Patterico's Pontifications


McCain Enables Crap Budget Deal in Senate

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:23 am



  1. You can’t vote against it unless you vote for it.

    Comment by nk (dbc370) — 12/17/2013 @ 7:42 am

  2. McCain got back from Kiev?


    Isn’t this a budget deal? Does it need cloture?

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (9fe80b) — 12/17/2013 @ 7:50 am

  3. “You can’t vote against it unless you vote for it.”

    nk – Absolutely. Republicans in the Senate will be able to register brave votes against it for the folks back home and campaign advertising once it reaches the floor.

    In the House, half of Bachmann’s Tea Party Caucus members (as of 1/06/13) bravely voted against the bill and half bravely voted for the bill. Mavericky all the way around.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/17/2013 @ 8:51 am

  4. I’ve earlier argued that this budget deal is the best our side was going to get and it keeps attention on the failures of ObamaCare, but I did sort of hope that the Senate GOP would drag their feet for several days before agreeing to it just before Christmas. But I would never stand in the way of mavericks being mavericky.

    Comment by JVW (709bc7) — 12/17/2013 @ 9:29 am

  5. JVW – Mavericks just gotta be mavericks and pretending to be able to explain why all Congress critters vote the way the do on any particular bill, no matter what they say in public, is a very mavericky sport all by itself.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/17/2013 @ 9:57 am

  6. I’d vote against it, but only to make the Dems kill the filibuster outright. The bill is the best we’re going to get.

    Comment by Kevin M (536c5d) — 12/17/2013 @ 10:04 am

  7. One wonders if this made an impression;

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 12/17/2013 @ 10:15 am

  8. given that we didn’t need to cut yet another “deal”, this Beltway RINO stampede to the other side of the aisle is unseemly, even for the dishonest scum of the Senate GOP.

    Ace nails it:

    since it’s always the next hill we’re going to fight for, most of us have come to realize these bastards are in favor of only what keeps them in office, not what’s good for the country.

    let it burn.

    Comment by redc1c4 (abd49e) — 12/17/2013 @ 10:54 am

  9. I think that ObamaCare will start falling in the polls again once businesses start cancelling policies, and once the budget office announces (probably late on the Friday of a holiday weekend) that the actual costs for ObamaCare are way higher than original estimates.

    Regarding Obama’s popularity numbers, I have long maintained that there is this 40% bloc of Americans who simply will not criticize Obama no matter how badly he screws things up. Don’t expect his popularity number to ever drop below that 40% line.

    Comment by JVW (709bc7) — 12/17/2013 @ 10:57 am

  10. “since it’s always the next hill we’re going to fight for”

    redc1c4 – Most of us have come to realize that it is impossible to please everybody. I read the Ace piece and my takeaway is that that there was no reason to compromise, but we overwhelmingly did, including half the Tea Party Caucus if you bother to look, so let it burn, this is the hill to die on is the easy way out while your opponents are making unforced errors left and right?

    Sounds like a great plan for the stoopid party once again!

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/17/2013 @ 11:25 am

  11. Yes, keep thinking one can negotiate in good faith;

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 12/17/2013 @ 12:30 pm

  12. 8 vs. 10. Note the demand that we “Don’t Deal” is once again rebutted by “Its the best deal we could get”.

    This is who I want to save the Republic, people who won’t listen, ever.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/17/2013 @ 12:55 pm

  13. well, obviously, the first place to start a fire is in support for & funding of, GOP candidates.

    if all they are going to offer up are squishes, RINOs and suicidal compromises, let them do it on their own. better to spend the money on guns & ammo and the time at the range.

    Comment by redc1c4 (abd49e) — 12/17/2013 @ 1:30 pm

  14. I’m torn between wishing Obama would waste all his time in idle pleasures, like watching TV and movies, and fearing he will try to emulate what he sees. You know how Obama sees himself in every photo honoring an event or person? I fear he does the same with every show and movie he watches, which wouldn’t be so bad if he were a Brady Bunch fan. Unfortunately, he’s a fan of the House of Cards.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/17/2013 @ 1:31 pm

  15. H/T narciso.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/17/2013 @ 1:32 pm

  16. Were you surprised that one half of the Tea Party caucus voted for the crap sammich? How do you account for that? How does one predict in advance who is and will stay pure, versus who will participate in suicidal compromises?

