TBD on Ning
Habitual liars just can't stop, I guess.
But we begin tonight with an effort to clear up a big, fat
embarrassing political lie.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIPS)
SEN. JON KYL ®, ARIZONA: Democrats have already decided on this so-
called nuclear option, a reconciliation process.
SEN. JOHN CORNYN ®, TEXAS: This would be the nuclear option. And I
think it would be a terrible mistake.
REP. STEVE KING ®, IOWA: Reconciliation, that sounds real nice and
gives me a warm, fuzzy feeling. It‘s the nuclear option.
(END VIDEO CLIPS)
MADDOW: No, it‘s not, actually. It‘s not the nuclear option. This
is the last-ditch, last-day, last-try effort to stop health reform by lying
about it, one day before the health care summit in Washington.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KYL: It is reported that the speaker has already said that she has
the process for reconciliation figured out. It was never designed for a
large, comprehensive piece of legislation, such as health care, as you all
know. It‘s a budget exercise. And that‘s why some refer to it as the
nuclear option.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: Actually, no. That‘s wrong. No one calls it a nuclear
option except you guys. And you know you‘re lying when you do that.
On the eve of the health summit, Republicans are trying to get away
with saying that Democrats passing health reform through budget
reconciliation rules, where you only need 51 votes to pass something in the
Senate instead of 60, Republicans are trying to get away with saying that
would be the nuclear option.
It sounds awful, right? It‘s nuclear. Except that it isn‘t the
nuclear option and Republicans know that.
The nuclear option and reconciliation are two totally different
things, which Republicans are intimately aware of. And we know that
because the nuclear option was the Republican‘s own threat five years ago -
not to pass something through reconciliation, but to do away with the
filibuster altogether, to prevent Democrats from filibustering President
Bush‘s judicial nominees.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Senate Republican Leader Bill Frist says he will
soon trigger what‘s known as the nuclear option, a vote to change Senate
rules to ban filibusters on judicial nominees.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: Oh, yes, that‘s what the nuclear option is. The nuclear
option is changing the Senate rules to eliminate the filibuster, to get rid
of the ability to require a 60-vote supermajority in the Senate. What
Democrats are talking about is something totally different, passing health
reform through reconciliation, passing health reform with 51 votes instead
60 -- not the nuclear option, and Republicans know it. They know it
because, “A,” they created the nuclear option back in 2005, and “B,”
they‘ve used reconciliation over and over and over again.
And there‘s been no nuclear explosion. They‘ve defended its use.
They‘ve never described it as nuclear before, before Democrats decided that
they were going to do it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JUDD GREGG ®, NEW HAMPSHIRE: We are using the rules of the
Senate here. That‘s what they are, Senator. Reconciliation is a rule of
the Senate. All this rule of the Senate does is allow a majority of the
Senate to take a position and pass a piece of legislation, support that
position. Now, is there something wrong with majority rules? I don‘t
think so.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: Is there something wrong with majority rules? I don‘t think
so—unless Democrats ever want to use them. And then we won‘t call it
reconciliation anymore. We don‘t call it—we‘ll call it using the rules
of the Senate. Then we‘ll call it nuclear.
Republican Senator Orrin Hatch is calling it, quote, “The highly
partisan ‘nuclear option‘ of reconciliation.” Republican Senator John
Cornyn tweeting today about, quote, “reconciliation, the 51-vote nuclear
option.”
What‘s going on here is a deliberate attempt on the part of
Republicans to define nuclear down, to conflate these two totally separate
things, to demonize the way the Democrats have to pass health reform right
now by calling it the nuclear option, even though the nuclear option is a
real thing in the Senate and this isn‘t that. It has nothing to do with
that.
Perhaps the reason that Republicans are so unwilling to call this what
it is, reconciliation, is because they have a really long record of using
reconciliation.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV), MAJORITY LEADER: My Republican friends are
lamenting reconciliation. But I would recommend for them to go back and
look at history. Realistically, they should stop crying about
reconciliation as if it‘s never been done before. It‘s done almost every
Congress. And they‘re the ones that used it more than anyone else.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: Republicans have, indeed, used reconciliation repeatedly to
pass their own agenda items. They used reconciliation to pass not one, but
two giant tax cuts during the Bush administration.
You want to say reconciliation was never used to change the health
care system, Senator Kyl?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KYL: It was never designed for a large, comprehensive piece of
legislation, such as health care, as you all know.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: Actually, that‘s completely, utterly 100 percent, knowingly
wrong. That is not true at all, Senator Kyl. And you know it‘s not true.
Reconciliation is how the health care system has been essentially formed in
this country, over and over and over again.
You ever heard of COBRA? COBRA is the law that lets people keep their
employee health insurance for a while after they‘ve been laid off. You
want to know what the “R” in COBRA stands for? “Reconciliation.” Oh, yes,
look at that.
In 1986, Congress passed the Consolidated Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act, COBRA, which forever affected health care coverage in
this country. Do you ever heard of SCHIP, the State Children‘s Health
Insurance Program? CHIP was created in a budget reconciliation bill in
1997.
Reconciliation is how we make changes to our health care system. As
NPR pointed out today, quote, “Over the past three decades, the number of
major health financing measures that were not passed via budget
reconciliation can be counted on one hand.”
This is how health reform is done in this country. And this effort to
say that using reconciliation would be the nuclear option, that it would
somehow be unprecedented is a lie. It is a lie and it is—it is
disingenuous. It is disingenuous in the sense that it‘s not just a
misunderstanding, they know they‘re lying about it. And people in the
media who repeat what Republicans are saying about this instead of
challenging them on it are helping Republicans spread a lie.
Republicans have used reconciliation over and over and over again—
as was pointed out to them by Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer last March.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. BARBARA BOXER (D), CALIFORNIA: Nineteen times since 1980 has
reconciliation been used by far and away more times by the Republicans,
namely, 13 times they used it. They never came here and complained. They
used it. I have the record.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: Senator Boxer actually inserted into the public record 13
previous instances of Republicans using this thing that they now say has
never been done before. That would be so unprecedented. This thing that
they‘re now calling the nuclear option, even though the nuclear option is a
totally different thing. This thing they now say the Democrats shouldn‘t
dare use. This thing that they‘ve used again and again and again.
Joining us now is Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer of California.
Senator Boxer, thanks very much for your time tonight.
BOXER: Thank you for shining the light of truth on this whole issue.
It really—it‘s heartwarming for me to listen to you.
MADDOW: Well, I‘m glad to hear it. I am—I‘m heartwarmed to be
able to do it, but I‘m angry that they‘re getting away with it.
BOXER: Yes.
MADDOW: I have talked to people in my profession, in the media who,
actually, I think have been bamboozled by this. They remember that there
was something called nuclear option. Now that Republicans are saying this
is it, I think they‘re falling for it.
BOXER: Yes. I mean, you—the nuclear option had to do with
something entirely different, the filibuster and judges. So let‘s set that
aside. I think was so—there were so many good things about what you
did, but I thought the best case for reconciliation was made by Republican
Senator Judd Gregg, who said, “Colleagues, this is a rule of the Senate.
It‘s the way we do business.”
And by the way, way back when I talked about how many times the
Republicans use it, I was wrong. They actually used it 16 times out of 22
times that it‘s been done since 1980. Let me say that again—since 1980,
we‘ve used reconciliation 22 times and out of those times, the Republicans
used it 16 times.
So, you know, to my Republican friends, you can have your opinion, but
you cannot change these facts, because they‘re in the congressional record.
It‘s important.
And I don‘t know that you know this, Rachel, but Eric Cantor, who‘s in
the leadership of the House, in 2005 -- I have an exact quote. Can I give
it to you?
MADDOW: Please.
BOXER: I wrote it down.
MADDOW: Yes.
BOXER: This is what he said. “Reconciliation is a process I hope we
can engage in every year.” Eric Cantor, a leader who‘s going to the White
House tomorrow, Republican in the House—“Reconciliation is a process I
hope we can engage in every year.”
So, thank you for doing this and thank you for giving me the chance to
set the record straight.
Look, all this is about is utilizing the rules of the Senate, using
the majority of the senators to make sure that we get health reform done.
