He busted his butt on this and now Reid’s going to tell him “Thanks for nothing. We’re tossing yours in the trash.”

The GOP had better be ready to shut down the Senate completely if this is true.

let’s see how the blue dogs bark.

Call me crazy but I think this would be great news. If HR 3200 passes about 70 rats would automatically lose their seats and 50 more would be in jeopardy. I can’t imagine they would be that stupid. While they definitely want socialized health care, they want to stay in power even more.

ie can we use the nuke option to get rid of it?

I can almost hear them now: “See, (insert noodle spined centrist name here), we bought off the seniors with the promise of that check for $250, and now we’ll pass 3200 without you if you don’t line up behind the Baucus bill.”

I believe the good voters of this country will “go nuclear” in the upcoming elections, yet to undo all of this may be impossible. I fear for my own health care and that which I worked hard for over 36 years. I believe our government no longer abides by the “will of the people”. I am saddened by our politicians arrogance, sense of entitlement and privilege, and sheer disrespect for the working class.

All the Blue Dogs / swing districts vote against it, the safe libs vote for it (and get all the glory and no heat), the effects are not felt until 2012, and the Republican rebound in 2010 is tempered as we will probably be in the middle of WW III anyway.

Perfect.

about the future of our country. Democrats delenda est.

the term “going nuclear” is reserved for breaking a filibuster by majority rule and not for using the reconciliation process.

From wikipedia

In U.S. politics, the “nuclear option” is an attempt by a majority of the United States Senate to end a filibuster by majority vote, as opposed to 60 senators voting to end a filibuster. Although it is not provided for in the formal rules of the Senate, the procedure is the subject of a 1957 parliamentary opinion and has been used on several occasions since. The term was coined by Senator Trent Lott (Republican of Mississippi) in 2005.

The maneuver was brought to prominence in 2005 when then-Majority Leader Bill Frist (Republican of Tennessee) threatened its use to end Democratic-led filibusters of judicial nominees submitted by President George W. Bush. In response to this threat, Democrats threatened to shut down the Senate and prevent consideration of all routine and legislative Senate business. The ultimate confrontation was prevented by the Gang of 14, a group of seven Democratic and seven Republican Senators, all of whom agreed to oppose the nuclear option and oppose filibusters of judicial nominees, except in extraordinary circumstances.

Now the Republican distraction is over, the Dems have to confront the reality that they are not united. They probably dont have sixty with Snowe and will probably lose her and a few others after the bill is tweaked.

Republicans should stay strong with their current coalition, but they now have a new group to covet: the “good government” and “respect the process” crowd. They should make this an affront to the whole institution of the Senate and remind people that Republicans never did this when they had a majority. There are some Dems who are looking for a reason to bail, Give it to them. Their are other Dems who really cherish the process like Byrd, what does he think?

If they still have fifty votes, I think they should make life hell for the leadership. Moderate Dems are just worrid about Cap and Trade, Card Check and Amnesty. If we can bloody and bruise them up over this, it could exhaust political capital and cripple the 2009 legislative session.

“They should make this an affront to the whole institution of the Senate and remind people that Republicans never did this when they had a majority.”

– The 2001 Bush Tax Cuts [HR 1836, 3/26/01]
– The 2003 Bush Tax Cuts [HR 2, 3/23/03]

The second one passed 50/50 with the Vice President making the tie-breaking vote. If minority rights warrant such deference (and I agree with many here that they do), it would be wise to remember how your party comported itself the last time it held a majority. Power corrupts, and neither political party can long resist the temptation to trample the minority in order to achieve their agenda.

Re: reconciliation:

“Elements in bills that are not strictly designed to have a budget impact can be removed on points of order, leaving comprehensive bills less than comprehensive. And the time frame for reconciliation bills is at most ten years, after which they expire unless explicitly renewed (the problem, of course, with the Bush tax cuts.)”

I read this article from the American Spectator by Codeville. It goes into great detail about the history of the type of government our “leaders” have been designing to replace the Constitution. It is not the first time it has been tried (Italy, Argentina, Mexico), and may not be the last, but it is what we see today and goes a long way to explain why we are witnessing “water running up hill.”

http://truthandcommonsense.com/2009/10/15/i-hate-being-right-especially-on-this-american-spectator-outlines-our-future-not-good/

That will allow the Blue Dogs to cover themselves with No Votes won’t it? They’ll be able to go back to their constituents and say they voted No. That will suck.
Also if the Republican Senators and Congressmen “Go Quietly into that Dark Night” over this it could well spend the end of the party as we know it. You may very well see a huge splintering off the party thus ensuring Democrat rule for a long time.
And, IMO, if Obama Care passes with three years or more left until we can hope to get a majority again, it will be near impossible to put and end to such a huge benefit. Imagine all those millions who would been switched to the government plan would then need to find what will probably be unavailable medical coverage. I really am having dark thoughts about all of this.

Intro to Federalist Papers; section 5;
paragraph 4.
“…dangerous ambition more often lurks behind the specious mask of zeal for the rights of the people than under the zeal for a firm and efficient government.”

I’m an embarrassment to Barack!

I only scored 17 on the Obama Test

Once the dems lose power - and they will.

Payback will be a bitch. Conservatives will dismantle the statist federal government - one law at a time. I am fifty but I would be willing to forgo all of the Social Security I have built up so my kids will have a future.

We are on the brink. If the socialists push on then we will have to reform and refound a new America without them.

…the Blue Dogs some cover by possibly being able to vote “NO” in
+R leaning districts. Now will that “possible” scenario outweigh the potential for a huge swing to the right by the voting public? I don’t know. But I do know that only needing a simple majority to cheat it through may work in the favor of some moderate democrats who would likely be voted out with a “YES” vote.
The Fiscal Insanity, The Job Destroying Legislation’s, The Jobless Faux-Recovery, Cap & Tax, The Alleged Stimulus, and The Open & Blatant Corruption by Top Democrat Leaders in Washington should be shouted…hell screamed daily and put on record and brought up for review, charges etc etc etc. We need a loud, articulate, easy to understand voice to bring our views to light and cut through the BS.

Intro to Federalist Papers; section 5;
paragraph 4.
“…dangerous ambition more often lurks behind the specious mask of zeal for the rights of the people than under the zeal for a firm and efficient government.”

I’m an embarrassment to Barack!

I only scored 17 on the Obama Test

http://www.npr.org/s.php?sId=4566818&m=1

And that was regarding filibusters of nominees, not trillion-dollar bills.