Rahm "We Saved The Economy" Emanuel made some noise this morning about the House still voting on health care next week. It sounded nuts considering that the Energy and Commerce Committee can't even get a bill marked up because of the Blue Dogs.

Now it turns out that Democratic leaders, having grown tired of running roughshod over just minority Republicans, are considering screwing their own members and simply reporting a bill to the floor without any committee action.

Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman told The Associated Press negotiations with fiscally conservative Democrats on his panel cannot go on "interminably" because they would "empower" Republicans and allow the minority party to take control of the panel.

The California Democrat said Friday if he can't reach agreement with the conservatives, the health care bill would go straight to the floor, and not through his committee.

Two House panels have already passed legislation. Waxman is stymied because seven conservatives—who call themselves Blue Dog Democrats—are sticking together. Negotiations continued.

This is a high stakes game of chicken right now. Obama wants a vote somewhere by somebody before his stated August deadline. Nancy says she has the votes (which isn't a given)but won't commit to bringing something to the floor and now this. Waxman is basically saying to his own committee members, you can have a say in this but only within certain limits, what's it going to be?

The other bet is it's better to pass something to keep the process alive rather than let members go home and get spooked by opposition and not be able to get a vote in September.

Remember, the game here is to get something passed in both houses so they can go to committee where they will basically start again.

Pelosi and Reid are in tough spots with few good options. I'm sure they are really happy with Obama right about now.

Given all of this, I really doubt they are going to vote something next week in the House.

First, they don't have a bill yet. They'll throw something together over the weekend and toss it out there next week. Will House Democrats really want to be on record for something that is sure to be slipshod and have lots of embarrassing crap in it and then have to spend the next month back home defending it?

That's assuming it even passes.

Don't forget a lot of House Democrats are now considered vulnerable because team Pelosi forced them to vote for the job killing Cap and Trade bill that is pretty much dead in the Senate. With Harry Reid saying there will be no Senate vote on health care next week, are House Dems really going to fall on their swords again for the sake of Pelosi and Obama?

It's kind of funny to see Waxman unable to get a bill out of his committee considering he was Pelosi's handpicked choice to lead the panel and she even helped engineer the overthrow of the previous chair, House Dean John Dingell. Nice job Nancy!

Via Karl Rove, here's a list of the "Blue Dogs". If you live in one of their districts, you may want to give them a call.

Posted by: DrewM at 08:49 AM | Comments (2)
Post contains 572 words, total size 4 kb.

Something I didn't know that might explain why Rasmussen always has Obama 4-5 points below Gallup and others -- their tracking poll is of likely voters.

Just 25% believe that the economic stimulus package has helped the economy.

...

Overall, 49% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance. Today marks the first time his overall approval rating has ever fallen below 50% among Likely Voters nationwide. Fifty-one percent (51%) disapprove.

...

California Senator Barbara Boxer is clinging to a four-point lead in her bid for re-election.

Fifty-three percent (53%) now oppose the Congressional health care reform package. ThatÂ’s up eight points over the past month. Just 20% now see health care as the most important of the PresidentÂ’s priorities. Nearly twice as many, 37%, say deficit reduction is most important.

I have written about my belief that 2008 was mostly about America voting no-confidence in the GOP due to perceived failures of competent management, and not really about ideology.

So while the public wanted to deliver a message to the GOP, they didn't necessarily want to deliver this message.

Megan McArdle makes a similar point, responding to Ezra Klein's odd assertion that Democrats in conservative districts should vote for health care, and their voters will reward them for doing what they don't want them to do.

But let me propose a couple of alternative scenarios. One is that basically center-right districts elect Democrats because the Republicans did things they didn't like: raising taxes, raising spending, getting into costly wars in the Middle East that don't go so well. When a national health care program passes, this reminds them that delivering a gigantic raspberry to the GOP has a price.

These are all just alternative ways to say "overreach," or, more specifically, "assuming a mandate for transformative socialist-leaning change when in fact you only had a mandate to manage the government better than the GOP was thought to do."

