We Have a New Home! Please Click Below to Go to the New Freedom’s Lighthouse!


Blog Archive

Sunday, January 17, 2010

Mark Halperin Explains the "Silver Lining" for Obama to a Possible Democrat Loss in MA Senate Race - Video 1/17/10

Here is video of Mark Halperin today on Meet the Press explaining the "silver lining" to a possible loss by Democrats of the Massachusetts Senate Race on Tuesday.

Halperin said the significance of this race "cannot be overstated," and that the White House feels it "may be slipping away." He says the "silver lining" is that Obama can then go to the House of Representatives and tell them they must pass the Senate Health Care Bill. That way, they would not have to re-vote in the Senate. Halperin said the White House actually prefers the Senate Bill anyway.


wisdomsprince January 17, 2010 at 7:31 PM  

So the silver lining is that Obama can skip that hole separate but equal crap as it relates to the House and Senate. Senate should dictate and the House should act like monkey's and do as the Senate commands. Great system you've got there Halperin. These guys are unbelievable. Come to think of it, who cares if the bill is even constitutional (thus eliminating the need for the Supreme Court). This is an absolute joke. The so called Cadillac plans language is still in the bill, didn't they just negotiate some exemptions with the Unions...That requires another vote. This is a tactic to suppress Conservative turnout; if Brown wins, the bill is dead

Anonymous,  January 17, 2010 at 8:26 PM  

I say this as a staunch dem who has donated and phone banked for Scott Brown.

I have not only lost complete faith in my party, now being led by the radical left. I have lost complete faith in the media. I DO NOT TRUST ONE WORD THEY SAY.

Does this fool Halperin even get it? People are PISSED at the DEATHCARE Bill in general. People know this is a HORRIBLE bill. This is why people like me, loyal democrats, are campaigning for Scott Brown.

I am convinced these people like Halperin have lost complete touch with the American electorate. This is beyond being democrat, republican or independent. They are essentially crapping on us as Americans!

Brian January 17, 2010 at 8:41 PM  

Wisdom / Anonymous - Excellent comments. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

Diogenes January 17, 2010 at 9:39 PM  

"wisdomsprince" ?? What a misnomer!

How incredibly sad. How incredibly telling. How incredibly rightwing.

"that hole separate but equal crap" ?

Let's just forget that there's a difference between "whole" and "hole". Chalk that one up as a typo.

But "separate but equal crap"? Do you have a clue what you've written?

"Separate but equal" was the legal standard established by the Supreme Court in Plessy v Ferguson... a standard that legally enforced racial segregation for the next half century. The term that you were struggling to find is "separation of powers"... and THAT doesn't apply to the distinction between the House and the Senate, either.

Talk about a Freudian slip: you try to explain political theory you don't understand, and you conflate it with legalzied racism!

Pseudo-superiority and pseudo-intellectualism.... and your gracious host commends you for your "excellent" comment.

Despite the fact that the House version of the bill is preferable to the Senate's, I hope the House DOES just pass it, so that we can start on our way to healthcare reform. It took this country fifty years to overturn "separate but equal" and it would take at least that long to enact meaningful healthcare reform if this opportunity escapes us.

So please, elect Brownie in Massachusetts. Do us a favor.

Brian January 17, 2010 at 9:59 PM  

You are being ridiculous. "Wisdomprince" was not talking about race at all and you know it. He is talking about the system of checks and balances between and within the branches of government.

You all can't stop trying to turn everything into an argument about race. You know that the very fact Brown even has a chance to win in MA shows that Obama and his agenda is being rejected by Americans. Otherwise, a Democrat in MA should win this seat by 20 points or more.

Larry S January 18, 2010 at 10:05 AM  

Wait a second, Brian. Diogenes rightfully pointed out that "wisdom" cited "separate but equal". Maybe it was an innocent mistake, maybe it was a Freudian slip, maybe it shows how little rightwingers truly understand about government.

There is a danger portraying isolated local elections as a barometer of national sentiment. If Coakley loses (and that's still s sizeable "if") it sounds to me like it might be due more to the fact that Coakley seems to be more than a little tone-deaf, and not necessarily about healthcare reform.

