So, Republican moderates, what's it going to be? Are you willing to take "yes" for an answer?

Are you kidding? How many times is Harry Reid going to play Charlie Brown to Lucy's football?

They'll take this one; that's why the deal was offered in the first place, because it's a deal they would take. This is what they've been saying they're holding out for all along, after all. They know we need their votes, and they want blood in exchange.

Snowe, Collins and Brown are playing a game, and they're good at it. By blocking five or six critical, only-a-madman-would-oppose-this bills in a row, they've made the Democrats desperate enough that they can dictate terms in exchange for one leeetle bitty vote to barely, insufficiently pull state governments back from the brink.

And as long as everyone except some left wing blogs continues to blindly accept their credentials as "moderate", and doesn't question their claims that oh really they support these things they voted against, they're just voting against them because [bizarre excuse of the week], they have every little reason to keep doing it. Their vicious little game is working for them. Democrats are being blamed by all parts of the political spectrum for the problems Snowe, Collins and Brown create, but SC&B themselves are not facing any negative repercussions.

If repubs don't filibuster then it must not be good for the country. These goobers only care about political power not the nation. When dems increase their majorities in the midterms then we can be rid of them and the country can begin to operate as a democracy again.

Why do I feel like I've heard this all before?

American people: "Please, sir, I want some more."

"What!" said the GOP at length, in a faint voice.

"Please, sir," replied the American people, "I want some more."

The GOP aimed a blow at the American people's head with the ladle; pinioned [the American people] in [its] arms; and shrieked aloud for the beadle [i.e. a figure in authority].

I'm not so sure which way the Republicants will go on this one. On the one hand, if they filibuster this bill, they can be portrayed as being against cuts to food stamps, which could significantly hurt them with their base and against funding the states, which would hurt them with everyone else. On the other, if they vote for the bill, they will be portrayed by their base as caving to the Dems demands and raising taxes.

It's a coin flip which way they will go.

oh please oh please oh please

i am an alj, and do fair hearings on medicaid waivers for the disabled, elderly, those with traumatic brain injuries, developmentally disabled, and on SNAP, TANF, Institutional Care Medicaid, and on and on and on.......Medicaid recipients are in CRISIS, and if the stimulus matching funds are allowed to run out, they are TOTALLY SCREWED.

"[Thursday night], Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) attached an amendment with funding to preserve teachers' jobs and to provide much-needed Medicaid funding to states to a Federal Aviation Administration bill. The amendment is fully paid-for, and the FAA bill is just a vehicle."

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

"Paying for this through food stamp offsets is rough, but it may not quite as bad as it appears. A source close to the talks told me this afternoon that the $6.7 billion from SNAP won't go into effect until 2014 and the money comes from an increase that came through the Recovery Act. For Democrats, it seems like a reasonable trade-off -- they get to save a lot of jobs and bolster Medicaid in the short term, while having three years to replenish the extra funds for food stamps."

I know the repubs do it too, but I REALLY hate this shit. It makes it look like a fucking shell game. I agree with and support the ends, but the means churns my stomach.

Of course they're not going to take yes for an answer. And of course there's no such thing as Senate GOP moderates. They'll obstruct and count on the fact that almost none of the electorate wants to keep track of inside baseball. (The very basics of how Congress operates is now considered hopelessly arcane.) Maybe the Dems will come up with effective advertising to nail the "moderates", maybe they won't, but they'd better plan to spend to drum this message into the public consciousness.

Benen's rhetorical naivete is charming for a while, but everyone reading this blog knows that GOP Senators are not going to suddenly see the light and start working for the best interest of their constituents. Duh!

The GOP "moderates" remind me of the "moderate" Arab states in that, while the moderate Arab states only moderately want to see all the Jews jump into the sea, GOP moderates only moderately want to see President Obama fail.

-Z

Republicans are doing pure [if terrible] theater here and it is up to the Democrats to dramatize their pitiful drama-making strongly.

