MSNBC's Chris Matthews (the conscience of Pennsylvania) tried to browbeat our own Darcy Burner on the teevee Monday. She didn't take the bait. Matthews is a Billo Reilly wannabe who interrupts and sternly filibusters his guests- when, that is- he's not fellating them.
Darcy, (now the Executive Director of ProgressiveCongress.org, a non-profit lobbying group) kept her cool, making Matthews look evermore bilious and past his pull-date. (HT to KO!)
I saw that but it didn't look like Matthews was bullying her, rather Darcy claimed that liberals should be asking for more, and Matthews asked her how that was going to happen and she balked... for a long time, and then she said because... Lieberman of all people would pull through, which frankly is the dumbest answer anyone could have given. She'd be better off saying a talking chipmunk relayed a message. We all know the bill will barely pass as it is and she looks like kind of a jerk thinking they can push it to the left. Several Senators have said if it moves even an inch they will withdraw their vote. Matthews was simply losing respect for her in real time in a very visible way, and for good cause.
It's pretty clear that Darcy Burner is trying to win popularity with liberal Democrats by saying things they would like to hear said out loud, much like Obama did before he ran for president. Chris Matthews isn't the best show for practicing your propaganda material. Now had she gone on Ed Schultz show, they probably would have locked in a passionate gaze and made love right there.
Heres the video
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | December 21, 2009 at 11:50 PM
Amazing how 2 local cops get shot and KIRO stays with a crappy taped syndicated Alan Hunt show. How can they keep promoting that 'live and local' bullshit.
Posted by: Jim Sweets | December 22, 2009 at 12:56 AM
Andrew is very correct that the Senate is holding the House hostage. The Darcy types can hope to change the bill but it is unlikely to occur. If the bill changes then this bill can go up in smoke.
Interesting as the abortion language per the Congress Dem Right To Lifers led by Stupak have already denounced the Senate version of Ben Nelson abortion language compromise as unacceptable.
So we will see if that is enough to scuttle the bill. Only 2 yeah votes would change the outcome of the House.
Howard Dean walked back his earlier comments but that is in large part because he wants to be at the table in final negotiations. We'll see how he feels afterwards.
At the end of the day, if this bill fails it will split the Dems and highly energize the right in an off year election. So the Dems are in a precarious position.
You have the Chris Matthews wing and the Darcy Burner Wing.
Posted by: Puget Sound | December 22, 2009 at 04:18 AM
Chris Matthews is one rude SOB. Regardless of what the content of the so-called "interview" he is just plain rude.
Posted by: Ray | December 22, 2009 at 04:51 AM
I am not a fan of Chris Matthews, but at the same time it is hard to have much sympathy for a two time loser like Darcy Burner who has no Economics degree. Her desperate attempt to pander to the HATE BUSH FIRST crowd was pathetic. Her only personal achievement was to rise to middle management at the big software empire. Not very impressive at all, really.
Posted by: Bruno | December 22, 2009 at 06:39 AM
Oh, my, I just looked at the video clip! What is that stupid looking pseudo military outfit she is wearing? Did she steal it from Michael Jackson's wardrobe? Reminds me of when she tried to run on the military record of the MALE members of her family. DISGUSTING!!!!
Posted by: Bruno | December 22, 2009 at 06:43 AM
You are right Bruno, she is probably one of the most apparent phonies in the political world today. There is a poster on this blog that's probably her soul-sister.
Posted by: Steed | December 22, 2009 at 06:52 AM
"Steed"? Why not "Stud"?
LMAO
Posted by: sparky | December 22, 2009 at 09:40 AM
And lo and behold the squeaky wheel speaks.
Posted by: Steed | December 22, 2009 at 09:43 AM
Conflicting information now in the news...The News Tribune has an update that says the shooter initially cooperated with the officers but then changed his mind and shot them. Older news reports are still saying it was an ambush.
The officer at Harborview is still in very critical condition in the ICU.
Posted by: sparky | December 22, 2009 at 10:56 AM
I was just going to post how hot I thought she looked in the red jacket. I think if Bruno had seen his sweetheart Sarah Palin in that jacket he would have gotten aroused, but a much smarter Darcy is dissed. And also Bruno, when you get a degree from Harvard with a minor in Economics I think you would have more credibly in criticizing her education.l
Posted by: David Tatelman | December 22, 2009 at 11:59 AM
I don't doubt her intelect, I think she was trying to play the part of the liberal bomb thrower in order to score points with liberal activists and Chris Matthews called her out. She might have a degree from Harvard, but Chris Matthews is not an idiot. She gambled that he was and lost.
