It's time to make them talk. No more giving up when the votes aren't there. Make them follow through with the talking. Maybe then the media would report these shenanigans as the filibusters they are.

Remember "the nuclear option?" Sounds pretty good right now.

I agree. Make them actually filibuster. I mean there is practically a generation of kids that think it takes 60 votes to pass anything in the Senate! That's ridiculous.

You can always count on Kit for infrastructure. I gotta give the devil his due. Every time I drive across the Missouri River I send him a good wish or two. Infrastructure spending is how he pulled enough votes from the Democratic strongholds of KC and StL to coast to reelection every time he ran. He gets the import - he was a governor.

Also, thanks, Judd Gregg!

How does a filibuster get anything passed? You think Republicans are averse to bloviation?

Hmm, if Landrieu, or one other Repub, had supported it, and Minnesota actually had its second duly elected Senator seated, it would have passed. Oh well.

I don't think we are going to see any aggressiveness from Obama in the near term. This stimulus package, which isn't going to stimulate nearly enough, is not something he wants to take full credit and blame for.

I underestimated this guy's political smarts once back around Super Tuesday, and if I do it again, shame on me. This bipartisanship stuff makes my skin crawl, but I'm willing to concede that he might be smarter than I.

I'm pretty sure there'll be some full-court partisan brawls soon enough and vicious enough to satisfy all of us fans of political blood sports.

Also, thanks, Judd Gregg!

Good point. Now he can actually undermine Obama from within his administration.

Already unhappy over the size of the measure, Republicans insisted additional infrastructure projects be paid for with cuts elsewhere in the bill. [...]

That one's easy. Some of the tax cuts could go. In fact, I'd be perfectly happy to cut twice as much (ie 50 B) from the cost of the tax cuts and shift the money -- half and half -- to infrastructure and green energy. Especially given that most of the Repubs won't vote for cloture anyway, never having heard that "for want of a nail a horse was lost...".

As for Landrieu... All the blonde jokes started with renewed vigour when she was elected to the Senate.

Obama's performance has been awful. He already gave away a lot to the GOP in an attempt to be bi-partisan and ended up with no support from them at all.

He also has been terrible in framing this issue in a way that benefits him. The GOP's inane criticisms have gone mostly unanswered, expect by Barney Frank.

Time for Obama to go totally partisan. Address the nation, tell them the truth: that unless stimulus passes, the economy tanks. And lay the blame solely with the GOP for a failure to pass the bill.

If I know one place that doesn't need infrastructure improvements, it's Louisiana!

Thanks Mary! Thanks Judd!

I don't think we are going to see any aggressiveness from Obama in the near term. This stimulus package, which isn't going to stimulate nearly enough, is not something he wants to take full credit and blame for.

Well he's going to take it whether he wants to or not, seeing as how the Republicans are in full opposition mode, so he'd better get it done right and forget about the political calculations. I don't think most Americans who are unemployed or struggling to get really care about the politics.

Our wingnuts are now like a foul tempered Hydra -- ONe head says we need more infrastructure in the bill to be happy, another head says if dems do that we will stop it. Another head says we need to have tax cuts in the bill, another says "wrong kind" or "not enough" and votes against it. I guess dems can do their part and hand a shovel to the whole bunch.

"Already unhappy over the size of the measure, Republicans insisted additional infrastructure projects be paid for with cuts elsewhere in the bill."

Fine, let's take out some of the corporate tax cuts to pay for infrastructure. We surely won't lose many Republican votes by doing that (we can only lose two). And let's make the Republicans do a real filibuster. And let's start holding these votes on Sunday morning while the Republicans are in church.

fucking mary landrieu voted against these funds? did she giggle as she noted how she's in the 'doghouse' now... the disgust i have for these scumbags i thought had long ago bottomed out is tanking even deeper.

and keep in mind these sons of bitches are entitling themselves to another sweet congressional raise:

Members of Congress Due to Award Themselves $4,700 Raise in 2009

Last update: 9:04 a.m. EST Dec. 17, 2008
WASHINGTON, Dec 17, 2008 /PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ -- Average Senior to Receive Just $756 Increase in Social Security Next Year; Lawmakers Slated to Make $174,000

Next Year Members of Congress are slated to receive a $4,700 pay raise beginning in January, increasing their annual salaries to $174,000. The increase for 535 House and Senate members would cost taxpayers more than $2.5 million.

