Wednesday Open Thread [5.22.13]

Filed in Open Thread by on May 22, 2013

Greg Sargent:

A few of us on the left have been arguing that the current scandal-mania gripping the GOP risks bringing about a rerun of 1998, when the frenzy amid the Monica Lewinsky revelations led the GOP to overreach, resulting in backlash. Now we have a longtime respected nonpartisan observer, Charlie Cook, arguing that this possibility is very real.

Nate Silver:

There are a lot of theories as to why Mr. Obama’s approval ratings have been unchanged in the wake of these controversies, which some news accounts and many of Mr. Obama’s opponents are describing as scandals. But these analyses may proceed from the wrong premise if they assume that the stories have had no impact. It could be that the controversies are, in fact, putting some downward pressure on Mr. Obama’s approval ratings — but that the losses are offset by improved voter attitudes about the economy.

Republican Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma has in the past opposed emergency aid for Hurricane Sandy. But unlike his Oklahoman colleague in the Senate, Tom Coburn, he will support federal emergency funds for the Moore Tornado disaster. Which means of course, he is a flaming hypocrite who would deny aid to East Coast Democrats and liberals but gladly take it for his Sooner state conservatives. Not so, says Inhofe. A tornado and a hurricane are “totally different.”

That was a “totally different” situation, Inhofe told MSNBC, arguing that the Sandy aid was filled with pork. There were “things in the Virgin Islands. They were fixing roads there and putting roofs on houses in Washington, D.C. Everybody was getting in and exploiting the tragedy that took place. That won’t happen in Oklahoma.”

Oh sweet Jesus. Is Inhofe unaware that the Hurricane hit the DC, Maryland, Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York and all of New England too? Is he not aware that the Virgin Islands are hit by tropical storms and Hurricanes on a yearly basis. Why are Republican Senators so fucking stupid? Why!!!???!!!

Paul Waldman on the prospect of filibuster reform: if the Dems don’t do it, the GOP will.

Let’s be realistic here. Unless there’s some kind of major upheaval within the Republican party that moves it back to the center, when the day comes that there’s a Republican president and a Republican senate, the filibuster will be gone. It won’t take a Democratic minority using it with the profligacy Republicans have, either. All it will take is one filibuster on something Republicans care about. Today’s Republicans don’t care about the institution’s traditions, or about what kind of precedent they might set. They care about getting what they want. If you think they won’t do it, you haven’t been paying much attention to American politics over the last five years.

About the Author ()

Comments (4)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. bamboozer says:

    Total agreement on the filibuster, the Republicans have a smash and grab mentality and if they gain power they will do as much damage as possible as quickly as they can. As for Inhofe he makes a good case that Ted Cruz is but one of a dozen Tea Bag Senators that up the ante for awful.

  2. jim center says:

    DD asked: “Why are Republican Senators so fucking stupid? Why!!!???!!!”
    They reflect the attitudes of their fellow sociopaths who voted them into office!
    Screw you as long as I get mine, FIRST!

  3. Republican David says:

    When Jim Inhofe starts asking for billions in aid not related to the tornados, then you can call him a hypocrite. The problem he had with Sandy relief was that 13 billion of the supplemental was repairing storm damage and 47 billion was either aimed at mitigating for future storms or something else completely like 17 billion in CBDG or 4 billion in HUD grants.
    http://www.politico.com/story/2012/12/sandy-bills-extras-draw-attacks-from-the-right-85274.html

    Senate Environment and Public Works ranking member Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) said he’d seen an analysis of how the $60 billion is broken out and “I’ve come to the conclusion that the most I could support would be about 13 out of the 60.”

    “When something like this happens, there’s always people that try to exploit it for more than it’s worth. I think that’s what happened here,” Inhofe said

  4. Republican David says:

    For the record, I did not oppose the relief bill, but I do think that if you add debatable items to a bill, it becomes a debatable bill. If you want it to go through cleanly and quickly, you keep it clean and basic. Investing in prevention was a worthy debate to have, but it is not clear to everyone what form it should take and how much can be spent on it. It would have been well served in a stand alone bill, but by adding it to the relief bill, they could ram it through. It is hard to disagree that right now normal business is next to impossible in this Congress. I blame the dysfunctional Senate for 90% of the problem.