Politics is a funny business. People vote for all sorts of logical and illogical reasons. I know, when I first heard about it, I thought that, if I were a resident of Massachusetts, I might vote against Coakley simply because of her gaffe of calling Curt Schilling a "Yankee fan" like Rudy Giuliani. That doesn't "mean" anything, politically, but it tells me that she has NO CLUE what's going on in Massachusetts. It's no crime not to be a sports fan, but it's stupid for Coakley to pretend like she understands sports like an Average Joe when she's clueless.

I think, if Brown wins, then the House passes the Senate healthcare reform bill and we move ahead. That's not a violation of "separate but equal" OR "separation of powers". That's the way the system is supposed to work.

Sorry if rightwingers don't like the way our political system works, but that's the way it is.

Brian January 18, 2010 at 10:11 AM  

The system can be used to force an agenda on the American people once a party gets into power as the Democrats are now. I would agree that Obama's election is a perfect example of people voting for someone for a whole host of reasons other than agreement with the actual ideology of the candidate. That's why the American people are telling Democrats every way they know how they don't want the socialist agenda being pushed in Washington.

But Democrats are bent on pushing their ideology rather than listening to the people. Sure, they system allows them to do that for now, until the people can speak again in the next election.

Diogenes January 18, 2010 at 9:16 PM  

Oh can we stop with the mindless rhetoric? "Socialist agenda"? What Obama is pushing is anything BUT socialist! Heck, he's catching flak from his own extreme left wing for not being radical enough!

It's sickening how rightwingnuts are trying to reignite the ugliness of McCarthyism with all this "socialist" nonsense. It's not enough to say it's an agenda you don't believe in? You have to demonize your political opponents within the American political system by trying to make them appear un-American?

Careful, your jingoism is showing.

Brian January 18, 2010 at 9:40 PM  

You are the one who constantly resorts to name-calling. In virtually every post - if not every sentence - you call conservatives "nuts," or "rightwingnuts." I don't call you names.

To say Obama has a "socialist agenda" is to comment on his ideology, not to call him a "nut." It is the Left that is the most intolerant of anyone who does not share their agenda, even as they talk about tolerance.

Diogenes January 19, 2010 at 12:32 PM  

You misunderstood my complaint, Brian. I don't mind name-calling, as long as the name is remotely accurate. I don't usually use the term "nuts" but I do use the term "rightwingnuts", to apply not to conservatives, but to ultra-conservatives, the lunatic fringe on the right. There's a lunatic fringe on the left, too, and you can call them "socialist" if yuo wish, but labelling the President of the United States a "socialist" is factually inaccurate.

[By the way, nice attempt to spin completely away from the racism inherent in the "separate but equal" gaffe of your new buddy "wisdomsprince" (speaking of misnomers!) and your endorsement of his gaffe.]

Brian January 19, 2010 at 12:58 PM  

No, I was not avoiding anything. I don't think it was a gaffe. He said nothing about race. Only in the minds of those on the Left - who try to make everything about race. Halperin was talking about the silver lining of a loss in MA as being that Obama could go to the House and urge them to pass the Senate bill. Wisdomprince was saying Obama could "skip the whole separate but equal crap." He is obviously talking about the separation of powers or the equality within the branches.

Now you may not think that makes sense, but he clearly said nothing about race. He just used the wrong phrase.

Diogenes January 19, 2010 at 3:58 PM  

"Separate but equal" is a loaded historical term. Maybe "wisdomsprince" merely made a mistake.... but at the very least, it's ironic and/or Freudian. My original comment was really addressing the fact that he was talking about political theory that he didn't truly understand, and he somehow used the very term that institutionalized and legalized racial segregation.

A little knowledge is, indeed, a dangerous thing.

Brian January 19, 2010 at 4:35 PM  

I agree that it is a "loaded historical term," and really should not be used. Whether intended or not, it could convey the wrong message.

  © Blogger templates Newspaper III by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP