On to the Supreme Court. Or just repeal the darn thing and get it over with.
P.S. – for all my lawyer-geek readers, here’s the full opinion. (h/t National Review).
One thing we’ve learned in the past several cycles is that Democrats truly believe they can only lose elections when they are stolen from them. Democrats should rightly win all elections. Republicans only win when secret money is deployed from overseas, dimwitted citizens are scared out of their minds, and nefarious special interests get stealth candidates to attack real public servants.
Of course, with evil forces such as these on the march,what right-thinking liberals shouldn’t use any means necessary to defeat them? Today’s sampling of such means includes:
Of course, such efforts don’t always turn out as intended. A group called the Illinois Democratic Coordinated Campaign sought to solicit hundreds of thousands of Democrats to use Chicago’s new “vote by mail” system, but glitches with the paperwork appear to have thrown a hitch into the scheme. Unless voting officials can sort it all out in a week, the affected voters could either lose their opportunity vote or at least be so confused by it all that they don’t bother. Call it a little karma coming back around Alexi Giannoulias’ way — his bank failed its customers, and now his turnout machine is failing him.
Now every election year, there are new reports of voter fraud and manipulation that crop up in the hothouse atmosphere that is a political campaign. Most turn out to be false, or at least unproven. Others turn out to be very true, but go unpunished. And still others are told as wistful memories by union officials:
So don’t believe everything you hear. But don’t tell me it doesn’t happen. I’ve watched union thugs take down signs five times in two hours on a road outside a precinct. I’ve responded to a complaint by a voter who said she could only be given Democrat ballots in her union hall precinct (and this was the 2004 general election), only to be told with a smirk that the voter (a 48-year old doctor) must have misunderstood. Be vigilant out there, folks. We’re too close to allow shenanigans to get in the way.
As discussed in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece today, there’s emerging evidence that Democrats intend to move all of their most controversial legislation — and their hearts’ deepest desires — to a lame duck session after the November elections. That way, their members don’t have to take tough votes in advance of their elections in the fall, but Democrats still get to take advantage of their once-in-a-generation situation of huge majorities in Congress with a friendly president. Card check, cap-and-trade, higher taxes on corporations and the wealthy — it’s all in the lame-duck agenda.
There is nothing illegal, unconstitutional, or improper about this. It is, however, anti-democratic, cynical, and entirely preventable. In response, the 41 Republican members of the U.S. Senate should issue a joint statement, signed by everyone, making it clear that while they will attend and participate in any session of the Senate that is called, they will all vote against cloture on every piece of legislation brought to the floor during a lame-duck session (at least assuming there is no imminent threat to the nation or somesuch thing).
That kind of statement, made now rather than in November, will take the pressure off folks like Scott Brown and Olympia Snowe. They might be inclined to vote in favor of certain of the Democrats’ measures on a substantive basis, but they have to resent being used to pass legislation that, had it been voted on in October, could have won the Republicans a couple more Senate seats. By saying now that they’re happy to vote on anything they bring up before November, they give themselves cover in case they are forced to vote on items their constituencies would expect them to support. Senators can then say, “I would have voted for it if the Democrats had operated with transparency and honor before the election, but I can’t support this manipulative lame-duck agenda, no matter what it is.”
“No one will know until this is actually in place how it works. But we believe we’ve done something that has been needed for a long time. It took a crisis to bring us to the point where we could actually get this job done.”
Am I the only one who is flabbergasted that the Democrats think this is an acceptable line of argument? Would you ever tell your boss, “You know, I think it’s a great company, but we’re going to have to buy it to find out what’s in it.” Or “Yeah, I think we did great last quarter, but we’re going to have to file that financial statement to find out what’s in it.” It’s the political equivalent of buying a car off Craigslist without seeing it first, and justifying it by saying, “It took me losing a lot of money on a few other lemons to reach this historic achievement.”
