blameless

With America enjoying the relief associated with no longer having to worry about a possible credit downgrade, Republican leadership got right to work on the single most important issue at hand - avoiding any remote suggestion that they might deserve even a scintilla of blame for the the fall from grace with the great gods S and P (deities so fearsome that their full names are rarely spoken aloud).   "The first time I met the president, just a couple days after his inauguration, I tried to explain to him my plan to reduce the deficit," House Majority Leader told the Wall Street Journal in an interview with the fair and balanced headline of 'Obama and the Narcissism of Big Differences'. "He just looked at me with that smug and smarmy little smile of his and says 'Young Eric, elections have consequences and I won'. I was too stunned to reply, 'yeah, Bozo, you might have won, but the rest of us lost'. And now it's easy to see how prophetic my unsaid words would have been, for he has managed to destroy our precious AAA credit rating and plunge us into the hell that is an AA+. Well, I did all I could, but sometimes one man can't make a difference."   Cantor did allow that there was a point where it appeared that progress was being made in negotiations because Biden and Boehner established a rapport, agreeing "not to get flared up over philosophical differences."   "Rapport, what a vile word," spat Cantor. "You might as well call it agreement to surrender, because that's what the Speaker was ready to do. What a piece of work. The other side wanted revenues, they were relentless about it. Can you imagine anything crazier than raising taxes at a time where our credit rating has been downgraded to a double A plus? Now we're going to need tax cuts more than ever."    "Young Eric has a big ego and an even bigger mouth," replied Speaker Boehner. "I guess we all remember who it was that was trying to achieve a grand bargain of four trillion and make changes in our runaway entitlement programs, and it wasn't anybody that might be nicknamed four-eyes. Sure, there was a revenue component, but it really wasn't much to write home about, just closing a few loopholes. It was four trillion dollars, and four trillion is exactly what the exalted Stand... whoops, I almost said their name aloud, but that's what the S&P gods wanted, and you should not deny them their due."   "Look, in the judgment they rendered upon us, S&P said that our governance and policymaking ha become less stable, effective and predictable. They said the threat of default had become a political bargaining chip in the debate over fiscal policy, and I sure don't think you've ever heard me threatening default, unlike a certain four-eyed whippersnapper I could mention."   "I'm listening here. I am not a four-eyed whippersnapper," responded a petulant Michele Bachmann.   "That's the House for you, always squabbling," chuckled Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. "I myself said that our tactics in the debt limit negotiations were the new template and that you could expect us to use them again and again. So as you can see,  there's more than enough blame to go around, although I am perfectly content to assign it all to President Obama."

Tea minus three

The nation's Congress continued the nation's plunge into ungovernability and political obsolescence today, with Republicans getting ever closer to their aspiration of successfully snatching failure from the jaws of victory through a combination of intractability, partisanship and good old fashion stupidity. In the Senate, Mitch McConnell delivered a letter to Majority Leader Reid containing the names of forty-three senators who promised to prevent his bill from ever ever ever being brought to a vote even though it contained almost all of the concessions they had been asking for.   "Almost is the operative word," chuckled McConnell. "Even though it gives us more than we ever dreamed we could get, it is a pointedly partisan bill which would deny us the opportunity to put Obama and the Democrats through all of this repeatedly over the next year. I have clearly stated that the number one priority for Senate Republicans is to ensure that Obama is a one term president, and in light of that goal, this bill will not stand."   In the House, this reasonable tone of enlightened self-interest was unable to prevail, with Speaker Boehner opting to have a 'symbolic vote' on legislation that will never reach him.   "Symbolism is important, as anyone who has ever seen the great hit movie 'Inception' can readily testify," explained Boehner. "Like most things in real life America, the story takes place almost entirely in dreams. And it's really trippy. The lead, played by Leonardo DiCaprio, is quite obviously a Barack Obama type of character, and we discover that the world he sees as paradise is in reality Limbo. He can't ever really wake up and he never will. Plus, there are a whole lot of phallic symbols, like the skyscrapers that suddenly rise and thrust into the sky, and the trains that appear from nowhere and scare the bejesus out of you. Trains are always phallic symbols. And don't forget that the plot is all about penetrating someone's dream and planting a seed. My god, that movie is full of dicks, and so is the House of Representatives."

