Senator Franken

Dear Senator Al.
.
Your biggest obstacle in the senator is named Harry and the way he fools you is by pretending he’s on your side. He even sells the ruse by pretending to your leader. However, this is not the case. Watch your back.

gunny wins the thread with the first comment lol

No. I screwed it up with all the mis spellings. What I get for commenting at work.

Recurring theme:
.
http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/07/al-franken-policy-wonk.php
.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/05/al-frankens-secret/

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1908983-1,00.html
.
I’m thinking of having T-shirts printed up.
.
My Time correspondent went to Alaska and all I got was this lousy Lovefest……

And Coleman’s lawyers were nowhere to be found?

http://www.political-buzz.com/

“Despite
the crowd, Franken caught his wife, Franni’s eye and the two shared a
knowing look across the chamber.”
.
Interesting use of commas.

Was Rush Whats-His-Name thrown out of the Senate Chamber for heckling?

Not to hijack the thread, but –

I’ve heard a report that another Senator – Kyl – has chosen to undercut his President during the latter’s negotiations with the Russian leader. Any truth to that, and how does it rank on the scale of Congressional/foreign relations propriety?

Perhaps it’s pedantic, but isn’t he Democrat #58? 59 if you throw in Lieberman’s party of 1. I’m not sure Sanders would be happy being reassigned.

Source/link FO?

What is the purpose or point of that Pagecast video that Mark Halperin does?

kyl link:
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/06/26/tauscher-confirmed-kyl/

Because God knows no Democratic Congressmen ever undermined a President Bush initiative. “On the scale of Congressional/foreign relations propriety” this ranks as standard operating procedure.

He’s no Michael Jackson.
.
Primarily because he’s living.

dumdedumdum, you asked:
.

What is the purpose or point of that Pagecast video that Mark Halperin does?

.
I think it’s done just to confirm to readers that he really is that inane.

Took ya long enough, Minnesota. Now maybe Reid will actually accomplish something and we get around to fixing the country.

“60 senators walk into a bar….”

“He’s going to be a serious senator.”
Won’t Al feel lonely, being the only one?

Nah. He’s got Bachmann for company, and she’s an even better comedian

Kyl places a hold, makes a demand, doesn’t get what he wants, and then withdraws his hold?
.
I must be missing something or my outrage meter is out of order.

“Nah. He’s got Bachmann for company, and she’s an even better comedian.”
.
Mercifully, she is only a Representative and not a Senator… yet.

My Time correspondent went to Alaska and all I got was this lousy Lovefest……
.
I just read that. JNS is utterly worthless.

Cliff-What’s up with JNS?

Now maybe Reid will actually accomplish something
.
Ha ha!

OT: But can anyone believe this? I like Digby but, this just can not be true. Reid is showing leadership. He has to have some backstabbing trick going on here. Either that or someone offered to physically harm him in the leadership meeting.
.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Tuesday ordered Finance Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) to drop a proposal to tax health benefits and stop chasing Republican votes on a massive health care reform bill.
.
Reid, whose leadership is considered crucial if President Barack Obama is to deliver on his promise of enacting health care reform this year, offered the directive to Baucus through an intermediary after consulting with Senate Democratic leaders during Tuesday morning’s regularly scheduled leadership meeting. Baucus was meeting with Finance ranking member Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) Tuesday afternoon to relay the information.
.
According to Democratic sources, Reid told Baucus that taxing health benefits and failing to include a strong government-run insurance option of some sort in his bill would cost 10 to 15 Democratic votes; Reid told Baucus it wasn’t worth securing the support of Grassley and at best a few additional Republicans.
.
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/

[...] Congratulations, Senator Franken.  Did you know that your election is the same thing as the coup in Honduras?  One of your “colleagues” said that today.  Huh.  And YOU’RE supposed to be the comedian, I thought. Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) today defended Honduran President Manuel Zelaya’s recent removal from office by the Honduran military. In the course of defending the military coup, DeMint attacked President Obama for having what he called an “ad hoc and personalized foreign policy that seems less about supporting the rule of law than it is about supporting particular rulers.” Zelaya’s “removal from office was no more a coup than was Gerald Ford’s ascendence to the Oval Office or our newest colleague Al Franken’s election to the Senate,” DeMint claimed. [...]

