Rachel Maddow took House Republicans to the woodshed Monday for their unprecedented misbehavior around President Obama's jobs speech.
Why, there were important votes that couldn't be missed, Boehner said, the cigarette-sucking wrinkles accenting his baggy face giving the illusion of sincerity.
Turns out the important business the House attended to that night was a vote authorizing a "charity jogging event," and a salute to a North Carolina softball team.
"One vote and some non-binding speechifying," Rachel said incredulously.
Some Republicans refused to even turn up for the speech. She noted that at least four Southern Republicans announced before the speech that they would not be attending.
"There is apparently something about this president that erases the need for whatever deference Congressional Republicans might otherwise feel toward the office that President Obama holds," Maddow said. "I would love to hear them explain exactly what that is."
We can tell you, Rachel. The GOP is a Southern-based Party, still grumpy about the outcome of the insurrection that erupted into Civil War 150 years ago. It was based in fundamentalism, ignorance, racism and the economics of the downtrodden.
Calling themselves the Tea Party, they've reorganized themselves (as they do every time the economy gets bad) and secession is again in the air.
It helps their cause with others of their kind that the President is a black man.
They do not operate in good faith. They're not really loyal to the United States per se. They would re-fight the Civil War, having let themselves be talked into fearing an eminent tyranny by the federal government. The Fort Sumter shots this time are these metaphorical "Hell no's!" and petty boycotts in Congress.
Many have armed themselves in a vague, romantic, masculine/adolescent delusion under the cover of the upcoming Apocalypse of Judeo-Christian mythology.
Their politicians reflect them, as politicians must.
It's no more complicated than that.
Bullshit! Maddow knows as well as the rest of you that there was a pre-scheduled debate that is going to help us pick next years replacement for Obama. Obama is in fear of becoming one of the millions of unemployed next year. Tough shit Mr President. Get your resume in order.
The following night was opening for the NFL. We have heard Obama sing his little ditty about how trillions of dollars pumped in to the government by the rich or borrowed from the Chinese will cure all that ails our economy. How could he ask us to listen to it one more time at the expense of Thursday night NFL football?
The guy was just grand standing. He brought nothing new to the table. He has nothing to bring.
So bring on your disingenuous racist accusations. That is what you will need as there is nothing that can be said to defend the incompetence of Obama.
Posted by: chucks | September 13, 2011 at 02:57 PM
If it was only that simple, Bla'M...
Here is an interesting NY Times piece about a recent speech by Sarah Palin, if you can get past the name and focus on the content of the article.
Posted by: Radio Queen | September 13, 2011 at 02:58 PM
Nothing you said there makes me believe anything but that you are a racist chuck. Your hatred is palpable.
Posted by: Independent wonk | September 13, 2011 at 06:08 PM
Chucks hates women and people of color who don't support him financially.
Posted by: Johnny Sombrerro | September 13, 2011 at 06:15 PM
Mr Hood is a communist thug.
Posted by: Zounds | September 13, 2011 at 07:43 PM
Zounds, Hood might be a pussy, but he is my pussy. Is you have a problem with that than see me after school.
Posted by: Mr hoods boyfriend | September 13, 2011 at 07:49 PM
The only woman that I hate is you joanie. No others that I know of.
Our friend buzard barf gave the most accurate description of you that I have ever read.
Sorry you feel that way wonk. Obama's shitty policies have nothing to do with race. There have been plenty of white people in office that had poor policies,IE Carter and Johnson.
If you think he is incompetent because he is black, so be it.
I think it has more to do with his lack of experience in business or government. But he can read a 'prompter well.
Posted by: chucks | September 13, 2011 at 07:53 PM
Yeah, none of the bush' or reagan's policies were bad. I bet black men stare at your wife, the gubmint breadwinner.
Posted by: Johnny Sombrerro | September 13, 2011 at 07:57 PM
What are you talking about joanie? Bush spent like a drunken democrat. Quit being a fool.
Many men have stared at my wife. Some have even hit on her. So what?
That is the facts a man must be willing to accept if he marries a younger woman.