break time

"Oh my God, I can't believe how much this thing stinks."   "I know, Harry, I'm about to gag."   "The sad thing is, my own bill doesn't smell a whole lot better."   "You're being too hard on yourself. I mean, granted that your legislation is an exceedingly generous concession for a Democrat, but it's not foul like this piece of shit."   "Well, that's nice of you to say, Mitch."   "I know, but don't get used to it. This is likely the only concession you'll get from me any time soon."   "I'm sure that's true.. At least I have the satisfaction of knowing it's you and Kyl that have to whip for it."   "I'm not going to twist any arms to wrangle votes for this bull crap. Kyl, maybe, but I... I guess I'll have to, a little... Do me a favor, Harry. Get it to a vote as quickly as you can. Make the suffering as short as possible. I'll owe you."   "Will you owe me enough to support my crappy bill?"   "I don't know, Harry. You know that I've got a crappy bill of my own in play."   "The problem is, Mitch, even if your crappy bill clears the Senate, it's not crappy enough to have a chance in the House."   "You're probably right, Harry. But then I don't know if anything without a balanced budget amendment would be approved."   "Do these morons in the House have any understanding of the fact that while a balanced budget amendment makes a certain amount of sense for a state, it's ludicrous for the nation."   "No they do not, and if you tried to explain it to them, they'd just start bitching and moaning about entrenched bureaucracies."   "It's sad... Well, you ready to get back on the floor and debate some more meaningless bullshit?"   "No, but let's do it."

The McConnell Scenario

It's been a long and lonely day at the theater for Senate Republicans during the great debt drama, with all of the good speaking parts going to the Obama team, Boehner and Cantor, and the occasional presidential aspirant. Striving to share that rarified air, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has introduced a new solution for raising the debt limit which straddles the middle ground between Machiavellian and utterly bizarre.   The proposal, which McConnell calls the 'last choice option', is basically a way to allow the the raising of the debt limit that would shield Republican members from Tea Party wrath while also protecting them from banishment by their corporate overlords, and insure an ongoing base-gratifying battle with Obama through the middle of next summer if not beyond.   "Okay, try and follow me," McConnell explained to a largely vacant Senate floor. "We have this imaginary pile of money, two and a half trillion in the case at hand. We separate that money into three imaginary piles - one of $700 billion and two of $900 billion. That's pretty easy to visualize. Our scenario states that the president wants to make this money real by turning it into debt. He'll have to ask us for permission to do this and he'll have to ask us three times. Now, this fall and next summer. But he does ask us nicely so we say, alright Mister President, we'll talk about it. But first you need to bring us a list of $700 to $900 billion dollars in spending cuts."   "Okay.  Now, let's hypothesize that we're in a good mood on the day when the president brings us that list of spending offsets, and we decide to consider them.  We still don't want to appear to be kowtowing to him, so we just give him a little money, say a 100 billion, and tell him that we'll get back to him in fifteen days. And then all of the Republicans vote down his request. Can't you just imagine the look on his face?"   "Eventually, Wall Street - God love 'em - is going to come along and spoil our fun. They don't want to see the economy bushwhacked and I can kind of understand where they're coming from. But you know what the GOP has to do? Absolutely nothing. You see, we deny his request under a legislative provision known as the joint resolution of disapproval. Don't you just love that name? And it's more like a bill than it is a resolution of anything, which means that Obama can veto it. Then it come back to the House and Senate, where it can't be overridden because of the obstructionist tax and spend Democratic Party. So Obama gets his debt limit increase, Democrats get the blame, and we get to keep our political virginity. And, we can have a good time doing it.  I mean, how much fun is it going to be watching this president repeatedly grapple with a joint resolution of disapproval? I believe that the American people find that name inherently funny."   "Now here's the beauty part. That list of spending cuts that we make Obama bring us - we're under no obligation to pass those cuts or even seriously consider them. Particularly not in an election year. What we are free to do, however, is campaign on them. We can be out their saying, Obama tried to cut your Medicare and we stopped it. It'll be hilarious. This is such a great plan - you've got to love it."   "Oh yeah," said a dejected John Boehner, "an absolutely brilliant plan. I mean, why would we want to get something out of these negotiations when we can get nothing? Just a few days ago I was on the verge of a four trillion dollar deal, but then young Eric raises a ruckus about closing tax loopholes and now we're considering a proposal which reads like a bad game show. Brilliant, Mitch, just brilliant."   "I don't think that the Speaker fully understands my plan," replied McConnell. "This strategy isn't about getting something per se, this strategy is about humiliating the president. What he calls nothing smells like victory to me."

