<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Reid Calls Republicans&#039; Bluff</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.chrisweigant.com/2010/04/26/reid-calls-republicans-bluff/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2010/04/26/reid-calls-republicans-bluff/</link>
	<description>Reality-based political commentary</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 May 2026 17:18:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Chris Weigant</title>
		<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2010/04/26/reid-calls-republicans-bluff/#comment-8682</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Weigant</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 May 2010 06:18:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisweigant.com/?p=1946#comment-8682</guid>
		<description>Michale -

If the Republican position was so principled, why did they fold Wednesday?  

HCR passed the Senate the same way bills have passed the Senate for years... even under Republican rule.  I bet they would call that &quot;democracy,&quot; at least when they&#039;re in the driver&#039;s seat.  You can&#039;t argue FOR some Senate rules (filbuster/cloture) and AGAINST others (reconciliation, for instance) in the same breath... it&#039;s inconsistent.  Either following the arcane rules of the Senate is the American way, or it is not.  Pick one.

You should check that 75% figure.  HCR has gotten more popular of late.  Update your figures from a recent poll, dude.

&quot;START with a good strong bill through negotiation&quot; means cutting a backroom deal that the public doesn&#039;t get to see.  The question is: Are you for or against such backroom deals?  Either what the Republicans tried (and failed) to do was just as bad as the Cornhusker Kickback, or both were fair game.  Take your pick -- they&#039;re both backroom deals.

Also, hate to break it to you, but what they wanted to start with was a much weaker bill.  Check any analysis of their 20-page summary in the news, if you don&#039;t believe me.

The Democrats agreed to one compromise, that they had already thrown under the bus two weeks ago (when Obama came out against it).  Doesn&#039;t sound very much like the Republicans &quot;won&quot; much of anything.  They caved.  Deal with it, it happens.

-CW</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Michale -</p>
<p>If the Republican position was so principled, why did they fold Wednesday?  </p>
<p>HCR passed the Senate the same way bills have passed the Senate for years... even under Republican rule.  I bet they would call that "democracy," at least when they're in the driver's seat.  You can't argue FOR some Senate rules (filbuster/cloture) and AGAINST others (reconciliation, for instance) in the same breath... it's inconsistent.  Either following the arcane rules of the Senate is the American way, or it is not.  Pick one.</p>
<p>You should check that 75% figure.  HCR has gotten more popular of late.  Update your figures from a recent poll, dude.</p>
<p>"START with a good strong bill through negotiation" means cutting a backroom deal that the public doesn't get to see.  The question is: Are you for or against such backroom deals?  Either what the Republicans tried (and failed) to do was just as bad as the Cornhusker Kickback, or both were fair game.  Take your pick -- they're both backroom deals.</p>
<p>Also, hate to break it to you, but what they wanted to start with was a much weaker bill.  Check any analysis of their 20-page summary in the news, if you don't believe me.</p>
<p>The Democrats agreed to one compromise, that they had already thrown under the bus two weeks ago (when Obama came out against it).  Doesn't sound very much like the Republicans "won" much of anything.  They caved.  Deal with it, it happens.</p>
<p>-CW</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Weigant: Friday Talking Points [121] &#8212; Swampy Muck &#124; Top Blogs News</title>
		<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2010/04/26/reid-calls-republicans-bluff/#comment-8679</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Weigant: Friday Talking Points [121] &#8212; Swampy Muck &#124; Top Blogs News</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 May 2010 01:54:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisweigant.com/?p=1946#comment-8679</guid>
		<description>[...] Leader Harry Reid. This should come as no surprise to regular readers, as I have written not just one, but two articles this week praising Harry&#8217;s leadership (which has to be a record of some [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Leader Harry Reid. This should come as no surprise to regular readers, as I have written not just one, but two articles this week praising Harry&#8217;s leadership (which has to be a record of some [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ChrisWeigant.com &#187; Friday Talking Points [121] -- Swampy Muck</title>
		<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2010/04/26/reid-calls-republicans-bluff/#comment-8675</link>
		<dc:creator>ChrisWeigant.com &#187; Friday Talking Points [121] -- Swampy Muck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Apr 2010 23:49:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisweigant.com/?p=1946#comment-8675</guid>
		<description>[...] Reid Calls Republicans&#8217; Bluff [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Reid Calls Republicans&#8217; Bluff [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michale</title>
		<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2010/04/26/reid-calls-republicans-bluff/#comment-8660</link>
		<dc:creator>Michale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Apr 2010 09:59:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisweigant.com/?p=1946#comment-8660</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ll tackle the easy one.. :D

&lt;I&gt;Think of it this way: if the Republican ideas for amending the bill are so wildly popular with the public at large (they&#039;re not), then why can&#039;t Republicans introduce them in the floor fight? &lt;I&gt;

Simple..  Because we all saw with CrapCare how Democrats handle such a floor fight.

