Here is an interesting mechanism for resolving the Madison imbroglio, which relies on a quirk in the state's quorum rules:
At issue is a normally obscure Senate rule that requires a quorum of 20 senators to vote on fiscal matters but just 17 to vote on other matters. There are 19 Republicans in the Senate. Mr. Fitzgerald and other members of the Republican leadership planned to meet Monday to establish a schedule for Tuesday’s order of business.
Senator Jon Erpenbach, a Democrat, said that the caucus was aware of the move but that Democrats would remain scattered across the border in Illinois until the restrictions to collective bargaining were off the table.
“They can vote on anything that is nonfiscal,” he said. “They can take up their agenda, they can do whatever they choose to do.”
The move, which came as union members and supporters packed into the capital for a seventh straight day, provoked speculation that the restrictions on collective bargaining included in Gov. Scott Walker’s “budget repair bill” could potentially be added to other legislation as an amendment and passed in the absence of Democrats. It would be another legislative maneuver in a standoff that has seen plenty of them.
The Republicans would argue that the collective bargaining and dues collection provisions are not fiscal, pass them, and let the chips fall. Presumably the increased employee contribution to health care and pensions must be part of a fiscal bill, but the union leaders have already conceded on those points.
FWIW, Candidate Walker made it clear during the campaign that he intended to sock it to the public unions on health and pensions (1, 2, 3, 4). On those points, one might well argue that the voters have spoken (and as noted, the unions have acceded.) As to the proposals that greatly weaken the public unions, I haven't found specific discussion of that during the campaign, although it is hardly a surprise given Walker's history.
Vicky McKenna was pushing this on the radio, Belling too. This morning I heard that Walker considered the collective bargaining issue to be fiscal (so not union busting?). This may be more public exuberance than Republican strategy.
Posted by: Henry | February 21, 2011 at 06:48 PM
Does anyone know whether "fiscal" has been defined anywhere in the Wisconsin Senate rules? Does the Senate's presiding officer have the power to rule whether something is or is not "fiscal"? Even if it has, how many Senate votes are necessary to change the Senate rules?
IMO it would be rather easy to by rule amendment or interpretation define the collective bargaining and check off provisions of the proposed legislation as not "fiscal". With all potential opponents to such parliamentary actions AWOL, who else would have standing to contest them?
Power politics stinks when you have abdicated your power.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet | February 21, 2011 at 07:03 PM
This is an epic battle. No one would give Walker credit if this gets compromised. But if he doesn't budge, he'll be a contender, maybe even near-term. They need to go all the way and bust these unions.
48% Back GOP Governor in Wisconsin Spat, 38% Side With Unions
Isn't this trending even worse for them tomorrow?
Posted by: Extraneus | February 21, 2011 at 07:06 PM
Walker's on Mark Levin right now. Just started.
Posted by: Extraneus | February 21, 2011 at 07:08 PM
The Republicans would argue that the collective bargaining and dues collection provisions are not fiscal, pass them, and let the chips fall.
If they do it, I'd advise them to do it again as part of a clearly fiscal bill once they get the weasels back into the chamber. Otherwise the state Supreme Court will decide the matter for them.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 21, 2011 at 07:11 PM
Danube, conservatives control the WI supremes so that won't be a problem. I'm curious about Walker on Levin (no cable), but my impression is that Walker wants to win this cleanly w/o games and keep high ground for 3.6 billion fight over the next two year budget.
Posted by: Henry | February 21, 2011 at 07:19 PM
FTR I want it noted that I suggested this very thing, yesterday.
Since I regularly feel like the dimmest light in the room here, I want that on the record.
Posted by: Jane | February 21, 2011 at 07:20 PM
Extraneous,
I don't believe that polling is a factor in this. Stern and Trumka said "DANCE, MONKIES" and they've gotta keep dancin' - or no more peanuts. Stern and Trumka are scared spitless of the annual certification and dues clauses. If they lose on those, then they won't have the members' money to blow on buying political hacks.
