« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

James Clyburn (D, SC-06) dangles potential public option carrot.

By: Moe Lane (Diary)  |  October 15th, 2010 at 11:58 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

(Via AoSHQ) Rep. James Clyburn went out there today to promise that, if only Democratic voters come out and keep their feckless legislators in control of Congress, said feckless legislators will maybe get a public option going next year. Although one suspects that if Democratic voters just elect Clyburn he’ll hold up under the strain somehow.

“Reelect me, keep Democrats on the field. And when we come back next year, maybe we will get to the public option,” Majority Whip James Clyburn (S.C.) said during an appearance on the Tom Joyner Morning Show.

“Maybe.” Some thoughts on this:

  • The current ratio of 255/178 (2 vacancies) in the House, 59/41 in the Senate is apparently not enough to ensure a public option: but nobody – and I mean nobody - is even trying to pretend that the Democrats are going to gain seats this year in Congress.  So one wonders how they expect to do that.  Actually, one does not wonder: even with the ‘maybe’ weasel-word Rep. Clyburn is lying through his teeth.
  • Drawing on that: if you are a Democrat who took this promise seriously… well, you will not actually deserve every drop of spiritual pain that will be dripped on your back on Election Night, but only because it’s not nice to torment the cognitively impaired.
  • SC-06 is generally considered to be a safe Democratic district*, and one that Rep. Clyburn typically wins with large percentages of the vote.  Since when did you start worrying personally about being re-elected, Congressman?

Moe Lane (crosspost)

*Jim Pratt is the challenger this year.  He has giraffes.

Tags: , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • http://pocketchangeproductions.net/ anotherindyfilmguy

    I suspect the voters hearing that have set their alert levels to beige…

  • http://pocketchangeproductions.net/ anotherindyfilmguy

    if you have a (whatever) addict away from the (whatever) they’ll play nice to get back to being able to have their (whatever)…

    In this case the addiction is absolute runaway abuse of power that is the addiction and the volks nominally, and hopefully temporarily, need a nice long rest from it…

  • http://www.laborunionreport.com LaborUnionReport

    …but more of a stick.

  • cordpt

    That’s a great idea, campaigning on the promise of the public option. Republicans on swing districts should follow the example of Clyburn and send him a thank you note.

  • Adjoran

    Clyburn is dumb as a rock. He couldn’t hold a job as a schoolteacher after desegregation, but a Democratic Governor created a position of “Civil Rights Commissioner” after the S.C. State shootings to appease blacks. Clyburn fit the bill perfectly – he was too dumb to actually DO anything, but very black and perfectly willing to draw state pay.

    Fast forward a couple of decades: tired of being shut out of SC government forever, the newly resurgent state GOP strikes a deal with black Democrats in the legislature for the redistricting after the 1990 census. In exchange for one “safe” black seat in Congress, the blacks voted for the GOP plan, which guaranteed a Republican majority in the delegation (they actually thought it would soon be 5-1, but Spratt proved remarkably adept at keeping his seat – until this year, at least).

    Again, Clyburn fit the bill, and proceeded to find good jobs for his unemployable friends and family, including daughter Mignon who now sits on the FCC and threatens free speech. His net worth keeps growing, despite the high cost of maintaining a house near DC as well as in SC, and no apparent investments, etc. But he can’t be beat in his 65% black district – even if he turned out to be the “real killer” in the OJ case.

    With that built-in increasing seniority, he keeps rising in the leadership, embarrassing his state and his party every time he opens his fool mouth.

    ~~~~~~~~~~

    Pratt will get my vote – yes, I was one of those sacrificed to create the “minority district” (hint: only one “minority” is a 2/3 majority in it) – but he has less chance than Dennis does against Pelosi. Unfortunately, we just can’t win ‘em all.

  • http://www.spartanburgteaparty.org karenmartin

    http://www.powerhousefive.com/pledge

    this is a campaign where you hand address and put stamps on envelopes, then you download an “October surprise” letter that will be available mid October and stuff and mail.

    More personal than a “mailing piece”, less intrusive and annoying than a GOTV phone call. Really a great idea transitioned to a campaign. Easy to pull off, you make a DIRECT contribution by investing in the envelopes and stamps yourself, plus a small time investment to address and stuff.