We cannot wait another day. I listened to Keith‘s talk.
I know from my constituency what is going on. Doctors that are told,
begged by mothers, “Please don‘t write down that my child has asthma.
Please lie and say it‘s bronchitis, because if you write down asthma, when
my child turns 18 or 20 and has to get his or her own insurance, it will be
a preexisting condition.”
And did you hear Harry Reid talk about—an incredible conversation
he had with a constituent who owns a restaurant, a lovely couple and they
had a baby and they had good insurance, really good insurance, covered the
birth. The baby was born with a cleft palate, and they were so devastated,
but the doctors say, “Don‘t worry, we can fix this, we can fix this.” It‘s
easily done. And they then got a note from the insurance company: your
baby has a pre-existing condition, and therefore you have to pay for this.
I mean, how much more do we have to hear about the injustice of it
all? And we can fix this. And we can fix it, you know, in a very good
way.
And I‘m glad the president has, you know, invited everybody over
tomorrow. I think it‘s a good thing. And then we‘ll act. We have to.
MADDOW: Senator Boxer, you are one of the 23 Democratic senators who
have signed on to a letter supporting not only using reconciliation, but
supporting—
BOXER: Yes.
MADDOW: -- the pursuit of a public option through reconciliation.
BOXER: Yes.
MADDOW: And when you give me that story about the child with the
cleft palate in Nevada and the way the private insurer responded to that—
BOXER: Yes.
MADDOW: -- it does make me want there to be better regulation for
private insurers, but it also makes me want the American people to have an
option to compete with the private insurance companies through a publicly-
accountable public plan.
BOXER: Yes.
MADDOW: Is this—is this new push for the public option going to
translate into anything? And if it‘s—if it‘s not, why can‘t we get it?
BOXER: Oh, it‘s about getting the votes. And all I can say is this -
we want competition. And the best way to have competition is to have a
public option in there. Because then we‘ll know what the fair prices ought
to be. It‘s just a—it‘s a very straightforward way to make sure
everybody, as the president said a long time ago, is kept honest. It‘s the
easiest way.
The other ways to go, one way, is to have regulation, where if
somebody—some insurance company wants to raise rates, they have to come
before a board and explain why. And that was an idea Senator Feinstein
had. I was proud to cosponsor that and the president has now taken that
up, which is great.
But the public option is the easiest way to go, the best way to go.
And I still think we‘re going to try to push for it. We‘ll push and push.
At the end of the day, we cannot walk away from this whole issue. And
we better make sure that when we finish, people have insurance they can
count on. They get treated with respect and fairly, and that it‘s
affordable. That‘s it. And that‘s why a public option makes sense.
But, Rachel, I do want to say to you and I‘ve said this to you before,
we will have a great expansion of Medicaid, and that is a public option.
Fifteen million of the uninsured will be covered under an
expanded Medicaid, so that is, in fact, a public option. Medicare, which I
think we should expand and open up to younger people, is a public option.
And by the way, it is strengthened in this bill. And the
doughnut hole, which is that terrible problem when you are getting
prescription drugs and all of a sudden, you reach a certain level and you
don‘t get anymore coverage. We‘re going to fill that hole.
So we do - it‘s a good approach. Without a public option, it
would be far better with it. But I really hope we don‘t get caught in a
situation where we say, unless we have this one thing, we shouldn‘t do it.
I think that would be a mistake.
MADDOW: I think that you and the president and Democrats in general
who are in the lead on this will find that when you fight for it, when you
fight for it in public, the public will stand by you. Democratic Senator
Barbara Boxer of California -
BOXER: I will.
MADDOW: Thank you for your time tonight. And it‘s nice to be here in
California, my home state and yours, too. I appreciate it.
BOXER: OK.
embarrassing political lie.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIPS)
SEN. JON KYL ®, ARIZONA: Democrats have already decided on this so-
called nuclear option, a reconciliation process.
SEN. JOHN CORNYN ®, TEXAS: This would be the nuclear option. And I
think it would be a terrible mistake.
REP. STEVE KING ®, IOWA: Reconciliation, that sounds real nice and
gives me a warm, fuzzy feeling. It‘s the nuclear option.