    Comment by elissa (57f24f) — 12/17/2013 @ 1:50 pm

  17. 16. Just for the record it was 63 Thugs against. Even by my count the number of Conservatives in the House barely cracks 80.

    Yes, Blackburn of TN is undeniably a TEA. But without investigating carefully the bona fides of each and every member, lets call it not quite a quarter of the TEAs. Only 54 or so actually belong to the TEA caucus.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/17/2013 @ 2:02 pm

  18. Gary,

    There should be interrogations to find out who has the proper bona fides.
    We need to find out which Tea party caucus members really belong to John Boehner’s subversive network of spies and closeted Democrat sympathizers.
    Then we can shame them by sewing a scarlet letter “D” to the lapel of their suit blazer.

    The first question to ask of these potentially traitorous GOP congressmen might be, “Have you ever been invited to have a beer with Paul Ryan ?”

    Comment by Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 12/17/2013 @ 2:16 pm

  19. 18. Actually, I’d be more interested in a witch hunt to determine which of the Thugs were in fact DIABLOs from Red districts trying to cover their azz voting agin Sergeant Schultz with his blessing.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/17/2013 @ 2:26 pm

  20. If you earn the endorsement of the Whig elite going into Primary day, chances are you are a scum-sucking DIABLO.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/17/2013 @ 2:30 pm

  21. I think 0bama should retire and take a job as a private investigator over in Hawaii, DRJ. Get his narrow behind out of government and the continental U.S.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (18cd23) — 12/17/2013 @ 2:32 pm

  22. Gary,

    Bud, one of these days, you will become famous when a producer for Colbert or Stewart spots one of your comments about witch hunts or executions or traitors or the Whigs or something.

    Comment by Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 12/17/2013 @ 3:04 pm

  23. OK, I have missed out on some conversation here. Can someone please tell me what a DIABLO is? Google searches only pull up links to the online gamer community.

    Comment by JVW (709bc7) — 12/17/2013 @ 3:34 pm

  24. Democrat In All But Label, Obviously?

    Comment by JVW (709bc7) — 12/17/2013 @ 3:34 pm

  25. JVW,

    Some of our conservative friends have developed a national sub-culture that is determined to shrink the size of the GOP tent just in time for the next election cycle. They use acronyms, secret handshakes, and have Wednesday Pizza Night meetings at the neighborhood Chuck E Cheese.
    You’ll be able to spot them by the little pitchfork they have dangling from their keychain.

    Comment by Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 12/17/2013 @ 3:47 pm

  26. Murkowski, Castle, Lugar, those are DIABLOS, other are merely RINOS,

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 12/17/2013 @ 3:51 pm

  27. 24. I’m changing up terminology to more nearly meet the realities on the ground. Steyn originated this particular term some years back.

    22. Believe me fame is not a concern.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/17/2013 @ 3:51 pm

  28. 25. “at the neighborhood Chuck E Cheese”

    Which might work if my job weren’t following kiddo from below. Not much pizza and less adult interaction for me.

    The whole prob with the TEA/Whig dustup is affluent white men are like frogs in the soup pot:

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/17/2013 @ 3:58 pm

  29. OT: The last few weeks have seen quakes in oddball places, like one 7.0 off Antarctica SE of Argentina.

    More recently still, it seems as tho that stretch from Guatemala to Alaska has awakened and now looks to get busy.

    Stay sharp Failifornia.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/17/2013 @ 4:14 pm

  30. 29. Oh, of course, the link:

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/17/2013 @ 4:14 pm

  31. Gary,

    We’re all for limited government, but the way to implement it is to win the next election cycle—not shut down the government again.