That salary alone, which excludes all other outside income and spousal wages, ranks each lawmaker in the top six percent of American households.

Congress automatically gets a pay raise each year, and has to introduce legislation to prevent the increase. Although legislation to halt the Congressional raise has been introduced, the most supported bill (H.R. 5087) has just 34 co-sponsors, far short of the 218 necessary for passage.

Officials said the GOP was uniting behind a proposal designed to give banks an incentive to make loans at rates currently estimated at 4 percent to 4.5 percent. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which were seized by the federal government in September, would be required to purchase the mortgages once banks have made them to consumers. - from the "58 votes" link

So what's the real incentive to make sure the borrowers are credit worthy? Don't these guys ever learn?

The failure to anticipate 9/11 was, as the 9/11 Commission called it, "a failure of imagination."

Now we'll exacerbate our ongoing economic disaster by a failure to grasp the "inconceivable." This nation's problem isn't the big numbers, it's the small minds.

Senate Republicans on Tuesday blocked Democrats from adding $25 billion for highways, mass transit, and water projects to President Barack Obama's economic recovery program.

Part of the masterplan?

This stimulus package, which isn't going to stimulate nearly enough, is not something he wants to take full credit and blame for.

Also part of the masterplan?

Now he can actually undermine Obama from within his administration.

And this fits in also, right?

Thank god, now we have them where we want them!

Louisiana voted against "infrastructure updates"? Irony, it would seem, is not not dead.

Let's face it, we need at least $1.5T in stimulus, probably more like $2T.

This $25B is not going to make a difference one way or the other.

We need to think in much, much larger numbers than we are right now.

Obama's good intentions are resulting in his being rolled and made a fool of by the Republicans. We who voted for Obama were not looking for Republican policies masqueraded under the guise of "bipartisanship." We want partisanship that advances the causes and interests we believe Obama was and is sincerely advocating.

The GOP wants to belittle Obama and his program -- and they don't give a damn about programs that are good for this country.

I agree with those who say let the Republicans filibuster. Let them bask in the spotlight of obstructionism by bloviating on the Senate floor until hell freezes over, if necessary. Let them strut their idiocies in front of the entire country -- on C-Span and all the TV networks. Trying to appease them or neutralize them is a waste of time. They need to be put in a position where they can publicly shame and humiliate themselves and their absurd ideas.

As I said above, I'm not sure Obama is a dumb as he looks to some of us. I think one of his deep and profound beliefs is that "it's never easy," and while patience is sure as hell not one of my virtues, it looks like it's one of his.

Even the Judd Gregg pick could help in a way that hasn't been discussed: marshalling biz support to lobby his former GOP colleagues. Today's infrastructure vote proves that we probably do need some help from that side. Moreover, a caretaker New England Republican who doesn't need campaign contributions may be hard for McConnell to keep in the herd.

I'm the kinda guy who never liked to kiss a lot of ass, and it got me where I am today--an angry old bastard like Algren's Fitz Linkhorn, damn near penniless and able to claim only that "I never played the whore to no man."

Every successful man knows when to grovel, and Obama's the most successful man there is right now.

This wasn't actually a cloture vote but a vote to waive a budget point of order. both require 60 votes but they are procedurally different. Paygo rules require that to add spending to a bill on the floor you have to find offsetting savings elsewhere in the bill, but the paygo rules can be waived if you can get 60 votes. This amendment failed to get the 60 votes to waive the budget point of order.

"We can't add to the size of this bill," said Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla. "The amount is just inconceivable to most people."

It's not inconceivable at all! If you stacked $100 bills on top of each other, it'd be 689 miles high.

Um, didn't the American people make their choice last November? And in 2006?

We have a minority party, thoroughly trounced in the last 2 election cycles, with a totally failed and discredited ideology (again, as evidenced by the elections), impeding the agenda people voted for based on their supposed 'principles' and 'convictions'.

Am I missing something here? Haven't we already had the debate about where this country needs to go and what it needs to do?