Independents are turning more and more from Obama. Critical, of course. While we conservatives frequently curse the fact that we need the independents, so too, of course, do the Democrats.

And: Rush Limbaugh on the media's Waterloo -- Barack Obama. The media army rushed to defend an indefensible hill, and they'll wind up losing big for that error.

Dick Morris Keeps Banging the Same Drum: Which is understandable, as it's a good drum. I've long agreed with his basic analysis.

Superficially, the United States appears to have a presidential system, but in fact it more and more resembles a parliamentary form of government. When a president loses the approval of the majority of the voters and polls reflect that his ratings have fallen substantially below 50 percent, he loses his power. In this context, polls are like parliamentary votes of no confidence in European systems. While the government does not fall if it loses in the polling, it limps on until either its ratings improve or it is voted out of office at the next election.

...

Now Obama faces the loss of power that comes with dropping poll numbers. The two early symptoms of this creeping impotence are his inability to pass the union card-check legislation or to force action on healthcare before the August recess, once highly touted administration goals.

As is usually the case, the apparent cause of these defeats -- the buildup of public disapproval of both bills -- is not what is really at work. Rather, it is the president's obvious inability to improve the economy that is exacting the daily toll in his approval ratings evident in all of the surveys. Like the body counts that mounted in Iraq and drove Bush's numbers ever downward, the rising unemployment numbers are stripping Obama of his popularity and power.

Obama's very activism in promoting the stimulus package in January as a cure-all has set him up for failure now that he cannot deliver on his overblown promises. Unlike Clinton's presidency, Obama's cannot be rescued by good public relations. His obvious failure to turn the economy around drags him down at every turn.

He says the elderly are turning against ObamaCare as they realize their free care is being largely taken away to provide free care for others. I don't think he has hard numbers for that; more just a sense of things. I hope he's right.

Posted by: Ace at 08:40 AM | Comments (11)
Post contains 745 words, total size 5 kb.

Doubling down, baby!

"I have to say I am surprised by the controversy surrounding my statement, because I think it was a pretty straightforward commentary that you probably don't need to handcuff a guy, a middle-aged man who uses a cane, who's in his own home," Obama said.

...The president said he understands the sergeant who arrested Gates is an "outstanding police officer." But he added that with all that's going on in the country with health care and the economy and the wars abroad, "it doesn't make sense to arrest a guy in his own home if he's not causing a serious disturbance."

Yeah, except that's the part that is in question, isn't it. Obviously, the cops maintain Gates was creating a serious disturbance and not in his own home but out on the porch in full view of anyone passing by.

As we've learned, facts and a lack of knowledge aren't things that the smartest and coolest President ever let's get in the way.

Fortunately, we may get a better understanding of what happened if the police release the 911 and radio calls. If they don't, someone needs to get up to Cambridge and start filing the Freedom of Information request forms.

Obama however does regret something about the remark, no don't be silly, he's not sorry he slandered the cops, he regrets stepping on his health care message. It's a 'distraction' but one of his own making.

Funny how a seemingly stupid question (many of us groaned when it was asked) could create such a shit storm. That's what you get when you elect an amateur to one of the toughest jobs in the world. Nice going 52%!

Posted by: DrewM at 07:30 AM | Comments (1)
Post contains 307 words, total size 2 kb.

Happy Friday!

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 05:32 AM | Comments (2)
Post contains 10 words, total size 1 kb.

Thanks to The New Editor.

The funny wedding video is kind of a craze. Some good ones below the fold. more...

Posted by: Ace at 07:30 PM | Comments (8)
Post contains 41 words, total size 2 kb.

It’s a couple of days old and I don’t remember anyone doing a post about it (unless it was in the comments), but let’s pause for a moment and pay our respects to “Gidget” the Taco Bell Chihuahua who passed away at the ripe old age of 15 (which is roughly equal to 15 in dog years). Wait a second….Gidget? WTF?