    I got my 50 envelopes addressed and ready to mail once the letter is available !

  • cordpt

    That’s a very unappreciated campaign tool. Glad to see Jim Pratt taking advantage of it even if it’s an uphill battle for him. Thanks for the heads-up.

  • adakinvalorem

    The current dialog over the expiration of the Bush Tax Cuts is really missing a vital point in this argument: ?Who?s Money Is It??

    While Obama/Pelosi/Clyburn are wrestling with the GOP over who gets what tax cuts, I wanted to point out a vital constitutional point that is being overlooked by both sides in the debate. This is a point that is easily rectified with by existing reform bill that currently has over five dozen congressional cosponsors.

    By definition, if someone has a claim of ownership of your labor, your time and your livelihood it is a defacto claim of ownership on you? I submit that forcible taxation on your personal income makes you a partial slave to the ?master? that enforces that claim, via fear and coercion.

    If you are legally bound to surrender a certain percentage of your income (the fruits of your labors) over to federal, state and local governments then, from a legal standpoint, you are only able to claim a ?partial ownership? of your person and your labor. The fundamental point here is not whether ownership is ceded through voluntary contract, but rather, if ownership of your labor is ceded through fear and coercion.

    Without a voluntary signed contract with the government, promising them payment of part of your income, whatever that portion of your earnings they demand represents the percentage of your income that was taken via the imposition of fear and the threat of force. If that claim is 40% of your earnings, then you only can claim 60% ownership of your Labor. In effect, you are a slave to the state from January through May, given today?s draconian tax rates.

    If one wants to stand on the U.S. Constitution as one?s foundation, then the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution should be used as basis for the argument against any direct tax on the labor of a ?citizen?. Either you are a ?citizen? or you are ?subject? of the state. The 13th Amendment * says; ?Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude?, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.?

    The 13th Amendment makes it clear that we cannot constitutionally be forced into involuntary servitude. As such, I maintain that a human being has an inalienable right to own 100 % of his Person and 100% of his Labor, including control over how the fruits of his actions are dispensed.

    Of the numerous macro-economic benefits of the FairTax (HR-25) has over the current tax code, is abolishing the last vestige of slavery via coerced taxation. This is the ultimate justification for passage of this needed reform. The FairTax provides a revenue collection system that upholds the Constitution while allowing all income classes the opportunity to choose what is best for their individual needs and desires while funding the needs of their government.

  • adakinvalorem

    Sorry, I forgot to add that Pratt has indicated that he would be a cosponsor of HR-25, the FairTax bill. Clyburn obviously is in favor of maintaining our current system of enslaving the population.

  • mathmatters

    Im a former Fairtax Cult member.

    I thought it was fantastic, well researched, simple, fair.

    Sadly I found out that the Fairtax fine print shows a DRASTICALLY different concept.

    The fine print — and I will show it to you — shows Fairtax is a massive new tax on city and state governments. That’s right, besides the “people tax” Fairtax tells you about, there is a hidden massive tax on city governments and state governments.

    Did you know that?

    Here is one example of their fine print — ?Under our plan, all city and state goverments will pay to the federal government a tax on all their spending ? on all their purchases, and on anything they pay for, including labor (wages).?

    Fairtax -The Truth. Answering the Critics. Page 138.

    All city and state governments, must pay the federal government massive taxes?? Surely that was a mistake, a typo, bad editing, right? Surely that was taken out of context!! No way would they have a massive new tax, which is barely mentioned.

    Oh- well — yes, that is exactly their plan. In emails with Fairtax spokesman they assured me, yes, of COURSE they will tax city and states. Why not?

    But don’t you think city and states should be told about this before you try to pass the bill?

    Fairtax spokesman assured me the mayors and governors “will be happy” to pay these taxes, because they will “save so much more”.

    Okay fine, but still, shouldn’t you TELL the mayors and governors about this?

    There is no apparent research by Fairtax to justify a massive tax on city and state governments. No list of states, and what each would likely pay. No list of cities, and what each would like pay.

    When I asked why Fairtax did not research what the cities and states will pay, they told me it was obvious. Twenty three percent.

    http://fairtaxhoax.blogspot.com

    December 19, 2010 3:58 PM