:D

&lt;I&gt;What you call &quot;ram-rodding&quot; a bill through, by its proper name, is &quot;democracy&quot; or perhaps &quot;majority rule&quot; or even perhaps &quot;the American way.&quot;&lt;/I&gt;

There was NOTHING democratic or American about the way CrapCare was ram-rodded thru..

&lt;I&gt;I hasten to remind you, 66% of Americans support this effort. &lt;/I&gt;

And 75% of Americans were against CrapCare..  So, apparently, public support shouldn&#039;t enter into the argument.

All the GOP wanted was to START with a good strong bill thru negotiation and then make it better thru debate.

And I consider that a very logical position.  Especially when we consider what happens when Congress starts with a BAD bill and then make it worse thru backroom deals and unethical parliamentary maneuverings..

In other words, the GOP is trying to prevent another CrapCare fiasco..

The Democrats should be THANKING the GOP...  :D

And, apparently the tactic worked because the Democrats have agreed to a host of compromises...

Michale.....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I'll tackle the easy one.. :D</p>
<p><i>Think of it this way: if the Republican ideas for amending the bill are so wildly popular with the public at large (they're not), then why can't Republicans introduce them in the floor fight? </i><i></p>
<p>Simple..  Because we all saw with CrapCare how Democrats handle such a floor fight.</p>
<p>:D</p>
<p></i><i>What you call "ram-rodding" a bill through, by its proper name, is "democracy" or perhaps "majority rule" or even perhaps "the American way."</i></p>
<p>There was NOTHING democratic or American about the way CrapCare was ram-rodded thru..</p>
<p><i>I hasten to remind you, 66% of Americans support this effort. </i></p>
<p>And 75% of Americans were against CrapCare..  So, apparently, public support shouldn't enter into the argument.</p>
<p>All the GOP wanted was to START with a good strong bill thru negotiation and then make it better thru debate.</p>
<p>And I consider that a very logical position.  Especially when we consider what happens when Congress starts with a BAD bill and then make it worse thru backroom deals and unethical parliamentary maneuverings..</p>
<p>In other words, the GOP is trying to prevent another CrapCare fiasco..</p>
<p>The Democrats should be THANKING the GOP...  :D</p>
<p>And, apparently the tactic worked because the Democrats have agreed to a host of compromises...</p>
<p>Michale.....</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Weigant</title>
		<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2010/04/26/reid-calls-republicans-bluff/#comment-8657</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Weigant</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Apr 2010 09:51:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisweigant.com/?p=1946#comment-8657</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Michale [5] -&lt;/strong&gt;

Dude, take a breather.

Seriously, let some fresh oxygen into your brain.

What the Republicans were aruging for was the ability to make backroom deals -- like the Cornhusker Kickback -- before the bill made it to the floor.  Would you really like me to dig up the language you used against such backroom deals back then to prove to you your own hypocrisy on the issue?

Think of it this way: if the Republican ideas for amending the bill are so wildly popular with the public at large (they&#039;re not), then why can&#039;t Republicans introduce them in the floor fight?  In full light of day?  Why are they so SCARED of this?  Why are they so TERRIFIED of making their case to the American public that they&#039;d try to make a &quot;Cornhusker Kickback&quot; type of deal BEFORE the bill got to the Senate floor?

The answer is: the GOP is for (1) protecting Wall Street, (2) backroom deals, where their fingerprints can&#039;t be seen on the watering down of regulations, and (3) WEAKENING regulations.

Otherwise, they&#039;d be happy to have this fight out in the open.  Their desperation to keep these arrangements in the dark should tell you something.

What you call &quot;ram-rodding&quot; a bill through, by its proper name, is &quot;democracy&quot; or perhaps &quot;majority rule&quot; or even perhaps &quot;the American way.&quot;

I hasten to remind you, 66% of Americans support this effort.  Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

&lt;strong&gt;- CW&lt;/strong&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Michale [5] -</strong></p>
<p>Dude, take a breather.</p>
<p>Seriously, let some fresh oxygen into your brain.</p>
<p>What the Republicans were aruging for was the ability to make backroom deals -- like the Cornhusker Kickback -- before the bill made it to the floor.  Would you really like me to dig up the language you used against such backroom deals back then to prove to you your own hypocrisy on the issue?</p>
<p>Think of it this way: if the Republican ideas for amending the bill are so wildly popular with the public at large (they're not), then why can't Republicans introduce them in the floor fight?  In full light of day?  Why are they so SCARED of this?  Why are they so TERRIFIED of making their case to the American public that they'd try to make a "Cornhusker Kickback" type of deal BEFORE the bill got to the Senate floor?</p>
<p>The answer is: the GOP is for (1) protecting Wall Street, (2) backroom deals, where their fingerprints can't be seen on the watering down of regulations, and (3) WEAKENING regulations.</p>
<p>Otherwise, they'd be happy to have this fight out in the open.  Their desperation to keep these arrangements in the dark should tell you something.</p>
<p>What you call "ram-rodding" a bill through, by its proper name, is "democracy" or perhaps "majority rule" or even perhaps "the American way."</p>
<p>I hasten to remind you, 66% of Americans support this effort.  Put that in your pipe and smoke it.</p>
<p><strong>- CW</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michale</title>
		<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2010/04/26/reid-calls-republicans-bluff/#comment-8634</link>
		<dc:creator>Michale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 17:08:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisweigant.com/?p=1946#comment-8634</guid>
		<description>&lt;B&gt;“All of this talk from Republicans about wanting to do something about this bill before it gets on the floor is really anti-Senate and anti-American.”&lt;/B&gt;
-Harry Reid

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0410/36485.html#ixzz0mPpBNf3Y


So, let me see if I have this straight...