Yes, the right wing blow hards are given airtime by the MSM at a rate of 2 to 1; the corporations that own them have their bottom lines to protect and they stand to lose when the government works for the middle class rather than being a cash-cow to the politically connected. But where is the bully pulpit from the democrats? Where is the blitzkrieg of marketing for this stimulus package? Press conferences?

The GOP has laid out their strategy; lie, obfuscate, do what they can to make the package fail. Then, they can blame democrats and government in general. I know this, you know this, so Obama must. We have the republicans by the balls, backs against the wall, and what do we do? Uggghhhh.... it's sickening.

It's almost like the republicans were the schoolyard bully, taking the democrat's lunch money daily. Now the democrats are bigger and stronger than the bully, yet they still hand over the their money. I don't get it.

I trust Obama's judgment and praise his willingness to reach across the aisle, but it's time to take the gloves off, to stop being so naive. The opposition has made their stance loud and clear.

What is this 60-vote requirement people speak of? Are the Republicans filibustering?

Let it fail and resubmit the bill as a budget reconciliation that requires a simple majority. Remove "pork" spending from red districts and states and ram the sucker through.

I believe in bipartisanship, but both sides need to be willing to flex muscles in order to create fair and predictible negotiations. Right now, the GOP assumes it has an advantage because the Dems haven't shown spine. They will be willing to show up at the table when they perceive it to be in their best interests.

sometimes i'm astonished by the naivete on display here in the comments.

we have any number of people who think that the gop won't filibuster, or will be shamed if they do filibuster. these are people who do not know the history of filibustering: filibusters work. there are not lots of examples of filibusters being turned around by criticism.

and then there's the time factor: getting a bill passed now is more important than winning a food fight. a filibuster guarantees a much later passage of bill. why is that good? i'd love to see the explanation (and an explanation that says "the gop won't really filibuster" is not an explanation).

as for the insanity of inhofe and his colleagues: i'd like to see one reporter ask inhofe why he didn't oppose the war in iraq, given that it amounted to $1T (or more) in spending with no income source, no spending cut offsets, no nothing.

As I said above, I'm not sure Obama is a dumb as he looks to some of us. I think one of his deep and profound beliefs is that "it's never easy," and while patience is sure as hell not one of my virtues, it looks like it's one of his.

Obama campaigned relentlessly on the "changing the tone and bipartisanship" nonsense that mostly independent voters insist on. And they decide elections. He has to start out at least with pro forma like gestures to the GOP to not be labeled a liar. He is, as is everyone with a brain, very aware with who and what he's dealing with, a dying 30 year conservative movement that is more like an unstable star fixing to go supernova. At some point, likely soon if this bill goes down, the gloves will come off and he'll be able to say he tried.

Besides, for a senator like Inhofe, the size isn't really the issue anyway.

And its a good thing, or else he'd have never had any second dates.

Well then, we'll just have to forget about rebuilding America's electric grid. No electric grid means no electricity. No electricity means no power for those talk-radio bastards and FOX blowhard broadcast stations. No electricity means that the gas pumps won't work, so the GOP's big-money friends won't be able to pull their SUVs out of the garage, or get their expensive corporate jets into the air, or launch those fancy-schmancy yachts come the summer boating season.

Million-dollar homes won't be climate-controlled, and they won't be safe from the burglars, once the expensive security systems shut down.

K-Street lobbyists will have to use the stairs, sit in dark offices, and signal from one building to the next with Semaphore flags.

McConnell and Boehner won't have their eternal access to television cameras---because the damned spotlights and mobile broadcast vans will all stop working.

Inhofe's electric can opener won't work---maybe he'll starve....

Hell---I grew up in Amish country. I can survive in an "infrastructure-free zone," and look forward to the Republikanner beast's self-inflicted extinction event....

What is this 60-vote requirement people speak of? Are the Republicans filibustering?

Every individual senator has the right to object to about every senate action. That can happen in a number of circumstances, and here, as has been described upthread, the infrastructure amemd. violates paygo rules. And to overcome an objection there has to be a three fifths vote (60) so it's a filibuster of sorts, or a point of order specifically in this case.

Sen. Landrieu, the American people spent billions of dollars rebuilding New Orleans. We want our money back!

"This wasn't actually a cloture vote but a vote to waive a budget point of order."

