Yesterday, House Democrats put an opening bid on the table in the political game of banning earmarks -- all for-profit corporate earmarks would not be allowed in the budget appropriations bills this year (or possibly longer). Today, House Republicans raised the stakes by proposing a ban on all earmarks (although only specifically for "this year"), and not just the ones directed towards for-profit entities.

Continue Reading »

While all of Washington is in a frenzy over ex-Representative Eric Massa's groping and tickling, some actual news (and actual progress, one would like to hope) is being made on the subject of ethics in Congress. Sure, it's more fun to watch Massa's implosion on nationwide television, or to come up with headlines that just write themselves (how about: "Weapon of Massa Self-Destruction"?), but we shouldn't allow this sideshow to distract us from what could shape up this year as a contest between Democrats and Republicans over who can denounce earmarks the loudest. And not just denounce -- but actually ban the practice.

Continue Reading »

[Today's column is going to be a reprint of a column I wrote exactly one year ago. This is somewhat of a coincidence, since today I will be taking care of some previous commitments in the non-online world and will be too busy to write a new column. So I went looking for an old column on healthcare reform, just to see where we were a year ago. I read a few columns from last March, and picked one out on not just healthcare reform, but the concept of reconciliation in the Senate. After I had read it and decided to use it, I realized it was posted one year ago to the day, so it serendipitously works as a good reprint article, since it looks pre-planned (even though it isn't).

Continue Reading »

Fred Phelps is a hatemonger.

On this, there is no question. It's actually about the most polite way to describe what Phelps' perceived mission in life drives him to do and say. He, and his "church" (mostly made up of members of his family) are the ones who arrive at various places and events all across the country, waving hate-filled signs which convey Phelps' belief that God hates the United States, homosexuals, the U.S. military, and dead American soldiers. He shows up at Jewish sites, gay events, schools, and other places he feels would benefit from his hatemongering. Most notably, this includes the funerals of dead soldiers. Phelps and his followers line up on a public sidewalk with signs saying things such as "God hates dead soldiers" -- which is one of the least offensive thing his signs say, I should mention (I refuse to reference any of his other messages, since I find them so personally odious). Phelps has become so notorious for doing so that a group of motorcycle enthusiasts have banded together to provide a human screen between Phelps' group and military funerals, to spare the families.

Continue Reading »

Before we get to the main course here, we've simply got to serve up a steaming hot dish of irony as an appetizer, first. And then, as the title promises, a fun contest that everyone at home can play.

But first, the news that Representative Alan Grayson, he of the fiery lefty rhetoric, is leading an opinion poll conducted in his district, heading into the election. Grayson was far and away the most popular candidate, at this point. He led the pack with 27.8 percent, which doesn't sound too impressive until you hear that nobody else got more than 3.7 percent (57.7 percent were, admittedly, undecided). But the delicious irony of this poll is that the respondents were Republicans. That's right -- Grayson is not just wildly popular among lefty Democrats across the land, he is also apparently more popular among Republicans in his own district than anyone they've got to put up against him. Grayson also, the last time fundraising numbers were released, raised more cash (from people across the country grateful he was actually standing up and fighting for the Democratic position) than anyone else. There's a lesson here among all the irony, if only Democrats would take it to heart.

Continue Reading »

President Obama, almost a year to the day after kicking off his efforts on healthcare reform, tried to nudge the process across the finish line yesterday, in front of a group of doctors and other health professionals. While some of this made the news as chopped-up soundbites, I thought it was an interesting enough speech to print the entire transcript here. Obama spoke for 19 minutes, and touched on the process he hopes to see in Congress on the issue soon. Without further introduction, here is what the president had to say yesterday.

-- Chris Weigant

President Barack Obama, speaking at the White House

Thank you so much, all of you, for joining us today. And I want to thank Julie, Barbara, Roland, Stephen, Renee, and Christopher, standing behind me -- physicians, physicians assistants, and nurses who understand how important it is for us to make much needed changes in our health care system.

Continue Reading »

Sinking Slowly

That's a pretty negative subtitle, but unfortunately it is true. February's poll numbers for Barack Obama showed a continuation of a slow slide downwards in approval, and a slow rise upwards in disapproval. His approval and disapproval numbers have not actually crossed yet, but they are within kissing distance of doing so.

The only good news in this situation is the "slowly" part. Obama's approval numbers, for the past six months, have dropped just under five percent. To put this in perspective, plenty of other presidents have had such a drop within a single month. But that's about the most positive thing that can be said, since the trajectory is so inexorably downward.

When will Obama turn this around? Will Obama turn this around? Well, there is a little good news recently, and Obama's numbers have gotten a bounce from his health reform "summit," but as this was at the end of February, it doesn't show up yet in the monthly figures, and it remains to be seen whether he will sustain it or not throughout March. But we'll all have to wait until next month to see the outcome.

Continue Reading »

The title of this piece quotes the well-known philosopher Jeremy Hilary Boob, PhD. The full quote is, of course:

Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo
So little time! So much to know!

and comes to us from the Beatles movie Yellow Submarine, right before singing a song about Boob, Nowhere Man.

If you think this is building up to some deep and meaningful point, well, it's not. Sorry to disappoint you.

Continue Reading »

The 2010 midterm election season has been officially underway for almost a month now (Illinois' primary was February 2). But for many on the Left, primary season officially got going today, with the announcement that Senator Blanche Lincoln will face a very credible Democratic opponent in the Arkansas primary. The Republican side of the aisle is already facing open revolt against national-party-selected candidates, from their Tea Party faction. And the news that Lincoln will be challenged means that Democrats may also be fighting some tough battles within their own party, before we even get to the general election season. What it means for each party is not clear year, and won't be until after November's results are in, no matter what happens in the primaries.

But it will be fascinating to watch. Because on both sides of the aisle, the base is angry at the perceived flaws of the parties themselves -- which, more and more, is being directed not only at the national party apparatus, but at individual candidates deemed not sufficiently pure enough by either side's base. This could lead to a lot more gridlock in Washington, due to more fervent (left or right) politicians being elected. And then again, it could backfire. For one side, the other, or both.

Continue Reading »

As the dust settles on the aftermath of the health reform summit held yesterday by President Barack Obama and attended by leaders of both parties in Congress, not much has changed. Not that anyone really expected anything to change, much, to be honest.

The media has mostly chalked the whole debate up as a tie. Normally, they'll stick their necks out and say one side "won" or "lost," but my sneaking suspicion is that a lot of the talking heads just don't have the attention span to sit through seven hours of politicians talking. So maybe calling it a "tie" was the easy way out for them.

Continue Reading »