Independence Day special: the fourteenth amendment

"I've got to admit it, John. For the first time, I'm starting to get really, really worried."   "About what? About destroying the full faith and credit of the United States? I'm really glad to hear you say that, Mitch, because I've been thinking that we've really got to compromise on the debt limit before it's too late."   "What the hell are you talking about, Boehner? There will be no compromise on new revenues or taxes during my watch. What I'm worried about is the fact that Obama is right on the verge of bamboozling us again."   "Obama is going to bamboozle us?"   "Oh, the man is a bamboozler, all right. Let there be no doubt about it. And I think he may be getting ready to play his fourteenth amendment card on us."   "You know, I like the Constitution and I'm familiar with all it's more salient features, but uh... would you just briefly refresh my memory on that one?"   "Don't you have your pocket Constitution with you, Boehner?"   "Let me check... No... No, I think I must have left it in one of my other black suits."   "Here. Section 4. It's quite brief, so you should be able to follow it. 'The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.'"   "Frankly, Mitch, I don't see how that's a problem. I don't think any of us are questioning how valid our debt is. It's how we're going to pay for it that's the problem."   "It means that Obama can keep on borrowing to pay out obligations and say the Constitution requires him to, bonehead. It means that it might be legal for him to subvert our mandate."   "That's crazy talk."   "That's the exact same thing John Cornyn said on FOX News Sunday. Where were you? Playing golf?"   "Shot a 76 at Rock Creek. Could have been two over par but I had a double bogey on the seventeen."   "I don't know what the hell you're talking about. The point is, this sort of crazy talk is rampant. Chuck Shumer is telling his supporters that we're deliberately trying to sabotage the economy as a means to defeat Obama next year."   "Imagine that. It's pitiful that he's just figuring that out now."   "Yeah, well now that he has, he's urging Obama to consider playing the fourteenth amendment card."   "Shumer always has been a bit of a nogoodnik.... So, is that all the fourteenth amendment has to say about the matter? I mean, the Constitution always tends to get a little wordy."   "That's about the size of it, other than the government doesn't have to pay for the loss of slave services or for debt incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States."   "Not a lot to work with there..."    "That's why I'm worried. If Obama were to use that way out, there would be rioting in the street."   "I thought we were supposed to support a strict interpretation of the Constitution... Of course, our Tea Party friends go crazy when it's someone else interpreting it, so you're probably right, that's just the price we'll have to pay."   "God knows how you've risen as high as you have, Boehner."   "Brinkmanship, Mitch, same as you."