Her overall strategy is otherwise good. It worked for Obama; he was a rockstar on liberal blogs and had true grassroot support prior to his nomination. If Matthews will have her back after than embarrassing display she'd definately agree to go on but she will probably be sure not to say anything quite so stupid the next time around.
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | December 22, 2009 at 12:24 PM
Why is Darcy Burner at all relevant? She's never held office and routinely comes off as a complete idiot. I guess with the Democrat's "big tent" everyone gets to be a star even if it means most will come off looking like clowns.
Posted by: Santa | December 22, 2009 at 03:59 PM
Chill out Santa! Great Christmas music to have in the background!
It will soothe your nerves, thanks to KING FM
Posted by: sparky | December 22, 2009 at 04:45 PM
You can always tell when the teachers are off work, they imbibe earlier in the day.
Posted by: DoriPhilosophy | December 22, 2009 at 05:19 PM
Oh Sparkles and other self styled Progressives..
Be proud of this Health Care Bill. Look at what those in the front line have to say about this monstrosity.
The Nurses’ Union’s co-president, Karen Higgins:
"Sadly," adds Higgins, "we have ended up with legislation that fails to meet the test of true health-care reform, guaranteeing high quality, cost effective care for all Americans, and instead are further locking into place a system that entrenches the choke-hold of the profit-making insurance giants on our health. If this bill passes, the industry will become more powerful and could be beyond the reach of reform for generations."
Posted by: Puget Sound | December 22, 2009 at 05:32 PM
Darcy burner is a faker and a liar. She is too far left and stupid even for the 8th district. She couldn't even beat that clown Reichert.
Posted by: Van Ronk | December 22, 2009 at 05:34 PM
For those with a more fiscal point of view a nice Editorial from the Wall Street Journal that sums it up nicely with facts and reason:
A Pill of a Bill
Posted by: Puget Sound | December 22, 2009 at 05:36 PM
America loses but that doesn't matter PS, you see THEY get to say they won. Omni-important to the liberal progressive movement. America be damned. Rome is beginning to ignite.
Posted by: DoriPhilosophy | December 22, 2009 at 05:36 PM
Yep, but for some reason I think that this will collapse under its own weight.
They have yet to finish this yet and it is just has way too much crap to fly.
Posted by: Puget Sound | December 22, 2009 at 05:39 PM
So much whining so close to Christmas...too bad you can't take a break and enjoy the season and reflect on all for which you have to be grateful.
As for me, I'm making cookies!
BEST EVER OATMEAL, COCONUT, CHOCOLATE CHIP COOKIE
1 1/4 c. oatmeal
1 c. flour
1/2 c. sugar
1/2 c. brown sugar
1 c. flake coconut
1/2 c. chocolate chips
1/2 tsp. baking soda
1/2 tsp. salt
1/2 c. oil
1 egg
1 tsp. vanilla
Mix all dry ingredients together in bowl. Then add oil, egg, and vanilla. Mix thoroughly. Drop by teaspoon onto greased cookie sheet. Bake at 325 degrees for 12 to 15 minutes. Let cool slightly before removing from pan.
Another nice treat is to pop about 5-6 bags of popcorn, pour into a very large bowl. Melt a package of white Almond Bark and pour over the popcorn and mix completely. You can also add salted almonds. Spread it out on waxed paper or a silpat and let it cool. Break into smaller pieces and store in a sealed container. Butterscotch almond bark is really good for this too.
Bla'M, what's your favorite treat for the holidays?
Posted by: sparky | December 22, 2009 at 05:41 PM
OMG, she's apparently soused. Lonliness sets in through an alcohol facade and the Season is recognized by a fading memory that, sadly does not recognize substance over symbolism. But, she grabs at any semblance of what seemed so touching years ago. 'Tis sad, my friends, 'tis sad to be on the edge of such lonliness.
Posted by: DoriPhilosophy | December 22, 2009 at 05:50 PM
here have a cookie whilst we rip you off...
Posted by: Puget Sound | December 22, 2009 at 05:56 PM
How can KIRO stay with Allan Hunt you ask???? Dori was still in bed.
