We learned Wednesday from The Hill that many Democratic Senators don’t actually support all the great things they claim they have “fought for.” They lied to voters; they refuse to take the small step that would actually allow them to become law.
|By: Jane Hamsher Tuesday June 8, 2010 9:55 am|
It’s hard to know whether the New York Time’s content or the timing of the piece are more suspect, but appearing as it does on a hotly contested election day it does not rise to the level of responsible journalism.
|By: Jon Walker Tuesday May 25, 2010 8:15 am|
Expanding the power of the executive branch is terrible enough by itself. But redesigning the rules to make it easier to advance conservative goals while inhibiting progressive reform is an unbelievably disappointing request by a Democratic President.
|By: Jon Walker Thursday May 13, 2010 1:40 pm|
Democrats are suffering from a dangerous enthusiasm gap. On the generic ballot, Democrats are currently tied with Republicans for the 2010 midterm election at 44 percent each, according to the new NBC/WSJ poll. That’s bad news for Democrats, given that they are holding several Republican-leaning seats and suffer a built-in disadvantage based on the layout of Congressional districts.
|By: Jane Hamsher Thursday April 29, 2010 9:26 am|
On Monday, I asked whether the White House would put the screws to the Blue Dogs to pass immigration reform the way they did on health care, and the answer appears to be “no.” Rather, they will rely on their tried-and-true game plan for dealing with issues important to “f&%king r#%ard” liberals.
|By: Jon Walker Thursday April 29, 2010 7:20 am|
DNC Chair Tim Kaine has announced that Democrats will run on a platform of being the “results party”–a move that leaves me wondering whether it is stupid or simply the only choice for Democrats. . . because they can’t deny the fact that they fully control Washington. One hopes deciding to run as the party of results might encourage Democrats to actually do everything in their power, including using reconciliation, to actually deliver on some real results.
|By: Jane Hamsher Tuesday April 13, 2010 3:46 pm|
The fate of the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) over the course of the past year and a half has been largely determined by the White House. Rahm Emanuel would not let it come up for a vote until after health care was passed, and by that time the Democrats no longer had 60 votes in the Senate. But its evolution is also intimately tied to the electoral prospects of Harry Reid and Arlen Specter, and unless you understand one, you can’t understand the other.
|By: Michael Whitney Thursday January 14, 2010 7:14 am|
If unions take this deal, it’s a sell-out of epic proportions. I’m hard pressed to think of a deal unions could cut in health care that would cause more long-term damage to not just the credibility of the labor movement, but the middle class.
|By: Michael Whitney Monday December 21, 2009 7:08 pm|
A corporate front group funded polls in Nevada and Colorado to show opposition to the group’s only issue: the Employee Free Choice Act. And of course, media outlets not only printed the results as unchallenged fact, but failed to do the most basic fact check on the poll’s questions and on their own reports of the poll. It’s so wrong, in fact, I have to break this post into two parts.
|By: Jon Walker Friday December 4, 2009 12:55 pm|
Politicians, business executives, labor leaders, none of them seem to get it (or at least want to acknowledge it): Our broken health care system is the 800 pound gorilla sitting on our economy, and every year, the gorilla gains another hundred pounds. Health insurance is a massive piece of overhead cost, killing our competitiveness in the world market. The problem is not only getting worse, it is getting worse at an increasingly rapid rate. This current health care reform bill is good on coverage expansion, but extremely weak on cost control–and that is a very bad news.