the warrior

"Harumph... Harumph... Is this thing on? Good afternoon. As most of you know, Speaker Boehner and I met with President Obama yesterday to talk about ways in which we might work together in order to confront our crippling deficit. We imagined that we had seen a little bit of light in the darkness, a little clarity coming from underneath the door of bureaucracy, but when we opened that door, do you know what we found? More darkness. In a way it was darker than the darkness we thought we were leaving because it was full of terrifying sounds which appeared to be coming towards us with breakneck speed. Can you begin to describe what that sounder like, Boehner?"   "No, I really can't Mitch, because with the absence of light I was unable to ground my imagination to objective reality."   "Which is exactly what is wrong with Obama's views on the way to save our financial future. The President's imagination is not grounded in objective reality. For example, the one thing we told him in no uncertain terms is that we will absolutely will not be discussing any increase in taxes. And then Boehner repeated his shopworn cliché about how we don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem."   "I do say that a lot, Mitch, in part because I believe it. Of course if you looked at it objectively, you'd have to say that they're actually two different ways of looking at the same thing."   "But we can't look at it objectively, Boehner, because of the aforementioned lack of light and the unspeakable places it causes our imaginations to wander. Now, hard as it is to believe, an hour after we had spoken to Obama, in spite of what we had ordered him, he was on national television talking about increasing taxes. It was as though we had never had a dialogue at all, and was perfectly willing to thwart the will of the American people. It's time for us to put our foot down and say no."   "It's time to say hell no."   "It's time for us to stop the Obama agenda dead in it's tracks, but that is something the American people are not able to do, because they will not have the ability to vote him out of office until November of a future year. By then it will be too late. The new Republican president won't take office until late January. Even then it may take three or four weeks before he can extend the Bush tax cuts, because through parliamentary trickery, the Bush cuts will not be able to be extended. Instead a new bill will have to be crafted."   "It will be as though the Bush tax cuts never existed... That really boggles the mind."   "As well it should.. It's like the Twilight Zone, and that's another dimension America is not interested in visiting. But the entire issue is irrelevant, Boehner. We don't want the Bush tax cuts."    "We don't?"   "No we don't, Boehner. We want the Ryan tax cuts. If I may addle your sifter-like memory, your own caucus introduced that a couple of weeks ago. And correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that you were pretty quick on your feet to endorse it."   "I tend to support the most constructive..."   "Much like the citizens of this great nation, there is very little I can do to help Boehner's dream of an American oligarchy come to fruition. I am saddled with a contrarian Senate seemingly unable to bend to my will. I cannot stop the motor of the world. No, only one man can do that - Boehner."   "Well, I don't know about stopping..."   "For stop it he shall, with the help of his mighty House majority. Thanks to him, there shall be no precipitous rise in the debt level. And though I am only able to cheer him on from the sidelines, Boehner is alone. He is above us and below us."   "I don't even know what that means... But I do have a mighty House majority..."   "But that will not stop a majority of the house of our nation to retch at the very mention of the word Boehner, and to cause him and his seed to suffer the scorn of many a haughty pundit."   "You're kind of bumming me out, Mitch..."   "And though you might think he would be able to find solace in the fellowship of his fellow Republicans, they will deny him as such, claiming that he deceived them into betraying their own by-and large-quite reasonable political inclinations in a vain search for corporate approval."   "You know, a lot of my business friends have been calling me to say that they believe the debt limit is kind of sacrosanct..."   "America does not know that word, and if they did, it would not sheild you from the curses that will arise whenever your name is uttered aloud for eons into the future."   "Thank God I have a lot of sick leave built up..."

the battle for symbolic victory

"Well, this is really a revolting development, isn't it, John?"   "It certainly is, Mitch, and like most revolting developments, I believe the first reaction on our part should be to get a drink."   "That's your first reaction to any development, revolting or not."   "Touché. But you can't deny that this is a revolting one. Obama announcing a two year freeze on all raises for government workers. How do we oppose that?"   "It's not going to be easy, particularly since you put it in that stupid 'Pledge to America' of yours."   "The pledge is not stupid, Mitch..."   "Yeah, well, how many times have I told you never to put anything into writing? That's the stupid part. Obama is obviously going to play this up as some sort of symbolic victory, the first blow in the fight to reduce the deficit."   "Oh yeah, no doubt. But I think that we can play it down. I mean it's only a couple of billion dollars, hardly a drop in the bucket."   "Symbolism, John, symbolism. It's going to be all over the TV. He's out there telling federal workers that this is part of a broad national sacrifice, and meanwhile we're busy focusing on tax cuts for millionaires."   "Those aren't just millionaires, Mitch, they're our financiers."   "Uh huh. Uh huh. That makes for a great sound byte, doesn't it Tan Man? No two ways to cut it, he just took the rhetorical upper hand."   "Oh, I don't know, Mitch. You know, I went on record a couple of weeks ago saying that I was going to fly commercial."   "That made quite a splash, didn't it? Don't you see what's going on here, Boehner? Obama's going to try and triangulate. Don't you remember Bill Clinton?"   "Vaguely..."   "Let me tell you something, Boehner, those who remember history are likely... those who don't remember history... how does that go?"   "Those who don't remember history are unlikely to be troubled by a guilty conscience."   "Something like that. So tell me, how do we deny Obama a PR victory on this, even though it was pretty much our idea?"   "I don't know, Mitch. Let's go get a pitcher of martinis and listen to Rush. I'm sure he'll come up with something."