The pension/health benefits bit is pure smoke. We're talking cornered rats here and public opinion rates very low in importance to rodents looking for a way out.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | February 21, 2011 at 07:21 PM
Well, they're having a wide-ranging discussion about the legal and fiscal issues involved, and he's talking like a true conservative on a conservative radio show.
Levin has free podcasts if anyone wants to go to his site, marklevinshow.com. I don't know how long it takes for him to post a given show.
Posted by: Extraneus | February 21, 2011 at 07:24 PM
Good point DoT. Let them wait out the Dems, then pass the bill without any fear of future interference by the courts.
I wonder how long the dems can stay away before they can be declared to have abandoned their seats. There has to be a time limit, and it has to be stated somewhere in the law. It would be nice to see a special election to fill all those Dem seats.
Ask the Texas Dems what they gained by delaying the last redistricting. They gained only a few weeks delay; they lost a good bit of credibility and respect.
Posted by: Uncle BigBad | February 21, 2011 at 07:24 PM
Thanks for the link Ext
Posted by: Henry | February 21, 2011 at 07:27 PM
How about this? "Back to work by Wednesday or you're fired!" & "Thursday will be tear-gas and German Shepherd day."
Posted by: NoMoreMrNiceGuy | February 21, 2011 at 07:32 PM
New radio-announcer intro for coming back from commercial.
"Mark Levin... The George S. Patton of talk radio."
Heh.
Posted by: Extraneus | February 21, 2011 at 07:36 PM
Would a state court have any jurisdiction to counter a its legislative body's interpretation of its own rules, DOT? It wouldn't in Georgia since each house has the plenary power to make its own rules.
And I can't imagine a federal court getting involved in a spat in the US Senate over e.g. its filibuster rule, can you?
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet | February 21, 2011 at 07:40 PM
Levin online
Posted by: Strawman Cometh | February 21, 2011 at 07:42 PM
Local news-
Walker: cost state $30 million if employees not contributing for benefits by April 1. $300 million cost in next budget. Thus 1500 laid off in April and 5-6000 state and 5-6000 local and teachers laid off in June. If bill is not passed by Friday the state loses $165 million in refinancing- bigger numbers of laid off.
Posted by: Henry | February 21, 2011 at 07:43 PM
Mark Levin linked to this nifty illustrated history of public sector unions.
Posted by: DebinNC | February 21, 2011 at 07:43 PM
Detroit Ordered To Close Half Its Schools
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | February 21, 2011 at 07:50 PM
Also on local news- from secure location McHenry county IL, Dem vacation funded with campaign funds.
No mention of Madison Shuffle.
Posted by: Henry | February 21, 2011 at 07:52 PM
JimR, I can't imagine any federal jurisdiction, and I wouldn't think a state court could or would intervene on the matter if "fiscal" is defined in the rules. Yesterday someone posted the statutory definition, which didn't seem to settle the matter entirely. But I guess you are probably right; no court would likely presume to involve itself with internal disputes within the legislative branch.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 21, 2011 at 08:04 PM
ART. VIII, §6, WIS. CONSTITUTION
Posted by: Extraneus | February 21, 2011 at 08:09 PM
I don't know how long it takes for him to post a given show.
Mark usually has his podcast up within a couple hours after his show ends. I'm often out and miss the show, so I listen to the podcast when I get home around 11 pm.
Posted by: SWarren | February 21, 2011 at 08:09 PM
Henry,
Is everyone in Wisconsin talking about this, or is it just those who follow politics?