Posted by: Rich | December 22, 2009 at 06:12 PM
Chris Matthews is a pain in the ass, no matter if he interviews an airhead like Darcy whats-her-head or whoever.
Right now, I am more focused on the 60 soulless shitheads in the Senate (2 from WA) to pass subjugation legislation. Fu*K you very much...
The Liberal Progressive movement is designed to take the rest of us down with them. Sparkles and other fellow Lib Progs - relish this hollow victory, then get ready to assume the bend over position for years to come.
Posted by: KS | December 22, 2009 at 06:51 PM
Everyone who disagrees with you is a soulless shithead? You're a life sized joke.
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | December 22, 2009 at 08:17 PM
"On January 17, 1935, President Franklin D. Roosevelt sent a message to Congress asking for "social security" legislation. .....The resulting Senate and House bills encountered opposition from those who considered it a governmental invasion of the private sphere and from those who sought exemption from payroll taxes for employers who adopted government-approved pension plans."
(www.ourdocuments.gov)
"For conservatives, the New Deal represented an intolerable and dangerous expansion of federal authority. When the administration placed the authority of the federal government behind the right to unionize, it predictably outraged business leaders who took for granted that the state would defend the interests of capitalists, not workers. The subsequent success of the Democratic Party in winning the support of union members confirmed the worst fears of business leaders. When the administration provided public assistance to black southerners and when Eleanor Roosevelt, the president’s wife, spoke out against racial discrimination, many white southerners concluded that the New Deal posed a threat to states’ rights and to white supremacy." (www.dlt.ncssm.edu)
In 1965, when the likes of Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan George H.W. Bush and Bob Dole were railing against the socialized medicine, the end of personal freedom, destruction of the doctor-patient relationship and the assorted other evils Medicare was sure to bring, 13 Republican senators and 70 GOP House members, didn’t buy the lies and voted for Medicare. (www.4ibew.com)
You guys fit right in!
Posted by: sparky | December 22, 2009 at 08:22 PM
Authentic A-hole - I see that you are a useful idiot. Time for you to bend over now and take one for the team.
Sparkles, Why don't you move to the UK or Canada for 3 years, then come back and see how you like their Health Care - I bet you don't have a clue what you support - the trademark of a useful idiot.
Posted by: KS | December 22, 2009 at 09:08 PM
"i'm afraid. . . . I'm so afraid. . . I'm afraid. . ."
Roger Wicker on CSpan. God, is there anything you republicans are NOT afraid of?
Posted by: joanie | December 22, 2009 at 09:41 PM
Democrats = the sneaky party
Republicans = the stupid party
this could explain why our country is in a heap of trouble.
Posted by: KS | December 22, 2009 at 09:44 PM
Is it sneaky or stupid to turn the lights out on Dems? Is it sneaky or stupid to refuse to let Dems have a place to meet? Is it sneaky or stupid to hold open 15-minute votes for three hours?
Posted by: joanie | December 22, 2009 at 09:58 PM
KS, I have relatives in Canada and close friends in the UK. I am very aware of what they have for health care and they love it and would not give it up for anything. I also have a close friend in Australia who feels the same way. My cousin spends 4 months a year in Brazil and is very pleased with the treatment he gets if and when he has to go to a clinic. A friend of my mom got sick in Italy and was very well taken care of.
You are just mired in a Republican mindset, KS. You cannot fathom that there are people around the world who are very very happy with their lives. If we are the "greatest nation" in the world, it does not make sense that at the very least, we dont have health care similar to the countries that are fast gaining ground on us. Even if some of you have to go kicking and screaming into the future.
Posted by: sparky | December 22, 2009 at 10:27 PM
Sparky
Nice for you to reach back with some historical references but it is a false premise to say because some people opposed some historic bill before we must have an equally historic bill now.
We need medical reform. But not like this. The Huffington Post has it best:
"Progressives who oppose this bill are not being obstructionist, making the perfect the enemy of the good, or sabotaging their president. They are taking the position that history has shown us that opportunities to reform health care do not come along very often, making it essential to get it right when those opportunities arise. Pushing this bill through because the White House needs a victory before the New Year is a much bigger mistake, which will likely backfire for the president, but more significantly potentially make our health care system worse."
Posted by: Puget Sound | December 23, 2009 at 03:54 AM
Uh huh...except I don't look to Huffington Post or any other media to tell me what I think.
Posted by: sparky | December 23, 2009 at 08:20 AM
Well, we now know part of what somebody who writes for Huffington thinks. So what?