Speaker-In-Waiting

"Well go ahead, Boehner, you've got all the friggin microphones. We were supposed to have one each but Mister Speaker-In-Waiting wants to hog them all." "I'm not so sure that I want one, young Eric. I think I'd much rather stand here and look on disapprovingly. That's why I've got you in the middle, so I can distance myself from the fool." "I may be in the middle, but I'm standing behind him, Mitch. Wait, I'm not so sure I like the way that sounds." "Hey Boehner, you gonna speak or just stand there all day like a big dummy?" "Give me a break, Mitch. We've still got a few minutes before the statement to the press is set to begin, and I'm... I'm thinking about canceling. I mean, I know what I wanted to say but right now I can't think of the right way to put it." "Duh, that's because it's a lose-lose situation. Can you believe it, Mitch, the big dummy wants to promise to raise inflation." "Yes, young Eric, just like Ben Bernake. I do understand the need for low level inflation but it would be pure insanity for us to acknowledge that." "Sure, Mitch, but bonehead here wants to promise a couple years of double digit inflation." "Give me a little respect here, you two. I was just thinking that since increases in Social Security benefits are tied to inflation, it would be a great way for us to shore up our support with seniors heading into 2012." "Whoa, whoa, whoa, Boehner, that might work with the old folks but it's a great way to lose everybody else." "It's not even going to work with the senior citizens, young Eric. Sure, they want their increases, but they don't want inflation. They want to have their cake and eat it too."   "They are greedy bastards, aren't they? I have no idea why you would even want their support, Boehner." "I just thought it might be pragmatic to cater to them for a couple of years, Eric. We're not going to be able to begin dismantling Social Security until after 2012 irregardless." "You know what, fool? Some things are better left unsaid. Come on, Mitch, I'll buy you a cup of coffee." "Don't fall for that one, Mitch. You know the coffee is free."   "Shut up, numbnuts. We've got an election in a couple of weeks and you can handle this on your own." "Uh... [tap tap] Is this thing on?... Good afternoon. I have just a few brief words. As I'm sure you already know, this morning the Obama administration announced that for the second year in a row, there will be no increase in Social Security benefits. This... shameful fact... affecting our most vulnerable citizens... has created an environment where... uh, where our long suffering seniors need to go back to work. But where are the jobs? That's the topic of my remarks today. Where are the jobs? After nearly two years of the stagnant Obama economy...

One degree of separation from Justice Roberts

Good morning, and welcome to the weekly Republican rebuttal of President Obama's weekly Saturday address. Or as I like to call it, the GOP's weekly exercise in futility, seeing as how nobody listens to the President's Saturday address and even less listen to ours. Nevertheless, it's a long and hallowed tradition here in the Washington, much like wallowing in corporate money. That sound you hear in the background is Chief Justice Roberts trying rather unsuccessfully to suppress a laugh. You'll just have to take my word for that, of course, since we're not being televised. Which brings up a really interesting question - What the hell are we doing dressing up for a radio address? Heh heh, made him laugh out loud that time. Moving on to the point, President Obama today was once again criticizing the Supreme Court’s decision to let corporations spend without limit or any public disclosure on advertising aimed at influencing elections, and he was criticizing Senate Republicans for trying to protect these corporate rights by blocking his proposed regulations. To quote him verbatim, he said "a partisan minority in Congress is hoping their defense of these special interests and the status quo will be rewarded with a flood of negative ads against their opponents. It's a power grab, pure and simple." To which I would respond, duh. Ah, I've got Justice Roberts giggling again, which is good news because he certainly wasn't giggling half an hour ago when the President took it upon himself to once again to call that Supreme Court decision one of the worst ever. You were pretty hot around the collar about that, weren't you John? Well, Justice Roberts can't answer that because it might be seen by some as inappropriate for him to weigh in on what is basically a partisan difference of opinion. You see, here in Washington we also have a long and hallowed tradition called the separation of powers, which the Republican Party deeply respects, and for the Chief Justice to respond would understandably be seen as unseemly. So Justice Roberts, just give me a wink if you'd like to kick Obama's ass. I think I saw a wink, folks. To conclude, I would just like to ask the American people - at least the few who might be listening - why in the middle of the worst recession in memory is the President not focusing on jobs? I mean, he says this bill is about transparency. It's about transparency, all right: It's a transparent effort to help Democrats ahead of an election in which they clearly can't run on their record. Right, John? Ah, I think I saw a wink.