(END VIDEO CLIPS)
MADDOW: No, it‘s not, actually. It‘s not the nuclear option. This
is the last-ditch, last-day, last-try effort to stop health reform by lying
about it, one day before the health care summit in Washington.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KYL: It is reported that the speaker has already said that she has
the process for reconciliation figured out. It was never designed for a
large, comprehensive piece of legislation, such as health care, as you all
know. It‘s a budget exercise. And that‘s why some refer to it as the
nuclear option.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: Actually, no. That‘s wrong. No one calls it a nuclear
option except you guys. And you know you‘re lying when you do that.
On the eve of the health summit, Republicans are trying to get away
with saying that Democrats passing health reform through budget
reconciliation rules, where you only need 51 votes to pass something in the
Senate instead of 60, Republicans are trying to get away with saying that
would be the nuclear option.
It sounds awful, right? It‘s nuclear. Except that it isn‘t the
nuclear option and Republicans know that.
The nuclear option and reconciliation are two totally different
things, which Republicans are intimately aware of. And we know that
because the nuclear option was the Republican‘s own threat five years ago -
not to pass something through reconciliation, but to do away with the
filibuster altogether, to prevent Democrats from filibustering President
Bush‘s judicial nominees.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Senate Republican Leader Bill Frist says he will
soon trigger what‘s known as the nuclear option, a vote to change Senate
rules to ban filibusters on judicial nominees.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: Oh, yes, that‘s what the nuclear option is. The nuclear
option is changing the Senate rules to eliminate the filibuster, to get rid
of the ability to require a 60-vote supermajority in the Senate. What
Democrats are talking about is something totally different, passing health
reform through reconciliation, passing health reform with 51 votes instead
60 -- not the nuclear option, and Republicans know it. They know it
because, “A,” they created the nuclear option back in 2005, and “B,”
they‘ve used reconciliation over and over and over again.
And there‘s been no nuclear explosion. They‘ve defended its use.
They‘ve never described it as nuclear before, before Democrats decided that
they were going to do it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JUDD GREGG ®, NEW HAMPSHIRE: We are using the rules of the
Senate here. That‘s what they are, Senator. Reconciliation is a rule of
the Senate. All this rule of the Senate does is allow a majority of the
Senate to take a position and pass a piece of legislation, support that
position. Now, is there something wrong with majority rules? I don‘t
think so.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: Is there something wrong with majority rules? I don‘t think
so—unless Democrats ever want to use them. And then we won‘t call it
reconciliation anymore. We don‘t call it—we‘ll call it using the rules
of the Senate. Then we‘ll call it nuclear.
Republican Senator Orrin Hatch is calling it, quote, “The highly
partisan ‘nuclear option‘ of reconciliation.” Republican Senator John
Cornyn tweeting today about, quote, “reconciliation, the 51-vote nuclear
option.”
What‘s going on here is a deliberate attempt on the part of
Republicans to define nuclear down, to conflate these two totally separate
things, to demonize the way the Democrats have to pass health reform right
now by calling it the nuclear option, even though the nuclear option is a
real thing in the Senate and this isn‘t that. It has nothing to do with
that.
Perhaps the reason that Republicans are so unwilling to call this what
it is, reconciliation, is because they have a really long record of using
reconciliation.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV), MAJORITY LEADER: My Republican friends are
lamenting reconciliation. But I would recommend for them to go back and
look at history. Realistically, they should stop crying about
reconciliation as if it‘s never been done before. It‘s done almost every
Congress. And they‘re the ones that used it more than anyone else.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: Republicans have, indeed, used reconciliation repeatedly to
pass their own agenda items. They used reconciliation to pass not one, but
two giant tax cuts during the Bush administration.
You want to say reconciliation was never used to change the health
care system, Senator Kyl?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KYL: It was never designed for a large, comprehensive piece of
legislation, such as health care, as you all know.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: Actually, that‘s completely, utterly 100 percent, knowingly
wrong. That is not true at all, Senator Kyl. And you know it‘s not true.
Reconciliation is how the health care system has been essentially formed in
this country, over and over and over again.