It would almost be overlooked as a vapid statement by a 70-something Senator who didn’t sleep the night before, but Pelosi’s statement has been mocked so thoroughly — it appears in seemingly every story about the health care bill containing nasty surprises — no politician worth his salt could repeat such words without instantly realizing his error. Of course, the guy is retiring, after all.
UPDATE: Rob Long pointed out this gem from the same press conference. about the same bill.
“This is about as important as it gets, because it deals with every single aspect of our lives,” said Sen. Christopher Dodd (D., Conn.), a chief architect of the compromise.
Oh, good. So we don’t have to worry at all.
Many of my more liberal friends profess to be outraged by the incipient racism behind the Arizona immigration law. Setting aside the question of whether the law actually promotes racial profiling (there are many other, better places to find good information on that question), whether such profiling is a public good is a different matter entirely. I don’t disagree that the idea of making law enforcement decisions solely on the basis of race is fraught with peril, if not outright unconstitutional. But consider the following scenarios and see how you might react:
Item: Vice President of the United States Joe Biden says the former dean of Harvard Law school was right to punish the United States military for the United States Congress’s “very bad policy” of “don’t ask, don’t tell” by refusing to allow recruiters access to the school’s career services center.
In other truthy news:
Vice President Joe Biden pleaded with environmentalists on Tuesday to begin picketing the U.S. EPA for failing to institute a greenhouse gas “cap and trade” regime to combat global warming. When asked why Biden would wish his own government’s agency be protested, Biden thundered that “climate change is a serious threat to the security of our country, and it’s very bad policy for EPA to postpone implementation of a cap and trade system.” When reporters pointed out that Congress had not passed legislation authorizing EPA to implement cap and trade, Biden mumbled something about “sticklers for democracy” and left the podium.
At a recent photo op at a Peoria, Ill. bike manufacturer, reporters asked Vice President Biden what other government policies, if any, demand direct action by the public. Biden replied that “those tax people need to be taught a lesson. They don’t take enough from the rich! If you’re middle class in America, just hold onto your tax check until you see all those rich oil executives pay their fair share. That will get the IRS’s attention.” It is unclear whether any Americans have taken the Vice President up on his suggestion, or if the IRS is responding to his direction.
This follows on an earlier incident in which Biden, while touring a Pennsylvania coal mine, was shocked to learn that coal was still being burned in power plants across the U.S. “That’s outrageous!” Biden was heard to say. “What crazy agency allowed that to happen? Don’t they know that coal is dirty? Dirty, dirty, dirty! This has to stop.” The mine supervisor who was leading the tour politely informed the Vice President that coal was a valuable natural resource, and that technology and regulation had corrected many of the problems coal-fired power plants had experienced in earlier decades. Biden was not to be deterred, however, saying that the miners should walk off the job to protest the “very bad policy” that had allowed such dirty energy to be produced. Bewildered miners took an hourlong break out of respect, but went back to work when the Vice President’s motorcade left the area.
Vice President Biden had earlier called for a general boycott of the Postal Service in November 2009 to protest the U.S. government’s failure to provide universal health care to all Americans. Biden claimed that it was a “national tragedy” that a country as rich as the United States would fail to provide health care to everyone, and when he noticed that the Postal Service had issued a stamp series called “Miracles of Modern Medicine,” he considered the federal government’s “very bad policy” to be “so hypocritical as to demand immediate, nonviolent action against the government.” Postal Service revenues plunged during the critical Christmas season, prompting an emergency rate hike. When Biden learned that his comments had largely been blamed for the increase in postage rates, which made the medical stamps insufficient postage, he told reporters that he “was proud to have ended that hypocritical stamp mess. Now we’ve just got to fix the health care thing.”
As has previously been reported, when Congress passed health care reform legislation, Biden was recorded as saying “this is a big f–ing deal.” Sources have since learned that Biden made this comment after noting that it was his boycott of the Postal Service that had caused Congress to reform health care. It is unknown if this result has led the Vice President to demand that Americans protest other federal policies that do not fit his progressive ideology.