Happy news spurs party plan

The Republican leadership is ecstatic over a just released report from the Joint Committee on Taxation that analyzes the cost of extending the Bush tax cuts. According to the nonpartisan number crunchers, the extension would add 238 billion to the federal deficit in 2011. "There are members of Congress that feel this is still too high, including some in my own party," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. "I would agree, while pointing out that this is less than a third of President Obama's wasteful stimulus plan. Nevertheless, it is clear that proliferate spending must be brought under control, and I believe that the American people are willing to make sacrifices to achieve that end. The most interesting thing about this study is the fact that extending these tax cuts to those of us that make over a quarter million dollars a year, who the Obama administration childishly labels as the richest Americans, would cost only a paltry 36 billion next year. I'd call that a bargain." "A bargain? Indeed it is," agreed House Minority Leader Boehner. "That's not much more than the Democrats just rammed through to pay off all the unionized special interests in the schools and police departments. All about political payoffs, wasn't it, Mitch?" "You bet, John, whereas extending our cuts let's us hardworking Americans keep a little liquidity in our pockets during a time of real economic hardship. That's why I'm excited that we're together today to tell everyone about the exciting new GOP plan to both keep more of our own money and turn around the economy at the same time." "It is an exciting plan, Mitch. You know, this report was a real eye opener, and it seems that as usual, the devil is in the details. Would you care to expound on that?" "Glad to, John. It seems that a careful examination of this report reveals the shocking fact that a full 202 billion dollars is added to the deficit by extending the tax cuts to the least wealthy 98% of Americans. That's six times as much as is added by the so-called rich. Hardly fair and equitable." "Hardly fair at all, Mitch. And as we all know, giving money to people who are only going to use it to pay bills or buy food doesn't aid one bit in the important task of job creation." "That's right, John. It's like pouring water down a drain. It's gone and you've got nothing to show for it. Whereas 87% of money saved by the rich goes directly into job creation. That's a fact straight from the Heritage Foundation. That's why we're together today to announce our exciting plan to extend the Bush tax cuts only to those making more than $250,000." "It's a great strategy, Mitch. 202 billion in deficit reduction and 36 billion for job creation." "We don't need to exaggerate, John. That's 202 billion in deficit reduction and 31.32 billion in job creation." "Not all of us wear a calculator watch, McConnell. I was close enough for government work." "Steady as she goes, John. The important thing is our plan is bringing America together in the spirit of shared sacrifice." "And it most assuredly is shared sacrifice, Mitch, because the top 2% will be paying the same rate on their first $250,000 as the rest of the country." "Oh. That's right. So if I'm not mistaken, that means 202.74 billion in deficit reduction. This is a great plan, John." "It is a great plan, Mitch."