Those of you who are of the mind that Palin is entirely relevant, and thus worthy of endless journalistic antagonization, based on her VP run last year are overlooking a glaring fact: the second she opened her mouth on the campaign trail she lost all credibility. The was never a viable candidate from that day forward. She is even less now that she abandoned her duty to the citizens of Alaska for no apparent reason other than she could not handle the political heat. If she could not handle that, how can she presume to tackle the VP or Presidency in 2012? She’s done. Finished. Over. Let it go. Let her go. And more importantly, stop these vicious assaults on journalists for not going after her hard enough. For f*#@’s sake, find a new target, a more relevant one, for your partisan sniping!

According to Democratic sources, Reid told Baucus that taxing health benefits and failing to include a strong government-run insurance option of some sort in his bill would cost 10 to 15 Democratic votes; Reid told Baucus it wasn’t worth securing the support of Grassley and at best a few additional Republicans.
-
I can only believe this is possible if someone politely (or otherwise) suggested to Harry that if he doesn’t start playing ball with the President he will get primaried and lose the support of a still very popular President and White House in what could be a very tough fight to keep his seat. (I know there are other dynamics involved in Nevada regarding this, namely the lack of a credible Republican challenger, but for now I’m taking that at face value.) Harry is like any other Congresscritter: his first priority is his next election. If he knows that he’s in danger of losing his job then it’s possible the primary card came into play even earlier than I expected.

Cliff-What’s up with JNS?
.
Read her interview with Palin:
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1908983-1,00.html

That was cute Neo.
.
After your insisting that Michelle Obama was an important figure for making the French work on Sunday or some such your complaining about attention being paid to the republicans vice-presidential candidate of 8 months ago and current governor of Alaska is impressive.

PNNTO
~
The fact that she was the Republican VP nominee says nothing about her current relevance. She’s a bumbling fool who has no chance of going anywhere nationally. You might as well target a Republican who actually is relevant. Perhaps some journalists are beginning to realize her static, if not digressive, potential. Hence they might actually begin to focus on real issues, yet you would call out any and all who do not stay on top of this inanely irrelevant BS.
~
As for Michelle, I merely noted that accepting, if not requesting, special treatment from Sarkozy was imprudent and worthy of a little backlash. I did not advocate 174 threads relating to how Michelle, perhaps, has an image problem. I certainly am not demanding the heads of those journalists who aren’t banging on the WH doors asking pointed questions of the First Lady.

neoexile –
.
“For f*#@’s sake, find a new target, a more relevant one, for your partisan sniping!”
.
So, first ye be claimin’ she no’ be relevant, then ye be deliverin’ th’ knockout “target” an’ “partisan sniping” punch…
.
One o’ me own relatives (a “real American” fr’m across th’ Cascades) delivered near’ th’ same whine in exact’ th’ same words ’bout poor Sarah bein’ a “target” after she were jumpin ship.
.
Funny thing…
.
When I were askin’ ‘im ’bout how Hillary Clinton were bein’ a target fer ‘is own party nearly constant since 1992, ‘e got all bristly-like an’ insisted Hillary were DESERVIN’ th’ treatment SHE were receivin, ’cause…be ye knowin’…she be a selfish, calculatin’ bitch! An’ b’sides, be ye knowin’…she be a Clinton!
.
Aaahhhhh….
.
Th’ sweet stench o’ Conservative hypocracy!
.
It be all o’er ye, neo!
.
Arrgh!

I was all of 6 years old in ’92. Don’t believe I partook in those partisan wars.

For f*#@’s sake, find a new target, a more relevant one, for your partisan sniping!
.
Let me check my rolodex here…
.
Here we go:
John Boehner is a stupid assh*le.

Cliff,
Just read the Palin fluff piece. JNS has no shame. She was so desperate to speak to Palin so she could get a story in that she threw notjing but softballs. What kind of fools pay money to read this magazine?

Well done, Cliff. Someone who matters. I’d be all ears on a thread going after Boehner as he actually holds sway over our government. The soon to be private citizen, Palin, does not and thus I am utterly sick of hearing about her over more important matters. Palin falls somewhere in between Michael Jackson and the Boston Celtics in terms of political relevance.

Exiled. 72% that is the percentage for today of the number of republicans that would vote for Palin in 2012 from a USAToday/Gallup poll. 25% would not. So please don’t sell the bullsh*t that she is not relevant.

I read JNS’ story too. How much did she have to clean up for Sarah and why did she not ask why Sarah gave such a nonsensical resignation speech?

All hail the polls!
~
If it is in any way reflective of reality, than I would unequivocally suggest that 72% of the GOP are intellectually inebriated. Palin is an embarrassment as is anyone who votes for her.

.
I was all of 6 years old in ’92. Don’t believe I partook in those partisan wars.
.
I’d never have guessed.
~

I stand by my promise the other day that were Palin to win the GOP nomination, I resign my Republican commission without a second thought.

dfh – she could have at least asked for Palin to have provided a concrete example of all those ethics investigations.
.
exiled – if you figure out how to make the swampers post on something substantive let me know.

Re: JNS & Sarah
There might have been some ‘rules of engagment’ that we aren’t aware of. Otherwise I’m at a loss to explain how bad it was.

Sarah is kind of like Michael Jsckson after Thriller, insisting that those that interview him call him ‘the king of pop’. If you want to interview Palin you must pretend she is not a complete idiot. Andrea Mitchel just did the same fluff piece JNS did.
By the way that same poll showed that 52% would not vote for her. The Ms reports this and then tell us how poular she is. What is wrong with these people?

P-nnto:

Sorry for the delay. I just heard a report (this afternoon, radio station unknown) of Kyl alleging weakness by Obama on defense issues, in the context of (possibly a lead-up to) the Russian negotiations. Looks like it was, in fact, a piece he and Perle (that paragon of judicious comment) wrote last week for the WSJ – to which I’m regretfully unable to link. My apologies (gulp) to Kyl if I heard it wrong. I’m able to say only that the piece was entitled “Our Decaying Nuclear Deterrent.”

JNS and Sarah, the condensed interview:
.
Q1-Why is Government bad?
Q2-Really?
Q3-Was resigning a great move or merely a good one?
Q4-Hillary’s a whiner-Why aren’t you?
Q5-What now?
Q6-Just can’t get enough rally’s eh?
Q7-Until your ready to run again?
Q8-Care to unload on Obama?
Q9-Again?
Q10-and once more?

Saw the interviews from today. CNN, ABC, MSNBC and so on. Sarah Palin can not string a sentence combined with a thought together and all the reporters pretended that she could while she stood there in fishing gear.

Complete sentences are for elitists!!!!

Gunny
~
To be clear, 35% of Republicans polled in that Gallup poll said they were very likely to vote for Palin. 37% were somewhat likely. 25% were either not too likely or very unlikely to vote for her. Therefore, she currently has 35% core base of the GOP. The 37% can be swayed based on which candidates are in the 2012 primary. And the rest will likely not support her regardless of who the candidates are. So, it would appear that 35% of the GOP are wingnuts. The rest are reasonable enough to be persuaded based on the candidates at the time of the primaries.

Exiled:
.
I don’t think that follows. The 37% could prefer someone else equally (or, lordelpus, more) irrational/irresponsible. For all we know, a significant portion of the 25% are every bit as wingnutty but, say, sexist and unwilling to vote Palin on the basis of xx-chromosomes.
.
Face it – you might be the only rational one left.

FO
~
Is there someone more irrational than Palin who could potentially be a viable nominee? I think not…
~
In any case, I sincerely hope that you’re merely jesting with the XX-chromosome line. If we, or more appropriately you, are going to start discrediting those Republicans who no not support Palin on the grounds of some wholly speculative sexism allegation, than it is no wonder that partisanship is as pervasive and obstructive as it is. If you fail to concede any semblance of rationality among any Republican than you deserve to have an obstructionist GOP Congress. Why cede any ground to those who would demonize even the most rational amongst you?

Exiled-Fair enough.

For a long time I thought Al was a smart guy and would win, then did win, and to me it was only a matter of time before the courts couldn’t avoid recognizing his win. You know: it became no biggie.
.
But seeing him actually sworn in was a surprisingly big thrill, like seeing one of your buds promoted to the majors or something. I feel like Henry Hill and Jimmy Conway did when they found out Tommy was gonna be made. (okay, maybe that’s a bad example).
.

…as long as Harry Reid gets to be Morrie the wig guy, I’m cool wit it.

neo:”You might as well target a Republican who actually is relevant.”
.
Sadly (or not), there are fewer and fewer of them.
.
FO: xx: Read (over at TPM, I think) that the XYs held Palin in greater esteem than XXs. The GILF factor, perhaps.

“I stand by my promise the other day that were Palin to win the GOP nomination, I resign my Republican commission without a second thought.”
.
And George W. Bush was less psychopathic, less dumb, less accomplished, less incompetent, less dogmatic, less inarticulate and less of a failure than Palin, exactly, how?

