Changes, they are a Changin'

In a clean break with the practice of Senate Republicans Joe Biden came to have lunch with Senate Democrats. We had been told by Harry Reid that the practice, when Vice President Cheney engaged in it, was a sign of overreach of executive power.

Now, never mind that the Constitution, a document each of the parties has been unanimous in accusing the other of totally disregarding, states of the vice president that he- "shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be evenly divided" (Article I, section 3). Never mind either the great fun that was had at Sarah Palin's expense over her statement to school children that the vice president is "in charge" of the Senate (We are supposed to believe, I guess, that it was her duty to elucidate for fourth graders the difference between the function of a generic "president" [to preside] and that of the nation's president [to be in charge] Poor things, don't you know they are scarred for life!).

So, for whatever reason, Joseph Biden, Jr., who is the vice president of the United States, and does have the Constitutionally given job noted above appears to have been conceded the right to show up at Senate lunches. Only time will tell if that is a dangerous retreat on "change"

Posted by Lee Emmerich Jamison at January 28, 2009 10:17 AM
Comments
Comment #274467

How many subjects did the Democratics and the media focus on that are suddenly not so bad?
I just talked to a guy responsible for testing FEMA houses in New Orleans. They all passed. There’s a natural amount of formaldahyde in all building materials and standard operating procedure for new homes of that nature is to let the house breath for the first year. That issue was a non-issue.

Tax breaks for the rich! Don’t hear much about those now-a-days do you? How about get out of Iraq in 6 months or else, the war is lost! Now it’s a year and a half, maybe.
Thousands of dollars in bribe money found in a freezer and narry a word from the media or nothing from Pelosi for resignations. Yet, “ethics violations” on the other side of the isle are constantly in the news all the way up to an election! Hmmm. Can the media and the Democratic Party spell double-standard?

Posted by: Weary Willie at January 28, 2009 1:55 PM
Comment #274472

Now Weary, in fairness, the people of New Orleans did do to William Jefferson (he of the $90,000 in cold, hard cash) what the San Fran Nan and the people of the Democratic Party would not. They fired him.

They also replaced him with a Republican- a minority Republican at that.

The lesson of years of watching leaders on both sides (but especially our own) seems to be that being in charge makes people mumble a lot.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at January 28, 2009 2:53 PM
Comment #274499
Gingrich announced his resignation from his House seat and as Speaker.

Foley had virtually no chance of staying in Congress

Tom DeLay announced Tuesday he will not run for office again and not finish his current term.

Hastert said that he choose to resign this week

The Democratics may have set W.Jefferson aside, but the media did not focus for days and months on W.Jefferson. Not to the extent they did on their political rivals, most of who were not convicted of a crime.
Lee,
I’m glad you have the character to point out the hypocracy of the Democratic Party Leadership. It reminds me of this week’s airing of “What would you do?” where an abusive store clerk ripped off blind customers while all but a few seeing customers watched and did nothing.

Posted by: Weary Willie at January 28, 2009 9:44 PM
Comment #274508

Weary,

Want to see real character? Look one column to the left and see what Remer is saying about the guy he cheerled for all of the last six months.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at January 29, 2009 12:31 AM
Comment #274513

Are you talking about Mr. Remer’s posts that critique Obama’s performance as of the last two weeks? It doesn’t take much character to play both sides of the fence. I’m glad his posts are pointing out differences of opinion now but, …?

Is that what you’re talking about? Were you being sarcastic when you talk of “the guy”? Did I read too much into that? Am I going to get banned?


Posted by: Weary Willie at January 29, 2009 1:42 AM
Comment #274517

Weary,

You’re not going to be banned on my account. My comment was about holding those whom we support to account for their promises and standing by our own values even when it may cost us politically or personally.

To an outsider it would appear easy for me to criticize the appointment and continued support for Timothy Geitner. That his seat at the table of power undermines the rule of law and the appearance of setting things right can be overlooked because I’m supposed to be ‘partizan’.

It is the fact that Geitner’s presence in the administration is corrosive to the credibility of Obama’s ‘rule of law’ supporters that has raised Remer’s hackles.

So far, as this short post is intended to point out, Obama’s support has been generally reason-free. He could propose a “marshmallow in every pot” policy and get it passed by compliant Democrats for the time being. When the lust for fairy dust has worn off, though, credibilty will matter.