Posted by: Jane | February 21, 2011 at 08:16 PM
I guess the state Supreme Court could legitimately decide whether a piece of legislation is or is not within the state constitutional provision quoted by Ext. But I should think the collective bargaining provision clearly isn't. But anyhow it appears the GOP doesn't plan on doing it that way. I think they've got a winning hand.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 21, 2011 at 08:18 PM
I'm going OT with the following prediction:
Q'a'd'a'ffi will be at room temperature by April 1.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 21, 2011 at 08:20 PM
Jane, as far as I can tell, this is topic number one at bubblers (water coolers outside WI) across SE WI. Beer stores too. You will win your bet.
Posted by: Henry | February 21, 2011 at 08:25 PM
He'll make a handsome c'o'r'p'se.
Posted by: Extraneus | February 21, 2011 at 08:26 PM
Thanks ex. The fact that the "fiscal" requirement is in the Wisc Constitution makes clear to me that DOT is right and my "rules" theory doesn't hold up.
But It seems like the constitutional definition makes it difficult to argue that the collective bargaining and checkoff proposals are fiscal. Neither "imposes, continues or renews a tax", "creates a debt or charge", "makes, continues or renews an appropriation of public or trust money" or "commutes a claim or demand of the state". Am I missing something?
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet | February 21, 2011 at 08:26 PM
Actually, he'll be well above room temperature by then. Well above.
Posted by: Hell | February 21, 2011 at 08:27 PM
As usual, I did not refresh the thread and was writing while DOT commented. I think we agree.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet | February 21, 2011 at 08:28 PM
the caption to that photo should be
"aw shit....."
Posted by: matt | February 21, 2011 at 08:29 PM
Anyone know what all the Colonel's medals were for?
Posted by: Extraneus | February 21, 2011 at 08:29 PM
You have expect a Shaihulud to come up and swallow hi, in other absurd news, in the LUN
Posted by: narciso | February 21, 2011 at 08:30 PM
Back in the good ol' medal-earning days.
Posted by: Extraneus | February 21, 2011 at 08:32 PM
DOJ covering up faux terrorism software ...
Posted by: Neo | February 21, 2011 at 08:35 PM
The picture next to the word "style" in the dictionary.
Posted by: Extraneus | February 21, 2011 at 08:35 PM
Ext, fashion?
Posted by: Henry | February 21, 2011 at 08:35 PM
Extraneus: Take pity, STOP! I'm trying to eat dinner.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | February 21, 2011 at 08:36 PM
Ext is right, Henry. Yesterday I said he perfectly fits this description: Busy Dictator and Fashion Icon, M. Gadhafi.
I mean, he is clearly evil - but he is also insane and quite the dresser!
Hey - y'know, if he isn't at room temperature by April 1st, he might have a second career as a stylist for Flotus.
Posted by: centralcal | February 21, 2011 at 08:39 PM
Ext posts faster than I type, I was still on the first pic.
Posted by: Henry | February 21, 2011 at 08:43 PM
So unions in Egypt and Tunisia and China you all are for, but not here?
Posted by: btraven | February 21, 2011 at 08:48 PM
Did you say fashion?
Posted by: Extraneus | February 21, 2011 at 08:48 PM
That's just a touch too 'Weekend at Bernie' there.
Posted by: narciso | February 21, 2011 at 08:50 PM
How bout them shades.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet | February 21, 2011 at 08:51 PM
Check out the LUN, Sara(Pal2Pal), and you'll forget the Khadafy photos.
Posted by: Thomas Colins | February 21, 2011 at 08:51 PM
"Q'a'd'a'ffi will be at room temperature by April 1."
"ordering-libyan-soldiers-to-kill-gaddafi/"
LUN
Posted by: Pagar | February 21, 2011 at 08:51 PM
Has anyone ever had more spellings to his name?
Posted by: Jane | February 21, 2011 at 08:58 PM
Pagar, I wonder whether Khadafy can get an imam to announce a similar fatwa against Qaradawi. Jihadist on Jihadist fatwas sound fine to me.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | February 21, 2011 at 09:01 PM
Walker on Hannity. No bending. A skinny Christie.