Memo from the desk of Mitch McConnell, re: Elena Kagan

Dear fellow GOP Senators, We will soon begin deliberations on the nomination of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court, and it is of the utmost importance that we stand united in our opposition to her. There are many reasons for us to resist her rise to the highest court in the land, but the case was best summarized yesterday by Judson Phillips of Tea Party Nation who writes "Obama wants to transform this country from a right of center country, to a European style socialist country. He knows the congress is going to go from Democratic controlled to either Republican controlled or split evenly. To get much of his agenda enacted or saved, he is going to need control of the judiciary." Mr Phillips then goes on to emphasize that we should oppose "any nominee who comes through from Obama even if that means for the next two years, we only have eight justices." I believe we all understand the inherent truth in these words. Unfortunately, we cannot speak bluntly to the American people during an election year without suffering cynical accusations of obstructionism from both our Democratic opponents and the liberal mainstream media. Therefore it is important that we get our talking points together so that we may present objections that the average voter can easily understand. Kagan has virtually no paper trail, meaning there are few past writings for us to attack. And almost everything she has written is within an academic context, making it far too boring to read... Just what is she trying to hide? This, however, is not an easy matter. Kagan has virtually no paper trail, meaning there are few past writings for us to attack. In addition, almost everything she has written is framed within an academic context, making it far too boring to read. Just what is she trying to hide? Therefore, I've seen fit to put together an opening list of topics for your use. I am sure that many of you have thoughts of your own, and I look forward to discussing them with you both individually and together as a group. 1. As I said above, Kagan has virtually no paper trail. I think this is odd, and with proper presentation, I'm sure that the American people will think it odd as well. 2. On the other hand, Kagan was unable to hide her 2003 memo blasting the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy, which is the law of the land. If this doesn't show an activist slant, I don't know what does. 3. As dean of Harvard Law, Kagan allowed military recruiters on campus when the Solomon Amendment allowed federal funds to be withheld from non-complying universities. One year later, when the law was struck down, she once again banned the recruiters, proving she hates the military. 4. Re: 3, this may also be seen as a clear indication that she has absolutely no regard for national security. 5. Also, re: 3. a flipflopper. 6. Kagan could prove to be every bit as liberal as Justice Stevens, effectively keeping the court in stasis. 'In Stasis' is the key phrase; research show that most Americans react negatively to the phrase, believing it refers to being buried alive. 7. Jim Inhofe opposes her, and most Americans believe he was right about global warming. 8. Kagan would be the first nominee in the past 41 years with no judicial experience. I realize that until recently many of you were advocating the selection of someone outside of the judicial arena, but it need not be seen as a negative if we emphasize that the GOP is the party of flexibility, while the Democrats are the party of rigid thinking. 9.Three women on the Supreme Court? At the same time? What the hell is up with that? White men are quickly becoming a minority. 10. Re: 9. Depending on your state, this may be phrased as 'What does Obama have against black men? Even George Bush nominated a black man. 11. In 1980, when Kagan was only 20 years old, she got drunk on vodka and cried after liberal Democrat Elizabeth Holtzman lost her race for the Senate. Holtzman, as you may recall, went on to write 'The Impeachment of George W. Bush: a practical guide for concerned citizens'. Enough said. 12. Re: 11. We don't need a drunk on the Supreme Court. 13. Also, re:11. Or a crybaby. 14. Kagan has no children. Democrats may site this as a positive since Kagan has never been married, but if you're going to select someone so far out of the traditional experience of American women, why not just choose a man? 15. Maybe she's never been married because, re:14, Kagan is rumored to be a lesbian. Even if this turns out to be nothing but innuendo, she certainly looks like a lesbian, and that should be enough to give us pause. 16. Re: 15. What the hell sort of a haircut is that anyway? Yours in victory 2010, Mitch McConnell