    Comment by Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 12/17/2013 @ 4:16 pm

  32. Here’s a naked(Whig not involved) TEA pickup.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/17/2013 @ 4:19 pm

  33. 31. Yeah, and I’m for winning the PowerBall lottery, but it helps to buy a ticket.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/17/2013 @ 4:20 pm

  34. Doesn’t matter what you say;

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 12/17/2013 @ 4:28 pm

  35. Gary #32,

    That’s the seat that the great Mia Love narrowly lost in the 2012 election cycle.
    She is a solid conservative who would have won the damn seat but for the sanctimonious losertarian candidate.

    Jim Matheson (D) 119,803 48.8%
    Mia Love (R) 119,035 48.5%
    Jim Vein (L) 6,439 2.6%

    Comment by Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 12/17/2013 @ 4:31 pm

  36. 35. Well youse Thugs and da TEA mob see one thing alike: Libertarians is fishfood.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/17/2013 @ 4:50 pm

  37. We’re all for limited government, but the way to implement it is to win the next election cycle…

    Not if the ones that win are anything like McCain or any of the other crap sandwich Republicans. What’s the point of winning elections when those who are supposed to be on your side are going to eventually sell you out anyway?

    Comment by Blacque Jacques Shellacque (dc129f) — 12/18/2013 @ 1:41 am

  38. How much longer will the press fawn over gutless republicans?
    As long as it takes to kill the tea baggers. This has become a shits and giggles game. I can’t wait to see all the elephant stones and daleyrocks blame the baggers for losing the house. You two do know your team republican is made up of lying hypocrites. Good luck trying to find conservatives to carry you to victory. Your party is a fricken farce.

    Comment by mg (31009b) — 12/18/2013 @ 2:35 am

  39. If team republican could they would run bob dole again and again and again.
    Hey, they really are.

    Comment by mg (31009b) — 12/18/2013 @ 2:53 am

  40. Odd he would get something right, but no;

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 12/18/2013 @ 3:46 am

  41. 40-The only people on this site that have intellectual integrity must be e.stone and daleyrocks, so say the leader juan.

    Comment by mg (31009b) — 12/18/2013 @ 4:10 am

  42. Helluva job Ryan:

    You were known as Mr. Fiscal Conservative.

    Now you’re just another lying pol.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/18/2013 @ 4:46 am

  43. She is a solid conservative who would have won the damn seat but for the sanctimonious losertarian candidate.

    I wonder how many voters sided with Vein for purely ideological reasons, how many avoided Love for purely gender/racial reasons? Mia Love should have won that election, and regardless of why people plucked their ballots the way they did, the fact that Matheson got far more votes than he (or any modern-day liberal in general) deserved indicates that even in Utah there is way too much left-leaning sentiment among the electorate.

    Comment by Mark (58ea35) — 12/18/2013 @ 7:40 am

  44. “I can’t wait to see all the elephant stones and daleyrocks blame the baggers for losing the house.”

    mg – Unlike you and gary in the Daily Dose of Doom Caucus, notice I’m not tossing blame around like i9t was a free government goodie. You two sad sacks aren’t happy unless you are complaining about something, bless your hearts.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/18/2013 @ 8:28 am

  45. PERFECT is the ENEMY of GOOD.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (b76d97) — 12/18/2013 @ 8:32 am

  46. Please allow me to explain…


    Comment by Colonel Haiku (b76d97) — 12/18/2013 @ 8:37 am

  47. 45. A bismark flecked with rodent feces is far, far better than a rancid turd.

    Eat hearty.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/18/2013 @ 8:40 am

  48. mg – Do you pay more attention to what Meghan McCain has to say or what John McCain has to say? I try to avoid paying any attention to either.

    Stop eating those bad clams.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/18/2013 @ 8:43 am

  49. Gary… you’re old enough to realize that your “Shining White Knight on Horseback” that they promised you in your adolescent years never existed.


    Comment by Colonel Haiku (b76d97) — 12/18/2013 @ 8:44 am

  50. gary – Another ice sitting contest victory this past weekend?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/18/2013 @ 8:44 am

  51. We’re all for limited government, but the way to implement it is to win the next election cycle—not shut down the government again.

    1) how has that been working for you?
    2) this strawman that another shutdown was averted is silly.

    Comment by JD (8935bd) — 12/18/2013 @ 8:49 am

  52. 41. Intellectual integrity does not require intellect or integrity.

    Neither does it require a path to success, a timeline, however tentative, it need not open to verification or negotiation, and need not pay its own way or be accountable in any way.

    It just is, bagger.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/18/2013 @ 8:52 am

  53. “41. Intellectual integrity does not require intellect or integrity.”

    gary – If you are claiming to have something you have shown no evidence of having then I must agree with your above statement.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/18/2013 @ 8:56 am

  54. 53. Proving anything to your satisfaction is a fool’s errand.

    Your argument that Whig electoral triumph is a mountain ditch lane, a car chase nail mat, a speed bump, any impediment whatever to the goosestepping Brown Shirts is vacuous nonsense.

    You demand that it be tautological, axiomatic. We demand that it be experientially proven, not once, but reliably.

    Your time is up, go to bed.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/18/2013 @ 9:10 am

  55. Looks like the Jets and Sharks are having a rumble.

    Comment by elissa (78bee9) — 12/18/2013 @ 9:19 am

  56. I’d rather deal with bad clams than decades of b.s.

    Comment by mg (31009b) — 12/18/2013 @ 10:28 am

  57. I don’t doubt the belief is sincere, but I wonder if the “let it burn” brigade understands how very extreme and scary that rhetoric actually sounds to most voters, including independents and not terribly political or ideological types who go to work, love their country, and consider themselves net contributors to society. Certain minor subsets of the electorate, such as the struggling middle class, people who still own property, or folks who have children and grandchildren, might not be as open to the “let. it. burn” tactic as some might think.

    Comment by elissa (78bee9) — 12/18/2013 @ 10:45 am

  58. Ah, but elissa, unless you are all about Teh Purity, you are squishy. There is no difference, remember, between the “two teams.”

    And the Left keeps winning.

    Comment by Simon Jester (c8876d) — 12/18/2013 @ 11:13 am

  59. 57. “very extreme and scary”

    Anxiety is an evolutionarily preferred response of the organism to a perceived general threat. Heightened levels of noradrenaline, the primary neurotransmitter are the cause.

    People aware that “unsustainable conditions tend not to persist forever” are on the alert. Their pupils widen, their reactions are quickened.

    At the recognition of a threat, a specific actor, adrenalin floods the system, respiration and heart rate quicken and on a trigger the body springs into action.

    Organisms that do not appropriately respond to existential threats tend to extinction.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/18/2013 @ 11:18 am

  60. 58. It’s your Party, you may do as you please.

    And cry if you want to.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/18/2013 @ 11:24 am

  61. Ditto. “Let it burn” can apply to a lot of things. The Republican Party is first on my list.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/18/2013 @ 12:02 pm

  62. A bone tossed to optimism:

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/18/2013 @ 12:04 pm

  63. if it were to burn all on its own and everyone had gotten out safely particularly the puppy dogs I’d probably let it burn as opposed to going out of my way to make it to where it wasn’t burning anymore

    but if there were like a puppy dog barking plaintively out of a second floor window I’d get a garden hose and a ladder and try to rescue the puppy

    then the rest of it could burn

    and then I’d try to track down whose dog this is

    Comment by happyfeet (c60db2) — 12/18/2013 @ 12:05 pm

  64. All fixed:

    You weren’t paying attention? No matter then.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/18/2013 @ 12:06 pm

  65. 63. I would not make water to save Dog. He might get the wrong idea.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/18/2013 @ 12:12 pm

  66. 62. Good boy, have another.

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/18/2013 @ 12:14 pm

  67. you might could just coax the puppy to jump and then catch him or at least break his fall a little with a big pile of empty pop tart boxes

    Comment by happyfeet (c60db2) — 12/18/2013 @ 12:15 pm

  68. This country needs to hit rock bottom. Changing leaders on team r would be a start in the up direction. 5-4-3-2-1- and Blastoff!!

    Comment by mg (31009b) — 12/18/2013 @ 1:43 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2091 secs.