What I worry about most is that reality, that which does not go away when you stop believing in it, is a contingency neither this administration, not the Congress, nor even the politics of the present day is prepared to deal with.

Want to see character? Facing, then seeing, then accepting, then working within the confines of REALITY builds character.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at January 29, 2009 11:01 AM
Comment #274547

WW “They all passed. There‚Äôs a natural amount of formaldahyde in all building materials and standard operating procedure for new homes of that nature is to let the house breath for the first year. That issue was a non-issue.”

Careful who you talk to WW:
From Wikipedia “The United States Centers For Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) performed indoor air quality testing for formaldehyde [32] in some of the units. On Thursday, February 14, 2008 the CDC announced that potentially hazardous levels of formaldehyde were found in many of the travel trailers and mobile homes provided by the agency.[33][34] The CDC’s preliminary evaluation of a scientifically established random sample of 519 travel trailers and mobile homes tested between Dec. 21, 2007 and Jan. 23, 2008 (2+ years after manufacture) showed average levels of formaldehyde in all units of about 77 parts per billion (ppb). Long-term exposure to levels in this range can be linked to an increased risk of cancer and, at levels above this range, there can also be a risk of respiratory illness. These levels are higher than expected in indoor air, where levels are commonly in the range of 10-20 ppb, and are higher than the Agency for Toxic Substance Disease Registry (ATSDR, division of the CDC) Minimal Risk Level (MRL) of 8 ppb [35]. Levels measured ranged from 3 ppb to 590 ppb.[36]”

Posted by: j2t2 at January 29, 2009 6:17 PM
Comment #274708

j2t2
The homes we sent were good, but we suffered the same fate the national media inflicts on all of us for political reasons.

The whold Katrina disaster was turned into a political hammer to use on the President.

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 1, 2009 6:59 AM
Comment #274756

WW,

The president turned himself into a nail…what should he have expected? Did he arrive at his age and station in life without knowing that in a national disaster he’d have to act like a president instead of a spectator? Of course he was hammered…that’s what you do to a nail.

Posted by: Marysdude at February 2, 2009 7:32 AM
Comment #274781

OH MY GOD
I GUESS HALF OF NEW ORLEANS STILL NOT RECOVERED — AFTER PROMISES FROM THE DIVIDER IN CHIEF WAS ALL JUST A MEDIA AND BUSH-HATER PLOY???

THE THOUSANDS TRAPPED AT THE SUPERDOME, FEMA UNABLE TO DO ANYTHING, BUT PRIVATE GROUPS DID WAS ALL A MEDIA FALLACY???
GIVE ME A BREAK
BUSH ADMIN WAS THE MOST INCOMPETENT IN HISTORY, PLEASE DO NOT INSULT US WITH BLATENT ATTEMPT AT LAME HISTORICAL REWRITE.

Posted by: RUSS at February 2, 2009 12:54 PM
Comment #274935

Russ,

We had been warned literally for decades that New Orleans was a disaster waiting to happen. I read an article specifically to that effect in a Scientific American magazine three years before Katrina, and it outlined EXACTLY the circumstances in which the situation in New Orleans was inevitable.

Add to that the scope of the destruction from Katrina and Rita and the burdens of other storms and people such as yourself expecting the government to simply reach in and put the world right again are engaging in the height of fantasy.

The people in the Superdome were not supposed to be there. Opportunities to evacuate the city were squandered by responsible officials at a time when it would have been illegal for federal officials to act. It was stupid for city officials to establish a supposed “shelter of last resort”, thus literally inviting people not to leave. For their part the people of Louisiana have taken a lesson from this, throwing out incompetent and corrupt officials in the hope that a new batch of leaders can make headway against Louisiana’s heritage of government criminality and ineffectiveness.

As to New Orleans being “half not recovered” the statement itself is one of ignorance. You might as well deride the government for not refloating and recommissioning the U.S.S.Maine. Half of the whole affected Gulf Coast is not recovered, including places ravaged by Rita like Port Authur and Beaumont, Texas! From Mobile, Alabama to Galveston, Texas the landscape remains dotted with tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of blue roofs and whole cities have been effectively scoured to the ground. Strange, Russ, that you don’t find that interesting.

In the midst of all the destruction (Rita alone was more destructive than Camille, the storm of storms when I was young.) The money being thrown into New Orleans, rebuilding housing and infrastructure at the bottom of a leaky lake bed, is an insult to mammalian intelligence.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at February 4, 2009 9:46 AM
Post a comment