Christie is too much Soprano while Walker is more cerebral. Both could be a team:)
God, we are getting desperate sren't we.
What all this means is "bye, bye Palin", you are now irrelevant.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | February 21, 2011 at 09:13 PM
That's just a touch too 'Weekend at Bernie' there.
and definitely some use of Bondo.
Posted by: J...something | February 21, 2011 at 09:24 PM
Jane,
Has anyone ever had more spellings to his name?
Shakespeare
Shakespere
Shakespear
Shakspeare
Shackspeare
Shakspere
Shackespeare
Shackspere
Shackespere
Shaxspere
Shexpere
Shakspe~
Shaxpere
Shagspere
Shaksper
Shaxpeare
Shaxper
Shakspeare
Shakespere
Shakespear
Shak-speare
Shakspear
Shakspere
Shaksper
Schaksp.
Shakespheare
Shakespe
Shakspe
Posted by: caro | February 21, 2011 at 09:30 PM
Anyone know what all the Colonel's medals were for?
I think I spotted one in there for Shay's Rebellion.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 21, 2011 at 09:31 PM
So unions in Egypt and Tunisia and China you all are for, but not here?
Not for government employees. Not here, not Egypt, not Tunisia and not China, although I don't much care whether those places are stupid enough to have them or not.
Next question.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 21, 2011 at 09:33 PM
echo " testing SPEAK OF THE DEVIL (torture test courtesy Scott Anderson):"
echo " or, WIN ALL 32 WITHOUT LAZY EVALUATION"
echo './egrep "' 'M[ou]'"'"'?am+[ae]r .*([AEae]l[- ])?[GKQ]h?[aeu]+([dtz][dhz]?)+af[iy]"' egad
cat > egad << 'Egad'
1) Muammar Qaddafi
2) Mo'ammar Gadhafi
3) Muammar Kaddafi
4) Muammar Qadhafi
5) Moammar El Kadhafi
6) Muammar Gadafi
7) Mu'ammar al-Qadafi
8) Moamer El Kazzafi
9) Moamar al-Gaddafi
10) Mu'ammar Al Qathafi
11) Muammar Al Qathafi
12) Mo'ammar el-Gadhafi
13) Moamar El Kadhafi
14) Muammar al-Qadhafi
15) Mu'ammar al-Qadhdhafi
16) Mu'ammar Qadafi
17) Moamar Gaddafi
18) Mu'ammar Qadhdhafi
19) Muammar Khaddafi
20) Muammar al-Khaddafi
21) Mu'amar al-Kadafi
22) Muammar Ghaddafy
23) Muammar Ghadafi
24) Muammar Ghaddafi
25) Muamar Kaddafi
26) Muammar Quathafi
27) Muammar Gheddafi
28) Muamar Al-Kaddafi
29) Moammar Khadafy
30) Moammar Qudhafi
31) Mu'ammar al-Qaddafi
32) Mulazim Awwal Mu'ammar Muhammad Abu Minyar al-Qadhafi
Egad
Posted by: DrJ | February 21, 2011 at 09:34 PM
DrJ. You win!
Posted by: caro | February 21, 2011 at 09:38 PM
I think Kaddafi wins.
How is your leg Caro? Are you skiing yet?
I've got a case of Achilles tendinitis, which hurts like hell - in case anyone has some tips.
I'm pretty happy with Brown on Hannity.
Posted by: Jane | February 21, 2011 at 09:40 PM
Henry, they're called "bubblers" in Boston, too, because Mass and Wisconsin bought the same fountains from the same company as soon as they were invented..So says the author of the American regional dictionary..
Posted by: clarice feldman | February 21, 2011 at 09:40 PM
Cool! What's the prize?
Posted by: DrJ | February 21, 2011 at 09:41 PM
Speaking of Levin and Christie, Levin makes a good argument that Christie isn't all that conservative after all.