Is there a single Republican Senator doing their job this year? Are they even beginning to earn their big fat salaries?

If they want to save the government some money, why don't they all just resign en masse? No one but a few billionaires would miss them...

And if it fails, the media will once again report it as a Democratic failure to get a 60-vote majority.

I thought that eliminating the Dept of Education was one of their stated aims? If so, firing teachers would be an excellent first step. I doubt they'd pass up this opportunity, hard as it might be for them not to have the pleasure of cutting the food stamps to all those work-shy and downright lazy bums. First things first, you know.

Of course it will fail. Because the Republicans can and will impose discipline within their ranks. If Snowe or Collins step too far out of line they know there will be consequences. Even retiring Republican Senators, who occasionally say nice things about 'bipartisanship' and how Republicans are going insane end up sticking with their caucus when the votes matter.

Democrats know that Reid will not or can not touch them if they aid in Republican obstruction.

EVERYONE KNOWS YOU DON'T CUT JOBS IN THE MIDDLE OF A RECESSION, which is what SENATORS Collins and Snow want to do when they demand the budget be cut to pay for these necessities.

EVERYONE KNOWS YOU DON'T CUT JOBS IN THE MIDDLE OF A RECESSION, which is what SENATORS Collins and Snow want to do when they demand the budget be cut to pay for these necessities.

EVERYONE KNOWS YOU DON'T CUT JOBS IN THE MIDDLE OF A RECESSION...

If you want to win the next election as the opposition party, and if the electorate is too low-information to know or care what's really going on, then of course you cut jobs just as fast as you can.

"judicial nominees" stuck?

whatever happened to recess appointments?

or is our guy Obama afraid of hurting reflublican feelings"

.

The Rethugs enforce strict discipline on procedural votes. Snowe & Collins will have to get permission in advance to break ranks, if that's their inclination. That way the Rethug leadership can have it both ways. They can oppose the bill, but blame its passage on the "moderates".

No matter how much the Dimocrats compromise, or structure a bill to garner Rethug support, it's never enough for the red meat Rethugs, so whatever screaming results from any of this should just be ignored.

Gridlock,

Being portrayed as being against food stamps won't hurt the GOP with their base. After all, their base is so rapidly idiotic that even the members who are on food stamps would vote to cut them! That's how much Kool-Aid they've drunk.

Just like how the GOP has managed to convince many low-income conservatives to vote against their own economic self-interest by emphasizing social issues for the past 30 years.

"Being portrayed as being against food stamps won't hurt the GOP with their base." mfw13 @ 6:22 PM.

I'm really starting to wonder about November. More people, 35% was the last number I saw, identify as Democrats than Republicans; there the number was 29%. If my math is correct, even if ALL registered Republicans voted and 20% of Democratic voters didn't, the elections would basically be a tie.
"Independents" also outnumber Republicans. They are the ones, coupled with higher than average Democratic turnout, that won the 2008 elections. Are people seriously trying to tell me that enough independent voters would vote Republican in 2010 to give Republicans control of the House and, possibly, the Senate? When it would mean that independents would have to support the GOP candidates by a 2-to-1 margin?
Really? Can I have some too...?

Doug, @20:13,

Forget "independent voters"; there's no such animal. We all like to be "unique" (rather than a part of a herd) and we all like to be courted for our "independent" votes. But, long run... I consider myself an independent -- thank goodness Virginia doesn't require me to register my political preference and I can vote in either primary (as long as it's only one of them ). But my husband, regularly, refers to me as "a flaming commie". At the other end of the spectrum... There's a woman in our locality, who claims to be an objective independent also, and whose *every piece of clothing and jewelry* has an elephant on it. Brooches, earrings, skirts, shirts... And, just in case you think she has an elephant fixation not related to her political preferences in any way... I see her at every Labor Day Parade (which opens up our local political dog fight), yelling and screaming at the head of the Repub contingent.

So it really comes down to enthusiasm for *individual candidates*, not to 3 political "categories"

There are no GOP moderates any more. None.