Wanting to fix a bad bill and make it better is &quot;Anti-American&quot;...

But ram-rodding a really crappy bill thru Congress by hook or by crook, a bill that 75% of Americans DON&#039;T WANT...

Now THAT is the American way???

Is THAT what you are saying, Harry???

I said it before and I&#039;ll say it again...

The mid-terms simply cannot come fast enough for this country...


Michale.....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b>“All of this talk from Republicans about wanting to do something about this bill before it gets on the floor is really anti-Senate and anti-American.”</b><br />
-Harry Reid</p>
<p>Read more: <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0410/36485.html#ixzz0mPpBNf3Y" rel="nofollow">http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0410/36485.html#ixzz0mPpBNf3Y</a></p>
<p>So, let me see if I have this straight...</p>
<p>Wanting to fix a bad bill and make it better is "Anti-American"...</p>
<p>But ram-rodding a really crappy bill thru Congress by hook or by crook, a bill that 75% of Americans DON'T WANT...</p>
<p>Now THAT is the American way???</p>
<p>Is THAT what you are saying, Harry???</p>
<p>I said it before and I'll say it again...</p>
<p>The mid-terms simply cannot come fast enough for this country...</p>
<p>Michale.....</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michale</title>
		<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2010/04/26/reid-calls-republicans-bluff/#comment-8633</link>
		<dc:creator>Michale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 16:31:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisweigant.com/?p=1946#comment-8633</guid>
		<description>Looks like Harry got called on the crass politically ploy to bribe Hispanic constituents of this country before the mid-term elections...


&lt;B&gt;Reid Hits Pause Button on Immigration&lt;/B&gt;
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/13/reid-hits-pause-button-on-immigration/

Looks like the real Harry Reid is back.. :D


Michale.....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Looks like Harry got called on the crass politically ploy to bribe Hispanic constituents of this country before the mid-term elections...</p>
<p><b>Reid Hits Pause Button on Immigration</b><br />
<a href="http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/13/reid-hits-pause-button-on-immigration/" rel="nofollow">http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/13/reid-hits-pause-button-on-immigration/</a></p>
<p>Looks like the real Harry Reid is back.. :D</p>
<p>Michale.....</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tweets that mention ChrisWeigant.com » Reid Calls Republicans' Bluff -- Topsy.com</title>
		<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2010/04/26/reid-calls-republicans-bluff/#comment-8627</link>
		<dc:creator>Tweets that mention ChrisWeigant.com » Reid Calls Republicans' Bluff -- Topsy.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 02:04:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisweigant.com/?p=1946#comment-8627</guid>
		<description>[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Chris Weigant. Chris Weigant said: New column up -- http://tinyurl.com/28ejcmj -- &quot;Reid Calls Republicans&#039; Bluff&quot; #p2 [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Chris Weigant. Chris Weigant said: New column up -- <a href="http://tinyurl.com/28ejcmj" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/28ejcmj</a> -- &quot;Reid Calls Republicans&#39; Bluff&quot; #p2 [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michale</title>
		<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2010/04/26/reid-calls-republicans-bluff/#comment-8623</link>
		<dc:creator>Michale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Apr 2010 22:10:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisweigant.com/?p=1946#comment-8623</guid>
		<description>Let&#039;s see what happens tomorrow before we break out the bubbly...  :D


Michale.....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let's see what happens tomorrow before we break out the bubbly...  :D</p>
<p>Michale.....</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: akadjian</title>
		<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2010/04/26/reid-calls-republicans-bluff/#comment-8605</link>
		<dc:creator>akadjian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Apr 2010 02:27:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisweigant.com/?p=1946#comment-8605</guid>
		<description>This is an encouraging sign! 

-David</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is an encouraging sign! </p>
<p>-David</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fstanley</title>
		<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2010/04/26/reid-calls-republicans-bluff/#comment-8604</link>
		<dc:creator>fstanley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Apr 2010 01:10:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisweigant.com/?p=1946#comment-8604</guid>
		<description>I hope this means that when a bill is finally passed it will actually include some regulations real with consequences for non-compliance.

...Stan</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I hope this means that when a bill is finally passed it will actually include some regulations real with consequences for non-compliance.</p>
<p>...Stan</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