Posted by: chucks | September 13, 2011 at 08:06 PM
If you watch the Republican debates with Twitter on the laptop, it's like watching Mystery Science Theater 3000.
Posted by: sparky | September 13, 2011 at 08:07 PM
Maddow is a political hack who is a purveyor of strawmen - a nice way for saying she has little if any "cred".
Quit trying to change the subject Joanie Sombrero. Screw BO - once again pulling economic policies out of his ass - I don't care if he is the Prez, I have no respect for him, however I do not hate him.
Peace, Love...
Posted by: KS | September 13, 2011 at 08:08 PM
Obama will be relected, the gop blew it again this time. You gotta love it
Posted by: Coiler | September 13, 2011 at 08:20 PM
I think Obama showed a lack of savvy when he scheduled the speech on the evening of the Republicans debate. That was a mistake.
The rest of it? Hasn't it been obvious all along that the tea party and the rightwing has reduced politicking in this country to the level of thuggery, ignorance and racism. There's not much more to say. It's almost boring.
Posted by: joanie | September 13, 2011 at 08:27 PM
I wish I'd seen the CNN debate. You never know what is going to come out of the mouths of these guys.
One item I heard about and then watched online was the Ron Paul response about healthcare. The news is that he wants people to die. He never said that. He said that hospitals and doctors would help these people. Granted he wasn't very specific and granted that might not be the case, he said he would help and that hospitals would help them and that it would all come about at a much cheaper price.
I've seen two of my former doctors turn to concierge medicine which means they have pulled out of insurance-paid healthcare and see people only for direct payment. Not everyone can afford it but their patients are paying a lot less than those of us who pay through our insurance companies.
I go to the wound center for a small wound that opens every now and then. It's an old wound - hiking shoes too tight - but for fifteen minutes work, they charge my insurance $5000 and call it surgery.
That's ridiculous. Ron Paul did not say let people die. That is the conversation today. Skew and lie and distort. How can anyone make a decision about a candidate if media and other candidates lie like that? It's becoming shameful.
Posted by: joanie | September 13, 2011 at 08:37 PM
Well, he said it was a 'choice' to have coverage. It seems he doesn't have to care since he has options ranging from 30 years in congress to speaking tours and his celeb status. What was telling was the applause. I wouldn't vote for anyone from Texas running for president.
Posted by: Coiler | September 13, 2011 at 08:47 PM
I wouldn't vote for him either. But I don't like the mischaracterization. He's not someone who wants people to die. At least, I don't think he is. Mostly, he didn't say that he would let them die. That's just honest. A little truth in politics wouldn't hurt. We haven't gotten much of it from anybody lately.
Posted by: joanie | September 13, 2011 at 08:52 PM
Coiler will hate it when Obama loses to Romney/Rubio.
Ron Paul was bothered and thought 9-11 was brought in part because Americans were mean to the Palestinians. I never heard him say anything about let people die.
Posted by: KS | September 13, 2011 at 08:54 PM
I don’t know if it’s bigotry as much as it’s extremism. Let’s face it, these are the people that advocate Obama is not born here, Osama bin Laden isn’t dead and more recently, kill the uninsured. Nuts commiserating among themselves and don’t realize we are pointing at them.
Posted by: For Your Information | September 13, 2011 at 08:56 PM
Anyone happen to catch if maddow mentioned anything about those Americans under the poverty level is at an alltime high under Obama.
Posted by: zounds | September 13, 2011 at 09:02 PM
The gop is less organized than you wish, city hall boy. Romney lost if you recall in 2008, quite early in the game. He still has to explain his signing off on RomneyCare while he was against it. I believe this kind of thinking also was expressed by Tommy Boy and his support for hair spray candidate Trump. Most incumbents are reelected.
Posted by: Coiler | September 13, 2011 at 09:05 PM
I'm going to reconsider a bit, Coiler. Paul did name his son after Ayn Rand who would have let anybody die just for the fun of it. So, he might do that. But, he didn't say that.
Which may be a distinction without a difference...
Posted by: joanie | September 13, 2011 at 09:11 PM
Maddow is an Obama-propagandist - a prerequisite of working at MSNBC.