McConnell explains position on finance bill

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is blasting back at President Obama, who during his weekly radio address called McConnell's stance against the financial regulatory bill a cynical and deceptive argument. "Why, that arrogant pup," fumed McConnell, sitting in the VIP booth at an Alexandria Denny's with a group of other elderly schoolmarms. "He needs to be taught to respect America's financial institutions. And Capitalism in general. Because what he's attempting is a huge power grab - total federal control over the very dollars in our pocket. I keep mine in my left front pants pocket to protect against hooligans, tightly secured by an Adam Smith money clip. Ones on the outside then the fives, tens, twenties, and a couple hundreds right in the middle like a little money sandwich. No fifties, never. I'm not at all fond of Ulysses S. Grant, not after what he did to Paducah in the Civil War. Every September 6th I go back home for Paducah Day just to relive the humiliation of that blow against the Confederacy." "Anyway, as I was saying, the good thing about making a money sandwich, is that when you're someplace like Denny's where you don't need a lot of cash to get a quality meal, you can pay your bill without the waitress seeing how much money you have and trying to rob you. The way the Obama regime is trying to rob the American people by telling them what they can and can't buy, and making them responsible for paying out an endless stream of bailout money." "Anyway, getting back to the topic, the waitresses won't try to rob you if they think all you've got on you is a roll of ones. It just isn't worth risking their careers over. And believe me, waitressing is considered a pretty good career in a lot of parts of Kentucky, because most of the girls don't want to go anywhere near a mine. That's their choice, and thank God we still have a little freedom of choice left in America, like the freedom to invest in so-called risky derivatives, but unless we fight this bill that freedom will simply disappear. Much like my coffee. Waitress." "See, now this girl is going to expect me to tip her just because she refilled my coffee. And I could easily do that, just peel off a bill from the outside of my money sandwich, but that should be my choice to make, not like those fancy Socialist restaurants where the tip is automatically included. That makes me ill, just like this finance bill. What I really like are those places back home where they've got a tip jar up front by the cashier. I really don't like to carry pocket change, and that way the waitresses can't see what you're doing with your money. And I'm sure Wall Street feels pretty much the same way."

pre-summit strategy

"You drew the short straw, Boehner. That means you've got to do the giant health care bill stunt." "Not a problem, McCain, even though I'm pretty sure they were all short straws. I'll just give this to my sidekick Eric the Wonder Whip. That little twit will enjoy messing with Obama, even if it does makes him look juvenile and foolish. Or more foolish than usual, I should say." "Do you really think that the president is going to be flustered by seeing a giant health care bill on the table, Boehner?" "That's a good question, Mitch. Let's ask an expert. What do you think, McCain? You were almost president - would seeing a giant health care bill on the table have befuddled you?" "I would consider it a serious breach of decorum, so yes, I've got to say that it would likely throw me off track. But the truth is, I don't really give a fuck as long as it embarrasses Cantor." "That boy is too dumb to embarrass, but at least it'll be good for a laugh. Do you know what would be even funnier? If I had a giant health care bill also - then there would be a giant bill on either side of Obama. I'm laughing just thinking about it." "You don't look like your laughing, Boehner. You look like you're about to cry." "Oh yeah, I'm practicing. The camera just eats that up. I'm going to alternate between tearful, impatient, and unctuous. What do you think, Mitch? Good strategy?" "Well, I do appreciate the fact that you and Cantor are handling the props, since the Senate is far too dignified for that sort of shenanigans. But it is going to be a long meeting, so I hope I get a chance to see you seethe a little bit." "Forget about it, McConnell, that's a job for a real pro. You just leave the seething up to John McCain and you're going to see a red-faced, eye bulging, vein-popping seething demonstration of the type you can't buy for love or money. And when I speak... look out, their will be no prisoners taken and no quarter given. I'm going to snarl and interrupt and laugh in a strangely inappropriate way. And when that Nigerian motherfucker tries condescending to me, I'm gonna bite his goddamn head off." "You are a truly angry man, John." "You best believe it, Boehner, I'm on fire. If ACORN hadn't stolen the election, I would be the president and we wouldn't be in this mess today." "As I recall, you did vote for the bailout." "That's because Paulson and Bernake lied to me, you stupid fucking self-righteous peckerhead!" "Careful, Boehner, he's already turning crimson and the summit doesn't even begin for another hour." "Just getting him prepped, Mitch. You haven't told us yet what your strategy is for this meeting. You gonna go with your indignantly-lost-in-traffic expression?" "I know that's a pretty effective tactic, but I thought today I would stare at Obama intently and imagine that I have no pants on." "Oh jeez, Mitch, that's not much of a strategy. You know, that's an old trick for a speaker, where they imagine the audience naked, so that the speaker feels..." "I know that, Boehner, but seeing as how the President is an African-American, I'm worried that if I imagined him without any pants it might somehow be misconstrued as racism." "If I see this numbnuts imagining himself without his goddamn pants on, I'm gonna strangle him with his own intestines." "I've got a better idea, Mitch. When Obama calls on you, just yield the floor to McCain."