Thanks for the clarification. But in that case, what the hell are the Democrats doing? Just take out some tax cuts and pass the amendment with 51 votes. The final bill will still need to pass a filibuster, but it's hard to see this spending making a difference. Making the Republicans actually have to talk 24 hours a day until a cloture vote passes will make a difference. After two months of that, they'll want to see their families. It's also time for Obama to try the Johnson Treatment. Haul in some Republican fence sitters and threaten to close all the military bases in their state.

Every successful man knows when to grovel, and Obama's the most successful man there is right now.

Uh, I think groveling comes before success, not after.

But, I think that, perhaps unintentionally, you may have captured exactly the way many of us who voted for him feel about BO's recent behavior.

It sure is good that Louisiana doesn't need any infrastructure help from the US Government.

Already unhappy over the size of the measure, Republicans insisted additional infrastructure projects be paid for with cuts elsewhere in the bill. [...]

Actually that seems like a good idea to me. Obama could cut 25 billion worth of tax cuts out of the bill to satisfy the GOP and that would probably add more bang for the buck overall.

Works for me.

Another blow against Democracy. Senators representing less than a third of the disproportionally small backwoods states again block the vast majority's wishes. Liberal groups should mount a legal challenge to the Senate rules.

The Constant Weader at www.RealityChex.com

The reason Republicans aren't supporting infrastructure spending because their wealthy base has positioned themselves to have infrastructure privatized down to the last inch of pavement. Look at the broader issues, why is the economic meltdown leading to Republicans stonewalling on infrastructure to the tune of a measly (in comparison to bank bailouts) 25 billion. Infrastructure has been allowed to crumble for a reason under Reagan, Bush, and Clinton to a lesser extent.

The issue for Republican senators has nothing to do with too much money for bailouts it is because the money won't go to their constituents. Once infrastructure is completely privatized Republicans will have no qualms about signing over 25 billion to "rebuild". Infrastrucutre is the next great boondoggle and Republicans have their eyes fixed on it and they are salivating over the prospect.

Oops! Less than 40%.

Obama should take it to the people before giving up. Infrastructure building may not be the quickest stimulus, but the benefits last for generations and most people know that. Obama should make that case and reassure the American people that just because Republicans screwed it up royally in Iraq, doesn't mean that has to be the case. Americans can and do, when they think about it, take pride in our legendary ability to get things built. It's time for some serious home improvement!

we have any number of people who think that the gop won't filibuster, or will be shamed if they do filibuster. these are people who do not know the history of filibustering: filibusters work. there are not lots of examples of filibusters being turned around by criticism.

Actually, most people here are thinking of a Republican filibuster as being akin to Newt Gingrich's government shutdown, which was pretty disastrous for the Republicans and drew their teeth for at least a few months.

mnemosyne: if you're right that that's what people are thinking, then i'm right that people are hopelessly naive about this.

shutting down the government reminded people that the government isn't just an abstraction, it's a real provider of goods and services.

a filibuster is just a filibuster.

nor do i think for a second that a "failed" filibuster (let me return to that in a moment) would weaken the gop: they are playing to their base. their base is authoritarian and single-minded. that's why they're willing to filibuster in the first place.

and most important, the longer the delay, the less help the stimulus measures will provide by november, 2010, which is when we find out who won this little struggle. the gop figures it wins by gumming up the stimulus works; the dems win by actually improving economic conditions.

it's asymetric, and that's why the focus of the dems needs to be to win snowe and collins and hold ben nelson and (now) mary landrieu and not get distracted into macho posturing over filibusters.

The point of making them filibuster is this: it's a lot of work and a lot of time. Sure, there's a delay. By the third delay, they've lost their appetite for the process, plus they've lost whatever goodwill there still is out there for them. Letting them get away with just the threat and not the reality is the same as letting them drive. And we already know the only way they can make the car go is to move it up the edge of a cliff and then push it over.

Paging Jim Kunstler....

Some fucking *Democrats* need to be blocking highway spending. It's utterly stupid to be throwing away money to prop up the suburban car culture and the Wal-Mart "warehouses on wheels" business model. If they're going to spend money on infrastructure, the smart thing would be to target it to stuff that will bridge the gap and keep this country from falling apart when gas is $12/gal. Expanding mass transit and freight rail capacity, as fast as humanly possible, might just avert catastrophe.