Posted by: Rocco | February 21, 2011 at 09:44 PM
Drj
Two weks in Madison.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | February 21, 2011 at 09:46 PM
I rather like Madison, actually. In the summer, though.
Posted by: DrJ | February 21, 2011 at 09:47 PM
Well, here's a sample of Bush Admin strategic planning re, inter alia, Libya--deep as a puddle on the sidewalk: h/t The Rumsfeld Library
April 7, 2003 11:46 AM
TO: Doug Feith
FROM: Donald Rumsfeld
SUBJECT: Issues w/Various Countries
We need more coercive diplomacy with respect to Syria and Libya, and we need it fast. If they mess up Iraq, it will delay bringing our troops home.
We also need to solve the Pakistan problem.
And Korea doesn’t seem to be going well.
Are you coming up with proposals for me to send around?
Thanks.
Posted by: anduril | February 21, 2011 at 09:49 PM
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | February 21, 2011 at 09:50 PM
Christie isn't a conservative. He's more like Rudy; a former US attorney that's well placed in cleaning up an east coast den of corruption. I'd vote for either of them in place of B+ Hussein and might be pleased with the performance of either of them. But they're not conservatives.
Posted by: Captain Hate | February 21, 2011 at 09:53 PM
--Stern and Trumka said "DANCE, MONKIES" and they've gotta keep dancin' - or no more peanuts.--
LOL, Rick.
Posted by: Ignatz | February 21, 2011 at 09:56 PM
CH,
That said, do you think SEIU and the other thugs need to worry about a Christie run?
Posted by: Jack is Back! | February 21, 2011 at 10:04 PM
Palin is still the only one to get a true Frau Blücher reaction out of BOzo. That may change as time passes and as BOzo's Magic 8 Ball strategic plan dictates.
Anyone have any thoughts as to the import of Bingaman's decision to hang it up? He's only 67 and he's been in office since '83. It seems to me that his decision to get out carries more weight than Webb's but I didn't see many comments about it. His announcement was extremely bland, providing no real rationale for the decision.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | February 21, 2011 at 10:06 PM
Clarise & Dave, I never would have guessed. Local terms trip me up everywhere. I'm not from WI, I just ended up here. I don't remember drinking water on any trips to MA, but I do remember drinking.
Posted by: Henry | February 21, 2011 at 10:07 PM
I rather like Madison, actually. In the summer, though.
There is a thundershower nearly every afternoon as I recall. I worked in Madison one summer and rode my bicycle a fair distance.
Jane,I plan on going out for a short test run tomorrow. I abandoned the walking boot yesterday and it feels fine. I am a week ahead of Dr.'s orders.
Posted by: caro | February 21, 2011 at 10:09 PM
From yesterdays hapless interview with Rumsfeld, Crowley must have had a positronic
meltdown, in the LUN
Posted by: narciso | February 21, 2011 at 10:11 PM
Hitler was a leftist and a union boss. Of course, he broke up unions competing with his own. Union bosses will do that whenever they can.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | February 21, 2011 at 10:14 PM
--His announcement was extremely bland, providing no real rationale for the decision.--
Considering who they just elected governor I'm assuming he was reading the tea leaves.
Posted by: Ignatz | February 21, 2011 at 10:17 PM
You think she's posting as our old buddy with the neocon problem, Narciso?
Posted by: Boatbuilder | February 21, 2011 at 10:18 PM
No, there's a unique Byzantine architecture, to his rants, BB, the fact that guy gave up his nuclear program, in part due to the Iraq
invasion, somehow doesn't translate.
Posted by: narciso | February 21, 2011 at 10:23 PM
DebinNC:
"Mark Levin linked to this nifty illustrated history of public sector unions."
Somehow, the whole timing thing escapes me. I took a gander at the metamorphosis of Unions and Obama's "crisis" management over at Quasiblog -- in 2009.