Turner, the GOP candidate has been declared the winner of the NY-9 special election to replace Mr. Weiner. It was said that this election was a referendum on Obama.
Mr. Obama has brought it on all by himself - he is held accountable and bears responsibility for his actions and those in NY-9 did not like what they have seen.
Posted by: KS | September 13, 2011 at 09:11 PM
Radio Queen, you're linking! She's going up the risk-taking scale, folks.
I heard an astute scenario where Rick Perry could be our next President and it would be considered by most a referendum on Obama more than a Perry victory much like Reagan's win in 1980 was a referendum on Carter.
Well, you will get what you deserve rightwingers. You've got some surprises coming. And they couldn't happen to more deserving people.
Posted by: joanie | September 13, 2011 at 09:17 PM
Just looked at the speech you linked. I heard that speech. And I recall thinking at the time that she was telling truth. The problem for me was the context of the truth. Everything she said was custom-made to her target audience. I couldn't really believe she meant it. Words without deeds or actions don't mean much. The words reflected what a lot of us are feeling. But, have you heard that truth anywhere else from her? Have you seen any indication that she means to do something about it?
I'm asking . . . have you?
Posted by: joanie | September 13, 2011 at 09:26 PM
It is an interesting tidbit that the NY-9 seat that has never been occupied by a Republican, the seat that Chuck Schumer held for 18 years and Anthony Weiner held for nearly as long is now in the hands of the Republicans. In a district that is 70% registered Democrat.
Yes Coiler, the Republicans are in trouble.
Bonus, those wascally Republicans held on to the seat in Nevada as well.
Posted by: chucks | September 13, 2011 at 09:31 PM
"wascully" - grow up, chux.
Posted by: joanie | September 13, 2011 at 09:36 PM
An epiphany: with a long-time dem district going down and Rick Perry, Mr. Swagger Bush II on the horizon, this may be the perfect storm that will sink democracy and the republic Benjamin Franklin gave us when he said "if we can keep it." We may have finally failed.
Posted by: joanie | September 13, 2011 at 10:08 PM
according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the United States has both the highest overall poverty rate and the highest childhood poverty rate of any major industrialized country on earth. This comes at a time when the U.S. also has the most unequal distribution of wealth and income of any major country on earth with the top 1 percent earning more than the bottom 50 percent.
According to the latest figures from the OECD, 21.6 percent of American children live in poverty. This compares to 3.7 percent in Denmark, 5 percent in Finland, 5.5 percent in Norway 6.9 percent in Slovenia, 7 percent in Sweden, 7.2 percent Hungary, 8.3 percent in Germany, 8.8 percent in the Czech Republic, 9.3 percent in France, 9.4 percent in Switzerland. I suppose we can take some comfort in that our numbers are not quite as bad as Turkey (23.5 percent), Chile (24 percent) and Mexico (25.8 percent).
Posted by: joanie | September 13, 2011 at 10:13 PM
Watch out for the coming insurrection from the left (i.e the unions and other special interests) leading up to the election - the Democrat machine will not go down without an epoch struggle.
I read that Michael Savage thinks Perry is the GOP candidate for POTUS to beat, but not sure why after watching him last night - he was smacked down and piled on and did not give very endearing responses. In the CNN/Tea party debate, it looked like Romney prevailed and Cain and Newt also got in some licks, but neither of them are going anywhere.
Posted by: KS | September 13, 2011 at 10:25 PM
Say what you will - if you think Perry is Bush !! - so be it, but there are some obvious differences. Perry is a bit more slippery and a better politician (mutually inclusive) than Bush, communicates better and is not a neo-con. However, he has a similar stand on illegal immigration that I don't care for and will reserve judgment on how much of a fiscal conservative he is - he's a mixed bag.
Posted by: KS | September 13, 2011 at 10:43 PM
Romney will outlast Perry, as Perry stumnles and falls in the last 300 to 400 yaRDS OF THIS 880 YARD (HALF MILE) run to the repug nomination.