You ever heard of COBRA? COBRA is the law that lets people keep their
employee health insurance for a while after they‘ve been laid off. You
want to know what the “R” in COBRA stands for? “Reconciliation.” Oh, yes,
look at that.
In 1986, Congress passed the Consolidated Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act, COBRA, which forever affected health care coverage in
this country. Do you ever heard of SCHIP, the State Children‘s Health
Insurance Program? CHIP was created in a budget reconciliation bill in
1997.
Reconciliation is how we make changes to our health care system. As
NPR pointed out today, quote, “Over the past three decades, the number of
major health financing measures that were not passed via budget
reconciliation can be counted on one hand.”
This is how health reform is done in this country. And this effort to
say that using reconciliation would be the nuclear option, that it would
somehow be unprecedented is a lie. It is a lie and it is—it is
disingenuous. It is disingenuous in the sense that it‘s not just a
misunderstanding, they know they‘re lying about it. And people in the
media who repeat what Republicans are saying about this instead of
challenging them on it are helping Republicans spread a lie.
Republicans have used reconciliation over and over and over again—
as was pointed out to them by Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer last March.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. BARBARA BOXER (D), CALIFORNIA: Nineteen times since 1980 has
reconciliation been used by far and away more times by the Republicans,
namely, 13 times they used it. They never came here and complained. They
used it. I have the record.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: Senator Boxer actually inserted into the public record 13
previous instances of Republicans using this thing that they now say has
never been done before. That would be so unprecedented. This thing that
they‘re now calling the nuclear option, even though the nuclear option is a
totally different thing. This thing they now say the Democrats shouldn‘t
dare use. This thing that they‘ve used again and again and again.
Joining us now is Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer of California.
Senator Boxer, thanks very much for your time tonight.
BOXER: Thank you for shining the light of truth on this whole issue.
It really—it‘s heartwarming for me to listen to you.
MADDOW: Well, I‘m glad to hear it. I am—I‘m heartwarmed to be
able to do it, but I‘m angry that they‘re getting away with it.
BOXER: Yes.
MADDOW: I have talked to people in my profession, in the media who,
actually, I think have been bamboozled by this. They remember that there
was something called nuclear option. Now that Republicans are saying this
is it, I think they‘re falling for it.
BOXER: Yes. I mean, you—the nuclear option had to do with
something entirely different, the filibuster and judges. So let‘s set that
aside. I think was so—there were so many good things about what you
did, but I thought the best case for reconciliation was made by Republican
Senator Judd Gregg, who said, “Colleagues, this is a rule of the Senate.
It‘s the way we do business.”
And by the way, way back when I talked about how many times the
Republicans use it, I was wrong. They actually used it 16 times out of 22
times that it‘s been done since 1980. Let me say that again—since 1980,
we‘ve used reconciliation 22 times and out of those times, the Republicans
used it 16 times.
So, you know, to my Republican friends, you can have your opinion, but
you cannot change these facts, because they‘re in the congressional record.
It‘s important.
And I don‘t know that you know this, Rachel, but Eric Cantor, who‘s in
the leadership of the House, in 2005 -- I have an exact quote. Can I give
it to you?
MADDOW: Please.
BOXER: I wrote it down.
MADDOW: Yes.
BOXER: This is what he said. “Reconciliation is a process I hope we
can engage in every year.” Eric Cantor, a leader who‘s going to the White
House tomorrow, Republican in the House—“Reconciliation is a process I
hope we can engage in every year.”
So, thank you for doing this and thank you for giving me the chance to
set the record straight.
Look, all this is about is utilizing the rules of the Senate, using
the majority of the senators to make sure that we get health reform done.
We cannot wait another day. I listened to Keith‘s talk.
I know from my constituency what is going on. Doctors that are told,
begged by mothers, “Please don‘t write down that my child has asthma.
Please lie and say it‘s bronchitis, because if you write down asthma, when
my child turns 18 or 20 and has to get his or her own insurance, it will be
a preexisting condition.”