::sigh::
For anyone interested in a quick trip back to the future:
Always Look for the Union Label
Posted by: JM Hanes | February 21, 2011 at 10:24 PM
Anduril, Bush got Kadaffi to give up his nuclear program. It's such a shame for people like you that the rest of us have memories that go back farther than ten days.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | February 21, 2011 at 10:26 PM
Ignatz,
It would have been his seventh run - I rated him his a possible but very tough. If it was tea leaves, then BOzo has done more damage than we know. I believe I had him at 8th or 9th so if he's quitting for fear of being fired then 60 seats would enter the realm of possibility. That would be similar to the '30-'32 cycles.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | February 21, 2011 at 10:27 PM
Everyone: a YouTube commenter on one of Althouse's videos says she should be "shot in the head". The lefties in her comments are claiming that's not a death threat, because the jackass didn't say he was going to do it.
The left is really, truly working itself up towards bloodshed, aren't they?
Posted by: Rob Crawford | February 21, 2011 at 10:29 PM
Through the miracle of the Narcisolator I am now spared Anduril's posts, and thus have no idea what he said about Libya and Bush. What i do know is that Berlusconi says Q'a'd'a'ffi told him that when he saw what happened to Saddam he decided not to pursue nukes anymore.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 21, 2011 at 10:40 PM
Bingaman has some clout. The LUN for the wife is interesting as well.
COMMITTEES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Energy and Natural Resources Committee
Chairman
The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee has jurisdiction over national energy policy and the public lands of the nation.
Finance Committee
The Finance Committee has jurisdiction over Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, tax policy, trade policy, and other key domestic issues.
Posted by: Strawman Cometh | February 21, 2011 at 10:41 PM
Rob, I don't think the left ever recovered from the Sore-Loserman bumper stickers 11 years ago.
Posted by: Henry | February 21, 2011 at 10:42 PM
There is a poster so active right now at Tapper's I am certain she is paid by someone. She is repeating gibberish.
Posted by: MayBee | February 21, 2011 at 10:46 PM
John "Coward" Kerry goes to Pakistan to defuse the Davis uproar and promises he'll be criminally prosecuted here if released to our custody. And a few days later it comes out that Davis really works for the CIA. Coincidence?
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | February 21, 2011 at 10:51 PM
Maybee,
Did ya see the link about the gov't sock puppet generator?
Posted by: Strawman Cometh | February 21, 2011 at 10:54 PM
Ha! Strawman!
Posted by: MayBee | February 21, 2011 at 10:59 PM
That's nothing, Sara, Lurch has this tendency
of 'outing' people putatively even on his own side; re: Fulton Armstrong. I figured Davis, was more astute than the typical Foggy Bottom
drone, because he survived the encounter.
Posted by: narciso | February 21, 2011 at 11:01 PM
This concerns me. Can the guv stop buses at the state line?
Posted by: Strawman Cometh | February 21, 2011 at 11:02 PM
Meanwhile, while everyone is focusing on Wisconsin, the Governor of Illinois starts ballancing the state budget by cutting off funding to the most vulnerable, and with the least political clout (via Drudge).
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1359098/Tens-thousands-hit-Illinois-cuts-funding-drug-treatment-programmes.html>Illinois slashes ALL state funding for drug and alcohol abuse treatment in massive cuts programme
...Sara Howe, CEO of the Illinois Alcoholism and Drug Dependence Association said: '80 per cent of our clients on March 15 would be thrown out of care'.
That adds up to around 55,000 people who will lose their help battling drugs.
'It's the most devastating picture possible,' Howe added.
And who is this cold harted governor, a Democrat.
That's how Democratic politics works. The government employees have been promised no job cuts and no pay or benifits cuts. The people Democrats claim to cair about... left completely out in the cold.
Posted by: Ranger | February 21, 2011 at 11:03 PM
The security breach at HBGary was social engineering:
Anonymous sent e-mails from the hacked account of HBGary founder Greg Hoglund to a network administrator requesting key information as if Hoglund himself were asking. In response, the admin opened firewall ports and gave up Hoglund's user name and password for root access to the servers supporting the company's rootkit.com Web site.