This is just the latest blow to a nation already reeling from the recent passing of other icons such as Michael Cronkite and Walter Jackson, but this may be the cruelest cut given the important role that the Value Menu has played in our lives over the years since we bought our first rolling papers. Why is it that only the good die young? You can read more about the storied life and times of “Gidget” (again, WTF?) at the Wikipedia entry.

(Somewhere in the dank, musty archives of AoSHQ I have a post extolling the virtues of the enchirito. If I can, IÂ’ll find and link it as a proper tribute.)

However, not all animals have the sort of grace that our Chihuahuan friend did, as youÂ’ll see below the fold.
more...

Posted by: Open Blog at 06:25 PM | Comments (5)
Post contains 473 words, total size 4 kb.

I mean, look at how she's dressed, your honor.

Joe Namath just emailed to say he's had a change of plans.

One of America's leading female sports writers has insinuated that Erin Andrews may have been partially responsible for cultivating a "frat house" fan base that led to a Peeping Tom video taping her in the nude and posting the video on the Internet.

...

"If you trade off your sex appeal, if you trade off your looks, eventually you're going to lose those," USA Today sports columnist Christine Brennan said Wednesday on the sports radio show 850 "The Buzz." "She doesn't deserve what happened to her, but part of the shtick, seems to me, is being a little bit out there in a way that then are you encouraging the complete nutcase to drill a hole in a room.

"Erin [Andrews] did not deserve this. I want to make that crystal clear. But she's got to be smarter and better," she said.

Click here to go to the Buzz's Web site and hear the full interview.

She later tweeted that "women sports journalists need to be smart and not play to the frat house."

This story demonstrates three things:

1) Women really do despise each other.

2) Women's natural inclination to despise each other and spit venom at each other is exacerbated by the cult of Feminism, a cult which suggests that every woman in the world is not only qualified but obligated to comment critically on the choices of every other woman in the universe. Relentlessly. Because bitching out another woman is promoting the Feminist ideal. See, you're not just being jealous and catty. You're, um, working to create a better world for our daughters. Or something.

Give anyone a philosophy which justifies and promotes his or her natural (bad) inclinations and you're asking for a fistfull of dysfunction.

3) Erin Andrews is really dishy.

Pic thanks to Jones.

Posted by: Ace at 05:36 PM | Comments (7)
Post contains 354 words, total size 2 kb.

Idiot.

Bear in mind she has insisted she has the votes to pass a bill -- any bill; the details matter not to her -- despite the Blue Dogs telling her she doesn't.

Math is hard.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Thursday that the House can go home for its August recess without passing a massive overhaul.

And then she successfully defined what August is:

“I’m not afraid of August,” Pelosi said. “It’s a month.”

...thereby qualifying for Celebrity Jeopardy.

Here's a surprise: reliable partisan liberal Susan Estrich is... against ObamaCare.

The president is "not familiar" with the bill. No one can explain how it will work yet, as Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Md., told a contentious town meeting. There are various plans, and negotiations are still in the early stages.
But whatever it is, we should be for it.

Am I missing something?

We're only talking about our health and our kids' health, the things my mother, may she rest in peace, told me a thousand times are the only things worth caring about. If you have your health, you have everything. And if you don't, what in the world matters more than the best health care in the world, which is found right here?

...

I'm not willing to give up my doctor or the time I spend with him. I'm not willing to give up the relationship we have. My children, now grown, feel as comfortable calling him as I do because he has taken the time with them over the years to build that trust.

And no matter how high the final price tag on those tests have been, never once have I said, "If I'd known how much they would cost, I wouldn't have had them done." No, I'm grateful for my insurance, grateful for the technology, grateful for good care.

So am I for health care reform? Do I support the House bill, whatever it is, or the Obama plan, which may or may not be the same thing?

Not yet. Not until I know what it is. Not until someone convinces me that whatever it is will do more good than harm, both for the country and for my family. Mother knows best.

When you've lost Susan Estrich, you've lost a one-block portion of Cambridge, south of the co-op art-house theater, east of the Harvard Crew boathouse.

By the way, even MSNBC's blogger took a negative view of the press conference.

Well... sort of. This is MSNBC, remember. They can't really criticize Obama, after all.

MSNBC’s First Read disagreed. In their morning assessment of the presser, NBC’s political team asked, “Honest question: Is there a point when the president knows too much about an issue? He got into the weeds a number of times on a number of different aspects of health care, which is what his diehard supporters love, but might not grab the attention of the average viewer.”

Ah. The deadly he's-just-too-smart-and-well-informed critique. Well-played, MSNBC. Sounds nicer than "he was evasive to the point of actionable fraud."

I didn't get the sense he knew what he was talking about at all. When a Democrat is talking, the MSM deems "specific goals" to be the equivalent of "specific plans for achieving those goals."

Yes, Obama was specific - "Let me be clear," as Allah is ragging him -- on all his alleged goals. It will be deficit neutral. It will allow you to chose your doctor. Etc., etc., etc.

Those aren't "specifics," anymore than if I say "I specifically wish to write a best-selling novel" that I've offered a plausible plan for accomplishing this.

A goal is not a plan. The MSM rightly notes this when Republicans offer such "specifics," but claim that Democrats offering them are really getting into the nuts and bolts of legislation.

Posted by: Ace at 04:38 PM | Comments (2)
Post contains 694 words, total size 4 kb.

Two mayors (Hoboken and Secaucus) arrested, plus the former mayor of Bayonne, plus 27 others, for money laundering and corruption. All but a couple are, of course, Democrats.

The media would like to bury this, as usual, but the Jersey Democrats have announced they won't be ignored -- and tossed in the illegal trafficking of a human liver just to make the MSM's job more difficult.

But I think they're up to it.

By the way, the arrests come thanks to a two-year investigation launched by the front-running Republican candidate for governor, Chris Christie.

UPDATE (P.A.)
Reuters is using the term "culture of corruption" as subhead in this story. The FBI SAC said "It has become ingrained in New Jersey's political culture," and its "a cancer."

Update [ace]: Must have been hard for the AP to admit this:

Among the 44 people arrested were the mayors of Hoboken, Ridgefield and Secaucus, Jersey City's deputy mayor, and two state assemblymen. A member of the governor's cabinet resigned after agents searched his home, though he was not arrested. All but one of the officeholders are Democrats.

I'll bet anything pretty much all of the non-officeholders are Democratic functionaries/bagmen, too.

Thanks to AHFF Geoff.

...

Posted by: Ace at 02:23 PM | Comments (1)
Post contains 244 words, total size 2 kb.

You remember the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, don't you? It's the plane that is so awesome and just around the corner that we can stop "wasting" money on that "outdated' F-22 Raptor.

Except...it's not going to be ready on time and no, the Obama administration didn't want to talk about that before killing the Raptor this week.

Now, senators and aides are lamenting that the Pentagon oversight panelÂ’s more pessimistic view on the F-35 program was not publicly released during the F-22 debate and are calling for more open disclosure of the problems with the development of the F-35.

The PentagonÂ’s Joint Estimate Team (JET), which was established to independently oversee the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program, is at odds with the fighterÂ’s Joint Program Office, the aides said. The oversight panelÂ’s calculations determined that the fighter wonÂ’t be able to move out of the development phase and into full production mode until 2016, rather than 2014 as the program office has said. ThatÂ’s assuming there are no further problems with the program, which has already faced cost overruns and schedule delays. The Government Accountability Office said the delay could cost as much as $7.4 billion.

The most transparent administration ever strikes again. But hey, everyone will be invited to the roll out of the JSF in a few years so that about covers it, right?

Until then, we can just stick some more duct tape and chewing gum on those F-15's and everything will be fine.

Via Michael Goldfarb

Posted by: DrewM at 01:02 PM | Comments (7)
Post contains 268 words, total size 2 kb.