or something that had any chance in hell of being anything other than a political stunt and a talking point for Republicans with their fake claims that any of them have ever had any real interest in balancing our budget.

Here's more from Leahy's site with his speech on the Senate floor -- Leahy On Balanced Budget Amdt. Proposals: "Our Constitution Deserves Protection." :

Mr. President, unlike any Republican in the House or the Senate, I have voted for a balanced budget. We balanced the budget under President Clinton. Not only balanced the budget, but started paying down the national debt. He was able to leave hundreds of billions of dollars in surplus to his successor, who determined with Republican votes to go to war in Iraq and pay for the war with a tax cut. That’s why we had to borrow the money from China and Saudi Arabia.

Not a single Republican voted for a real balanced budget when they had a chance to. In fact, it passed in the Senate only because Vice President Gore came and broke the tie. I was proud to vote for that balanced budget. Not a gimmick, but a real balanced budget. We had to actually make tough choices. We did. We balanced it. We had a surplus.

Continue reading »

From The Senate Democrats, Republicans are finally taking a little bit of heat in the press for their hypocrisy on earmarks.

Republicans Say One Thing In Washington And Something Else At Home:

Senate Republicans took a lot of heat yesterday for stuffing a bill with millions of their own earmarks, then trying to claim they oppose earmarks. but Republicans’ earmark hypocrisy is even starker when you compare what they are saying in Washington, DC to what they are saying to their constituents back home.

In D.C., DeMint Decries Earmarks: “Americans want Congress to shut down the earmark favor factory, and next week I believe House and Senate Republicans will unite to stop pork barrel spending…Instead of spending time chasing money for pet projects, lawmakers will be able to focus on balancing the budget, reforming the tax code and repealing the costly health care takeover.” [The Hill, 11/9/10]

…But In South Carolina, DeMint Defends Earmarks: “U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint said fellow senators are ‘playing politics’ in blocking his colleague's efforts to secure a $400,000 earmark to study deepening Charleston Harbor.” [Herald Online, 9/11/10]

In D.C. , Cornyn Poses As An Anti-Earmark Champion: “I believe the public discontent can be accurately sourced, and Congressional earmarking process has become a symbol for wasteful and undisciplined federal spending. Earlier this month, I joined a bipartisan group calling for a one year moratorium on all earmarks. That effort failed. We missed a major opportunity to show we are serious about tightening our Congressional belts during a difficult economic period.” [Everyone Loses in the Earmark Game, 3/31/08]

… But In Texas, Cornyn Downplays Significance Of His Earmark Opposition, Emphasizes That It’s Only Temporary: Cornyn told the Dallas Morning News that the earmark ban, “’basically is a timeout while we reassess this whole earmarking process, which has been in some instances abused,’ said Texas Sen. John Cornyn, a member of the GOP leadership… Cornyn, like some other moratorium supporters, said the policy should not and won't last indefinitely but agreed that for now, ‘it will have an impact on Texas, just as it will have an impact on the rest of the country.’” [Dallas Morning News, 11/26/10]?

… And Requests Millions In Earmarks For FY2011. [Senator Cornyn FY2011 Appropriations Requests]

In D.C., Thune Lambasts Earmarks: “The bill is loaded up with pork projects, and it shouldn't get a vote. The bill was crafted behind closed doors, and it hasn't gone through the proper oversight or the proper channels.” [Press Conference, 12/15/10]

In South Dakota, Thune Defends Pet Projects: “He has backed similar moratoriums in the past but the proposed 2011 spending bills Congress will consider in the coming weeks include almost 30 Thune-requested projects, such as money for highway projects, water systems and safety programs on Indian reservations… ‘If you include [South Dakota] projects like Lewis & Clark, you end up costing taxpayers much more in inflation and lost economic opportunities,’ Larson said Monday. ‘We applaud responsible efforts to rein in earmark spending, but if that effort wrongly includes authorized projects like Lewis & Clark, it's counterproductive.’ Thune agrees. ‘There are ways that you can do this that really legitimize Congress spending money, and one is authorized projects that went through the normal process and passed the House and the Senate,’ he said last week. ‘To me, that's a very different thing than an earmark that gets dropped into an appropriations bill in a conference committee that hasn't passed the House and the Senate.’” [Argus Leader, 11/16/10]

DOWNLOADS: (553)

PLAYS: (3326)

Embed

Well here's something you don't see every day. John Thune getting called out on Fox News for lying about the health care bill raising premiums and for mindlessly repeating Republican talking points. That said, this is Fox and the interview wasn't that harsh. Smith started out pretty well and then let him go. Smith of course plays the all-sides-are-equally-bad game, which you would not know from this shortened version that Media Matters posted. By only showing part of the interview, Media Matters gives Smith a bit too much credit for taking Thune.

SMITH: What are we getting accomplished here?

THUNE: Not much that I can tell. I think...

SMITH: Here's what Politicos said today Senator. By the lunch break -- I'm quoting from Politico.com -- by the lunch break it was growing clearer that the pre-summit pessimism on both sides of the political, of the political aisle they mean -- that there was little or no hope of grand partisan compromise was absolutely on target. In fact both sides spent the bulk of the three hours of the session trying to score tactical points rarely veering from their scripts and extending a hand to the other side. I don't know if the people see anything bipartisan about any of this. It just feels like a bunch of politicians getting their talking points in.

THUNE: I think the only way could have been bipartisan and actually meaningful constructive is if they had taken all the previous talking points in the previous bill and set it aside and started over and say okay let's start over...

SMITH: Why do Republicans want to throw this out and start over Senator? Why do they want to do that? Nobody buys that. Everybody sees that as here's how we win. Our side wins if we get you to throw your thing out even though you're the majority. And the majority goes we win if we get you to come along with it. You're not going to come along with them any more than they're going to throw their thing out. It seems silly to talk about it.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (1016)

PLAYS: (5874)

Embed

December 14, 2009 C-SPAN

From Think Progress--Franken: Republicans ‘haven’t read the bill and are not very familiar with it.’:

This afternoon, Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) openly challenged Sen. John Thune (R-SD)’s claim that the Senate health care bill does not offer benefits until 2014. “We are entitled to our own opinions; we are not entitled to our own facts,” Franken asserted. “Benefits kick in right away.” He concluded:

I stand here day after day after day and hear my colleagues, my good friends from the other side, say things that are not based on fact. […]

Senator Thune did say that none of the benefits started next year. He just, I guess, hasn’t read the bill. .. I do find that many of my colleagues who I’m very friendly with, haven’t read the bill and are not very familiar with it.

And The Politico--Al Franken feuds with GOP's No. 4:

Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) and Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) sparred sharply on the Senate floor Monday evening, a departure from the usually dormant speeches in the august chamber.

Franken said he was struck by a speech in which he said Thune had refused to highlight when benefits to the health care bill would kick in and instead emphasized the negative parts of the bill.

Continue reading...