Posted by: Tommy008 | September 13, 2011 at 11:24 PM
yeah, i used to think, only a few months ago, that you'd need a thug with swagger like Trump or Perry to beat Obama, but i no longer feel that way. if Romney keeps finding a bit more passion, as he has been in the dabtes, i believe he can easily beat Obama, barring a dramatic turnaround in the economy. Tonights repug victory in New York only strengthens my view. Joanie can stop being hysterical and melodramatic about Perry, because he simply will not be the nominee/
Posted by: Tommy008 | September 13, 2011 at 11:33 PM
Do you really want to have Perry up on stage debating Pres Obama?
I'll take Romney over Perry. He is more likable, can present a business record, and just seems more credible.
Romney-Rubio would be a strong ticket. No doubt that Chris Christie would be named the Secretary of Education. (the 'quaifing' sound is Joanie Sombrero's brain imploding)
What will be of interest is the Senate and House. For the Senate, the Repubs have an advantage again going in on the seats up for grabs.
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | September 14, 2011 at 05:58 AM
From Politco
Hill Dems pick apart Obama jobs plan
By: Manu Raju
September 14, 2011 04:59 AM EDT
President Barack Obama’s new jobs plan is hitting some unexpected turbulence in the halls of Congress: lawmakers from his own party.
As he demands Congress quickly approve his ambitious proposal aimed at reviving the sagging economy, many Democrats on Capitol Hill appear far from sold that the president has the right antidote to spur major job growth and turn around their party’s political fortunes.
“Terrible,” Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.) told POLITICO when asked about the president’s ideas for how to pay for the $450 billion price tag. “We shouldn’t increase taxes on ordinary income. … There are other ways to get there.”
“That offset is not going to fly, and he should know that,” said Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu from the energy-producing Louisiana, referring to Obama’s elimination of oil and gas subsidies. “Maybe it’s just for his election, which I hope isn’t the case.”
“I think the best jobs bill that can be passed is a comprehensive long-term deficit-reduction plan,” said Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.), discussing proposals to slash the debt by $4 trillion by overhauling entitlement programs and raising revenue through tax reforms. “That’s better than everything else the president is talking about — combined.”
And those are just the moderates in the party. Some liberals also have concerns.
“There is serious discomfort with potentially setting up Social Security as a fall guy because you’re taking this contribution out,” said Rep. Raul Grijalva of Arizona, referring to Obama’s proposal to further slash payroll taxes.
Democrats in large numbers will still back the president’s overall jobs package, and when the plan heads for House and Senate consideration, some of these same skeptics will very likely vote to advance the measure. But as details of the plan began to be vetted on Capitol Hill on Tuesday, it was clear that the White House needed to redouble its sales job — or tweak its plan — to force Democrats to fall in line at a pivotal point in Obama’s presidency.
White House officials aren’t ruling out making changes to the bill or compromising with Republicans on pieces of the agenda, and they plan to brief Senate Democrats on Thursday. But following his joint address to Congress last week, Obama, in a feisty speech Tuesday in Columbus, Ohio, again ratcheted up pressure to “pass this bill.”
“Tell them that if you want to create jobs right now — pass this bill,” Obama said. “If you want construction workers renovating schools like this one — pass this bill. If you want to put teachers back in the classroom — pass this bill. If you want tax cuts for middle-class families and small-business owners, then what do you do? Pass this bill.”
The audience shouted back, “Pass this bill!”
But in the halls of Congress, “this bill” was already expected to be modified, pared back significantly or overtaken by the powerful new deficit-slashing supercommittee.
“It’s hard to have an opinion on something you don’t think is going to be the final product,” said Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson, a conservative Democrat who faces a tough reelection next year. “I’ve made it clear I’m looking for [tax] cuts, so I’m very hopeful there will be cuts.”
more here
ouch
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | September 14, 2011 at 08:12 AM
Thanks for bringing us the news, Pussy Fart.
Posted by: Johnny Sombrerro | September 14, 2011 at 09:40 AM
Ya see, the baggers ain’t racist. Their precious bagger queen banged a basket ball star in the past. I wonder how they’ll take it when they find out.