And did you hear Harry Reid talk about—an incredible conversation
he had with a constituent who owns a restaurant, a lovely couple and they
had a baby and they had good insurance, really good insurance, covered the
birth. The baby was born with a cleft palate, and they were so devastated,
but the doctors say, “Don‘t worry, we can fix this, we can fix this.” It‘s
easily done. And they then got a note from the insurance company: your
baby has a pre-existing condition, and therefore you have to pay for this.
I mean, how much more do we have to hear about the injustice of it
all? And we can fix this. And we can fix it, you know, in a very good
way.
And I‘m glad the president has, you know, invited everybody over
tomorrow. I think it‘s a good thing. And then we‘ll act. We have to.
MADDOW: Senator Boxer, you are one of the 23 Democratic senators who
have signed on to a letter supporting not only using reconciliation, but
supporting—
BOXER: Yes.
MADDOW: -- the pursuit of a public option through reconciliation.
BOXER: Yes.
MADDOW: And when you give me that story about the child with the
cleft palate in Nevada and the way the private insurer responded to that—
BOXER: Yes.
MADDOW: -- it does make me want there to be better regulation for
private insurers, but it also makes me want the American people to have an
option to compete with the private insurance companies through a publicly-
accountable public plan.
BOXER: Yes.
MADDOW: Is this—is this new push for the public option going to
translate into anything? And if it‘s—if it‘s not, why can‘t we get it?
BOXER: Oh, it‘s about getting the votes. And all I can say is this -
we want competition. And the best way to have competition is to have a
public option in there. Because then we‘ll know what the fair prices ought
to be. It‘s just a—it‘s a very straightforward way to make sure
everybody, as the president said a long time ago, is kept honest. It‘s the
easiest way.
The other ways to go, one way, is to have regulation, where if
somebody—some insurance company wants to raise rates, they have to come
before a board and explain why. And that was an idea Senator Feinstein
had. I was proud to cosponsor that and the president has now taken that
up, which is great.
But the public option is the easiest way to go, the best way to go.
And I still think we‘re going to try to push for it. We‘ll push and push.
At the end of the day, we cannot walk away from this whole issue. And
we better make sure that when we finish, people have insurance they can
count on. They get treated with respect and fairly, and that it‘s
affordable. That‘s it. And that‘s why a public option makes sense.
But, Rachel, I do want to say to you and I‘ve said this to you before,
we will have a great expansion of Medicaid, and that is a public option.
Fifteen million of the uninsured will be covered under an
expanded Medicaid, so that is, in fact, a public option. Medicare, which I
think we should expand and open up to younger people, is a public option.
And by the way, it is strengthened in this bill. And the
doughnut hole, which is that terrible problem when you are getting
prescription drugs and all of a sudden, you reach a certain level and you
don‘t get anymore coverage. We‘re going to fill that hole.
So we do - it‘s a good approach. Without a public option, it
would be far better with it. But I really hope we don‘t get caught in a
situation where we say, unless we have this one thing, we shouldn‘t do it.
I think that would be a mistake.
MADDOW: I think that you and the president and Democrats in general
who are in the lead on this will find that when you fight for it, when you
fight for it in public, the public will stand by you. Democratic Senator
Barbara Boxer of California -
BOXER: I will.
MADDOW: Thank you for your time tonight. And it‘s nice to be here in
California, my home state and yours, too. I appreciate it.
BOXER: OK.
Views: 7
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Mark Mentzer on
-
Yeah, Rachel was HOT last night!!!!!
-
-
Permalink Reply by Vernon Windsor on
-
I'm down with that.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Madhatterat60 on
-
Filibuster. Get the damned legislation on the table and MAKE THE BLOW HARDS stop all Congressional work on a pique. Let people SEE the obstructionists in action...standing at the podium....spouting Betty Crocker or whatever else they chose to waste time with. I'm tired of the hand wringing....Make Them Accountable for their actions.
-
-
-
I'm down with that too.
-
-
-
Bunning is just the latest in a long line of politicos (mostly from the right) who have been doing similar things, with similar disregard for the hardship caused to others. Will they pay a price? Probably not. Why this might be so, is a question that deserves serious thought. My first reaction is to blame stupidity, but then that usually where I assign blame when people are convinced to vote against their own interests.
-
© 2025 Created by Aggie.
Powered by
