How cool, Mary! It totally makes sense, too, that the rings aren't static. I love this stuff!
Posted by iamcoyote at December 13, 2007 05:33 AMI still predict that Pelosi will not be in the House in '09. They are already caving on the war funding. I plan to contribute money to Cindy's campaign.
Posted by JohnT at December 13, 2007 05:43 AMMy annoyed letter to Harry:
Dear Majority Leader Reid,
I heard a story on NPR this morning, that you have given up trying to find 60 votes to provide health care for children and will settle for just funding SCHIP at current levels for the rest of the year. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t that mean that more than 4 million needy children will continue to go without health care? Won't some lose the health care they already enjoy?
I’m afraid I have to be a pest again regarding another, no doubt, very fine point about free filibusters. In my random reading of things like the Federalist Papers, histories of Congress, etc., I was under the distinct impression that the filibuster was a mechanism to prevent majorities from railroading legislation through, against the sincerely held beliefs of minority parties, or even individual Senators.
The idea IS supposed to be that debate cannot be closed until the minority views are debated, is it not? So why does your response always suggest the image of a rod of cooked Capellini when Big Mitch McConnell scolds you and threatens to “filibuster” a bill which is vital to the health of our society? If the minority wants to continue debate, why don’t you allow them to? Surely you wouldn’t want to offend a Republican! That is patently clear from your behavior since assuming the mantle of Majority Leader.
I’m afraid I’m very dense about matters political. I simply fail to see how campaign videos of endangered Republicans standing on the floor of the Senate explaining why children don’t deserve to have health care would be detrimental to many Democratic campaigns next Fall.
Surely your crack, ever-profitable consulting firm of Grima, From, Marshall, Shrum, Lieberman & Wormtongue would be on board with this. They’ve guided you so close to victory so many times that you could almost taste it!
I understand that, in your youth, you were something of a pugilist. Based on close observation of your performance to date, I feel certain that you made the correct decision to go into politics instead. However, you did campaign for your job and you did take an oath about something called a Constitution, didn’t you? In case you’ve forgotten:
Lead•er•ship - Show Spelled Pronunciation[lee-der-ship]
1. the position or function of a leader: He managed to maintain his leadership of the party despite heavy opposition.
2. ability to lead: She displayed leadership potential.
3. an act or instance of leading; guidance; direction: They prospered under his leadership.
If nothing else, Harry, think of the children! If I have failed to understand your position in this, please let me know what this capitulation is really about. Inquiring minds want to know.
Last night, I got a call from the DSCC, asking for money. I was called because I have been generous in the past, both with my time and my energy. I’m afraid I had to tell him he’d get no money from me until I see ANY evidence of Congressional Democrats taking their oaths seriously. Even though I admire Chairman Dean, he gets the same answer, for the same reasons. Perhaps you should get out of that, apparently, opaque Beltway bubble over the break and actually talk to your constituents. You will be surprised.
deminNewJ:
Excellent letter. Please post senator's reply if you ever get one.
Posted by suresh at December 13, 2007 01:45 PM