Posted by: For Your Information | September 14, 2011 at 11:19 AM
Thanks for bringing us the news, Pussy Fart.
Posted by: Johnny Sombrerro | September 14, 2011 at 09:40 AM
Joanie Sombrero, they got pills that will stop it.
Ask Coiler, he's been on em for awhile.
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | September 14, 2011 at 11:43 AM
Sarah Palin - don't bother to run, but be a cheerleader for the GOP and would like to hear from Glen Rice to corroborate that story by the NYTimes oops - the National Enquirer - what the hell is the difference ?
Posted by: KS | September 14, 2011 at 12:23 PM
Sarah Palin is said to have fucked a black guy while in college 25 years ago. Oh my god! Really? Had sex in college! The slut.
Who of us didn't get a little strange ass while in college?
I loved black women while in school. They knew what that thing was for. But, come to think of it, I don't remember not being willing to get some from any willing provider. It is all pink on the inside.
Posted by: Pig | September 14, 2011 at 12:34 PM
I think the Enquirer has more integrity than the NY Times and WaPo editorials and Time Magazine.
------------------------------------
Posted by: KS | June 08, 2011 at 10:15 PM
Posted by: Pig | September 14, 2011 at 12:47 PM
Why are we supposed to care about a one-night stand 25 years ago? I mean, yeah, so she advocates abstinence until marriage but didn't practice it. And yeah, sleeping with a newsmaker when you're a TV reporter (even sports) is ethically dodgy. And yeah, it gives the Usual Suspects an excuse for more slut-shaming. But it was 25 years ago, and Sarah's done worse and far more questionable things a lot more recently.
Posted by: Pete | September 14, 2011 at 03:42 PM
So, I post a link about an interesting speech from Palin, joanie reads it & gives a thoughtful response, and right on cue come juvenile rants about her sex life--sourcing the National Enquirer, no less. Good gawd, people. Palin's had the ear of small-town America from the get-go and has been saying pretty much what she said in last week's speech. Too bad the media has been so busy destroying her, both personally and professionally, that they've missed something: while she may make Biden-like gaffs, she's not as stupid as they've made her out to be. Palin will fare much better behind the political scenes, energizing her party, than she would in a presidential race. I hope she's figured that out.
Posted by: Radio Queen | September 14, 2011 at 04:12 PM
I think you missed my point, I don’t think the baggers are racist. A Sarah proves my point. And as the Birthers are want to point out; one has to dig as distant as birth to prove validity of the assertion.
Posted by: For Your Information | September 14, 2011 at 04:55 PM
Rep Louie Gohmert of Texas introduced the "America Jobs Act" bill in to the U.S. House of Representatives earlier today.
This is a bill that I believe all of us should get behind and get passed as quickly as possible.
Contact your Senator and Congressperson to express your support and to ask them to act quickly.
This bill is good for America and will help get Americans back to work.
Posted by: Chucks | September 14, 2011 at 05:27 PM
The bill is HR2911 known as "The American Jobs Act of 2011".
Posted by: Chucks | September 14, 2011 at 05:30 PM
Chucks, why do you think rich guys care about you or will work in your best interests? Do you think you are just one or two deals away from joining the ranks of the rich so you are just like them? I looked over the bill and its more of the same. Give tax breaks to the top 1-2% and the rest of us can go to hell. If lowering taxes on the rich had worked before, we would not have the highest number of people below the poverty line in the history of our country. I feel sorry for you.
Posted by: Dennis | September 14, 2011 at 05:57 PM
Dennis,
You don’t know the back story regarding Chuck S and unemployment insurance?
Surly Chuck S, you should share.
Posted by: For Your Information | September 14, 2011 at 06:10 PM
Gee FYI, lets not pussy fart around.
Sounds like you've been posting before if you know all about Chucks.
'Shirley' you should share your other names...
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | September 14, 2011 at 06:22 PM
Na, hadn’t been posting much. But have been following for a while. 'Shirley'?
Posted by: For Your Information | September 14, 2011 at 06:31 PM
'Shirley' was a play on 'Surely'
you sure seem to have it in for Chucks.
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | September 14, 2011 at 06:33 PM