"The country is in the very best of hands" tm
Posted by: Strawman Cometh | February 21, 2011 at 11:20 PM
MayBee, are you talking about Alyson or Lydia? Not a lot of ideas get exchanged over there...
Nice of the NY Times to break the story that the poor wretch in Pakistan was a CIA agent. And who gave Kerry the authority to make that promise about prosecution. I sure hope one of the Watchdogs of the Fourth Estate asks him about it.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 21, 2011 at 11:21 PM
Today, Alyson. I'm not convinced she and Lydia are two separate people, though
Posted by: MayBee | February 21, 2011 at 11:25 PM
Strawman:
Did ya see the link about the gov't sock puppet generator?
The irony is that my dear friend sylvia was too close to the truth for her own good.
Posted by: hit and run | February 21, 2011 at 11:29 PM
Nice of the NY Times to break the story that the poor wretch in Pakistan was a CIA agent.
It's awful for him.
It seems we should have really gotten him diplomatic passports before he went, no? It sounds like the Obama administration has kept saying he has diplo immunity with very little to back that up.
Posted by: MayBee | February 21, 2011 at 11:30 PM
Here's some nice bashing of Paul Krugman by the UK Telegraph, so TM doesn't have to do it:
">http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100077099/paul-krugman-and-america’s-delusional-left-wing-elites-remain-stuck-in-the-twilight-zone/"> Paul Krugman and America’s delusional left-wing elites remain stuck in the Twilight Zone
Posted by: daddy | February 21, 2011 at 11:34 PM
So I skated over to Tapper's place to do some udercover IJ and came across this certifiable MFM production:
“Through the Recovery Act, we've proved that the government can move quickly and get the job done and do it right,” Biden said. “We're going to need to follow these lessons in future budget and implementation efforts if we're going to live up to what we've done in Recovery Act.”
....
“The Recovery Act wasn’t designed to bring back the economy,” Biden said [Mission accomplished - sc] – a familiar refrain from the vice president over the past two years. He emphasized that the White House never claimed the stimulus would fix everything.
Secretary LaHood was blunt: “The stimulus program has worked, I don’t care what anybody has said.” [anybody can say hat again-sc]
Vice President Biden patted himself and his stimulus team on the back, [nobody else would-sc] citing the low number of fraud incidents in the stimulus money disbursement.
“Any fraud -- any fraud -- is a problem, but it's less than 1 percent -- less than 1 percent of all the money out there that's been distributed,” he said.
Biden also said today that Sheriff Joe is hanging up his badge, passing on the responsibility of managing the remaining Recovery Act funds to OMB Director Jack Lew, who he deemed a “more than capable successor.”
Posted by: Strawman Cometh | February 21, 2011 at 11:42 PM
MayBee, ever since I discovered that site it has appeared to have one or two shills working twelve-hour shits repeating talking points. They take breaks for meals, but otherwise spend their entire day on that site. Seems like a lot of work to reach a tiny sudience.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 21, 2011 at 11:45 PM
twelve-hour shits
I meant todothat!
Posted by: Strawman Cometh | February 21, 2011 at 11:48 PM
do you think SEIU and the other thugs need to worry about a Christie run?
Sure because he'd frame the arguments against them extremely effectively. I think his experience as a US Attorney is very useful in dealing with vermin like that.
Posted by: Captain Hate | February 21, 2011 at 11:50 PM
Sounds like a very accurate description, Strawman.
Posted by: Minimalist Poster | February 21, 2011 at 11:51 PM
This concerns me. Can the guv stop buses at the state line?
What does that even mean? It's not like we have police barricades at the border stopping all traffic on the Interstate. And the buses probably won't have any distinguishing markings.
Posted by: PD | February 22, 2011 at 12:05 AM