@PD: Just finished reading JNS’s Palin article. Blechhh. Gargling with Buffalo Trace right now to wash the taste out of my mouth.

Shep
~
You’re speaking of the end result of Bush, after 8 years. In the beginning he was not perceived as such and he was thrust into wholly unfamiliar territory with the events of September 11th. In any case, though, I never supported the man anyway, never voted for him, never particularly liked him. Although, given the opposition, Gore and Kerry, can’t say that I am dumbfounded as to why he was elected.

Palin is still very much a player. I agree that when she first opened her mouth she had no chance nationally, but she energized the base and the base is the ballgame in the republican party. Her being a threat to win the national election is a long shot at best, but Sarah winning the republican nomination is possible.
.
We’re doing the serious republicans (endangered) a huge favor. Most of us diehard democrats would like to see a viable republican party just to keep us from going batsh!t crazy like the current incarnation of the republican party did. Ridiculing Sarah and trashing her bizarre antics helps us both.
.
Making her look like a buffoon isn’t hard. She supplies all the material and we just spin it. If she gets taken out of the picture politically, then the serious faction has a chance to nominate a real candidate. You really should be thanking us.

“…can’t say that I am dumbfounded as to why he was elected.”
.
Kitty Harris, Rove, Diebold, Rehnquist, Blackwell, and Diebold might have helped out.

“Although, given the opposition, Gore and Kerry, can’t say that I am dumbfounded as to why he was elected.”
.
Actually, he wasn’t. Dumbfounded.

@deconstructiva: spooky…

Electronic voting machines are spooky. Give me paper and a crayon any day.

I’m a paper ballot and optical scan guy myself. YMMV.

Shep
~
We still clinging to that long ago debunked election fraud myth?

@Neo- if it has been so thoroughly debunked, why does wikipedia still show that any of four different recount methods employed statewide in Florda would have resulted in Gore winning the state (in addition to winning the national popular vote)?
.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_recount
.
The supreme court overrode the will of the people by stopping the recount procedure, plain and simple. Considering the damage to the country that resulted from such a decision, it is surprising to see you so flippantly dismiss the facts as some debunked fantasy. There’s a saying about those who choose not to learn history’s lessons …

Why on earth to people think that wiki is an acceptable source?

@Ohiolib- among other reasons, because it provides linked citations and is accessible everywhere. What’s your beef with it?

I don’t think the election “myth” is debunked, either. There is the matter of Black Americans who were improperly removed from the voting rolls, a widespread practice in GOP controlled Southern states.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-fauntroy-phd/conservatives-and-black-v_b_51338.html
.
During sentances, OK, while on probation, maybe, after serving time, no:
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/45a/378.html
.
2000:
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2000/11/voteless-florida

That’s why I post Wiki links, too. Often, an article in Wiki can be accompanied by dozens of papers and references. If for no other reason, they serve as a loci for links that will allow the reader of a given article to decide it’s veracity.
.
On the above posts about Black disenfranchisement in Florida, there are may points of view on the exact details, grey areas (which I posted my views on), and clear violations.
.
Mother Jones helps to provide context and indicates some of history of these laws, which are a carryover, in many cases, from the old Jim Crow days. Because of the gray areas in some of these laws, they have a longer shelf life than other laws of this type.
.
My point is, Exiled, is that because of some of the then, and maybe now, intact vestiges of institutional racism, the issue is by no means “debunked”.
.
Whether you agree is not really the point here. The point is, that there are mechanisms that have been deemed by some to have been abused. These issues have not been resolved, and still debate continues. Therefore, the “myth” cannot be debunked, as the number of Black disenfranchised far exceeds the margins for FLA in both 2000 and 2004.

My own opinion is that, if you are referring to articles linked by a wiki article, save us the trouble and link directly to that article. Anyone can get on and write anything in wikipedia. If I wanted to, I could find a site about famous people from Ohio and add my own name to that list. This user-editing is why I flat-out reject wiki as an acceptable source.

@ohiolib- you certainly could change anything you wanted on a wiki article, but on any article of consequence your changes would be verified by other users almost instantly. If you don’t believe me you can run an experiment- find 10 articles of interest and make random changes, then check back to see what the response time is on corrections. My guess is that for high profile articles you’d have corrections within minutes, which strikes me as about as accurate as anything you can expect to find in the inter-webs.