And Sparky, I understood the point you were making. Maybe sputs should reread it.
Posted by: joanie | December 23, 2009 at 11:35 AM
"You are just mired in a Republican mindset, KS. You cannot fathom that there are people around the world who are very very happy with their lives. If we are the "greatest nation" in the world, it does not make sense that at the very least, we dont have health care similar to the countries that are fast gaining ground on us. Even if some of you have to go kicking and screaming into the future."
I am convinced that we must be living in parallel universes if you think that the UK and Canada are fast gaining ground on us. If you think so, have you contimplated a move ? More of us don't want a Government controlled health care system than do - get that straight.
Mired in a Republican mindset ? That would be wrong - try capitalist or even libertarian mindset. I'll plead guilty to that. I disdain totalitarian control and the a huge centralized government regulating our lifes to the max, but evidently you have no problem with that. All about social justice ? NIMBY.
I want some of you go kicking and screaming into the future and by the latest polls - we outnumber you by at least 60-40. This fight is a long way from over for this unconstitutional monstrosity. Seven State AG's including AG McKenna are readying the case for the people they represent for the SCOTUS.
Posted by: KS | December 23, 2009 at 12:45 PM
"Because never in the history of the Senate has a Senator gotten a bit of pork for his own state, like "37 earmarks..., including $950,000 for 'a convention center in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina,'" in stimulus legislation that he then opposed, eh Lindsey?
Is it a crappy deal for 49 states that they don't also get the funding break Nebraska got? You bet it is. And the Senate could make all 49 of those states, many of them struggling much more than Nebraska, and the Senators that represent them happy by extending the same deal to them. That's something that Graham and DeMint could work on, if they really cared."
Posted by: sparky | December 23, 2009 at 01:19 PM
More of us don't want a Government controlled health care system than do - get that straight.
That is provably untrue:
More than three out of every four Americans feel it is important to have a "choice" between a government-run health care insurance option and private coverage, according to a public opinion poll released on Thursday.
A new study by SurveyUSA puts support for a public option at a robust 77 percent,,,
and
(CBS)Poll: Support for Public Option Grows
Now, show us the polls that disfavor the public option which is what Sparky and every other liberal on this blog wants at the very least.
S-P Polls? but then you really don't want to know, do you?
Now, show me all those polls, klueless.
Posted by: joanie | December 23, 2009 at 02:09 PM
Rereading your last post, you are so emotional over this, you're not even thinking straight.
I realize you're reading emotion-igniting Fox News again. Why don't you get a variety of opinions before going off the deep end.
There are various parts of the bill that could result in litigation. That's always the case. However, thinking straight and moving towards fixes is standard procedure for any bill.
I guess the pen is mightier than the sword - or the brain - in this case.
I'm happy to post his source: Health Care Bill Could Face String of Legal Challenges for anyone else who wants to get Faux-emotional and ureasonable.
I think perhaps those who watch Fixed News should want socialized medicine. They are clearly going to need it for their stress-related early-onset heart attacks.
If truth be told. people on the left were already questioning the universal mandate yesterday. Ezra Klein of the WA Post and on Reagan yesterday questioned it. So Fixed News is a little late. Also, the medicaid help might have some teeth but the Feds already pitch in a percentage to every state for every dollar so that might be okay. Giving one state more? That happens all the time. Just check out some of the earmarks given the red states under Bush.
You know, klueless, you'd be a lot smarter if you listened to centrist radio, tv, newspapers and blogs. And a lot more current in your ideas as well.
Posted by: joanie | December 23, 2009 at 02:32 PM
"Uh huh...except I don't look to Huffington Post or any other media to tell me what I think.
Posted by: sparky | December 23, 2009 at 08:20 AM"
sparkles confuses hearing a different view point with being told 'how to think.'
if that is your mindset, no wonder you're so unwilling to consider the opinion of others or facts that could cause some mature reflection.
Posted by: Puget Sound | December 23, 2009 at 05:27 PM
earmarks are a fact of life (except for John McCain who steadfastly refuses 'em) but when you agree to do the 'full nelson' on the rest of the country then it gets beyond the pale.
enjoy the price you'll pay in the upcoming election.
today in the senate, an interesting event happened:
senator demint put up to a vote an ammendment to ban earmarks for votes.
it LOST 47 to 53. 53 dems voted against the bill to ban trading votes for pork. can't wait to see that in the upcoming election.
"“The American people are disgusted by the earmarks, kickbacks, and backroom deals that have been used to buy votes for this health care takeover,” said Senator DeMint. “We had a chance today to put an end to this practice but Senate Democrats voted for business as usual. 53 Democrats just gave their personal seal of approval to the Louisiana Purchase, Cornhusker Kickback and other earmarks used to bribe senators into supporting this atrocious bill.”
“Democrats have truly hit the bottom on their reckless pursuit of a government takeover of health care. The Democrat majority just voted to retain the culture of corruption in Congress. Just two years ago, Democrats bragged about draining the swamp, but now they’re endorsing political bribery. This is Washington at its worst.”
Senator Ben Nelson (D-Nebraska), who secured a special earmark for his state that forces taxpayers in 49 states to fund Medicaid in Nebraska, first voted against the ban on trading earmarks for votes but switched his vote before the final tally. Senator DeMint responded, “Senator Nelson, unfortunately, is trying to have it both ways, he was for trading his vote for earmarks before he was against it."
The seven dems who voted with the republicans: Bayh, Feingold, McCaskill, Merkley, Warner, Webb … and Ben Nelson.
Note also: The amendment would have applied only to future bills, not to this one, so no one was giving up anything by voting against it except the promise of pork to come."
Posted by: Puget Sound | December 23, 2009 at 05:35 PM
McCain likes to split hairs over the definition of an earmark -- he seems to think the term only applies if you're trying to put a spending plan in the budget on the down-low.
Somehow, if you're up front about wanting to spend $10 million on some law school facility named for the late Supreme Court Chief Justice (from McCain's home state) William Rehnquist that's OK. Or you shouldn't be painted with the bad brush of federal earmarks if you choose someone like idiot Palin, a true earmark expert, to be your VP running mate.
It's easy for Senator Grumpy to make excuses for why his requests and actions should be OK but not others.
Posted by: Coiler | December 23, 2009 at 05:46 PM
There you go. Thinking again, Coils.
Posted by: Carlos | December 23, 2009 at 06:24 PM
Coils is happy his hero 'Sheets' Byrd is still able to cast a vote...stay classy there Coils.
Posted by: Puget Sound | December 23, 2009 at 07:28 PM
Stay classy? Who's the one who name calls a 90-year-old Sentaor? Stay classy?
Piss-in-the Sound fits right for you. You are crass.
Posted by: Twitter | December 23, 2009 at 07:55 PM
Indeed. Putz is in the league if you can't argue, then play the frat boy.
Posted by: Coiler | December 23, 2009 at 07:58 PM
Name Call, hey if the 'Sheets Fit...'
Sorry, not a fan of the Klansman Byrd.
BTW, a little late there 'Coils' to play 'above the fray.'
Posted by: Puget Sound | December 23, 2009 at 08:11 PM
Sorry, not a fan of the Tea baggers.
Posted by: Coiler | December 23, 2009 at 08:19 PM
"When the people fear their government there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."
Thomas Jefferson
We have a clear case of the former
"If truth be told. people on the left were already questioning the universal mandate yesterday. Ezra Klein of the WA Post and on Reagan yesterday questioned it. So Fixed News is a little late. Also, the medicaid help might have some teeth but the Feds already pitch in a percentage to every state for every dollar so that might be okay. Giving one state more? That happens all the time. Just check out some of the earmarks given the red states under Bush."
Ph(j)oanie; Guess what, Bush is no longer President and I did not condone that - all it did was lead to the mountain of corruption we have today with your boy, Barry and the corrupt Chicago way.
I do know that the progressive left has an issue with the Senate Bill for different reasons than those who want less government, so this bill is just plain dogshit.
BTW, I did not get that information off of Fox News. There is a website called biggovernment.com that I have been reading routinely. Andrew Breitbart started it, but you and your progressive ilk would be in denial about anything that appears there because they have demonized ACORN - one of your favorite groups, yet it is clearly more credible than the Huff Post, Daily KOS.
You know, ph(J)oanie, you'd come across as halfway intelligent if you listened and considered more of a variety of viewpoints including centrist sources besides with the progressive moonbat sources you bloviate talking points.
Posted by: KS | December 23, 2009 at 08:59 PM
The right-wingers are crybabies and all loyal Americans view them that way.
Posted by: Coiler | December 23, 2009 at 09:08 PM