I’m skimming Bob Woodward’s book on the Obama Administration – The Price of Politics. I’ve read his books for years. They’re dry recitations of his reporting, utterly passionless and very readable.
In the last few years though, he’s begun to sound a bit like the ‘get off my lawn’ guy (encroaching on traditional McCain territory!). Still, he writes a good book. So I sat down and I began.
By page 20, Woodward is giving credence to a complaint uttered by Eric Cantor after the vote on HR1, the first bill of that congress, Obama’s stimulus package. Cantor had whipped the congressional Republicans so effectively that not a single one of them voted for the bill. Not one.
What. . . surprised Cantor was how badly the White House had played what should have been a winning hand. Though Obama won the vote, he had unified and energized the losers (really? he was the one that did it?). . . . he had actually pushed them away . . . there had been no sincere contact, no inclusiveness, no real listening.
The vote, and Cantor’s complaint, came on January 28, 2009, eight days after Obama was inaugurated. A period during which Obama had met three times with the House leadership – including Cantor.
Posted in 2012 Elections, broken government, Congress critters, economy, Government, Obama, partisanship, Politics
Tagged broken governmet, economic stimulus, economy, Eric Cantor, Obama, Politics
- See, he talks to me in one of these here ears.
Remember when Pat Robertson warned that a hurricane was bearing down on Orlando because his god was angry about all that “Gay Days’ stuff? And it turned out Orlando was spared; the hurricane hit Robertson’s backyard? Truly the silliness never stops.
Denial has its place too; turn away from bad stuff and it won’t happen. Jonathan Turley reminds us:
Earthquake Hits Cantor’s District After He Led Fight To Slash Funding
The epicenter was Mineral Virginia in the district of Republican Congressman Eric Cantor. You may recall Cantor’s effort to slash the budget of the United States Geological Service (USGS). . . .
. . . . My greatest concern is that Cantor also defended cuts in the National Weather Service and NOAA — and there is a hurricane approaching Washington.
Bombs are threats and that is all. Also Mooslims. And teh gays.
UPDATE: Cantor got more specific today. Via TPM: “We aren’t going to speculate on damage before it happens, period,” his spokesperson Laena Fallon emails. “But, as you know, Eric has consistently said that additional funds for federal disaster relief ought to be offset with spending cuts.”.
Folding laundry, emptying the dishwasher and listening to the Sunday shows. First up for me – new Majority Leader Eric Cantor on Meet the Press. Gregory has been trying to get him to say the birthers have an illegitimate issue. He won’t. He’s trying to get Cantor to dispute the birther script and agree that it’s just ‘crazy talk’. He won’t. But he has a good reason – Cantor says he ‘won’t be prodded into calling people names’.
How about specifics for cutting the budget? Everything is on the table David. Like what? See, David, we need to get back to fiscal responsibility. But Rep. Cantor, what would this Congress cut? We have a committee working on that.
How about repeal of Health Care? What will the Republicans to cover the Americans who have no health insurance now? Well first David, we have to keep our campaign promise and repeal this bad bill. Will you repeal all fo it or parts of it? Americans were clear. Elections have consequence.
Find an answer in there. I dare you.
(For some Sunday fun, go visit The Bobblespeak Translations, where the weekend jibber jabber is translated every week for the rest of us. Funny stuff.)
Posted in Cable News, Congress critters, Current Events, economy, elections, Government, Media, Politics
Tagged Birthers, congress, David Gregory, Eric Cantor, Media, Meet the Press, Politics, Sunday talk shows
Eric Cantor (R-Va) has a cool idea
I must admit I never saw this coming. But then why not? We might as well go the rest of the way in corporatizing our government, er, I meant our elections.
House GOP moves to end public financing of campaigns
” . . . the House will vote next week on legislation that would end public financing of presidential campaigns and national party conventions.
The program, which Congress enacted during the aftermath of Watergate, is funded via voluntary $3 contributions when taxpayers file their annual federal income taxes. . . . Eliminating the program all together would save taxpayers $520 million over ten years.” (oooohhhh, $52million a year! )
In the understatement of the year, the story concludes:
It’s unclear how eliminating the program will actually make a dent in the federal deficit, since taxpayers voluntarily contribute cash to the effort.”
Posted in campaign finance, Congress critters, corporate power, elections, Government, Meet the 112th!, Politics
Tagged 112th Congress, Campaign Financing, elections, Eric Cantor, government, Politics, public financing
I used to think Cantor (R-new leadership) was a level-headed guy. He’s smart, not all Christianey (Jewish in fact) and doesn’t uses an entire can of spray every morning. He was obstructionist in the way of his party, but I always figured him to be someone who’d grow in his office.
Wrong. Apparently, he doesn’t like a proposal for a value-added tax, because . . . wait for it . . .
Cantor Dismisses Budget Fixing Proposal Because It Sounds Too European
Rep. Eric Cantor is trying to walk back his pledge to protect Israel from US foreign policy. He is failing.
And by the way, that wasn’t all he said From Matzav Network:
Cantor also took issue with Obama administration policies in other areas, including Iran, with the statement from his office saying the congressman “believes that it is time for the administration to fully and aggressively implement the Iran Sanctions Act passed by Congress earlier this year.”
Ron Kampeas from the Jewish Telegraphic Agency news agency found Cantor’s comments extremely surprising, writing, “I can’t remember an opposition leader telling a foreign leader, in a personal meeting, that he would side, as a policy, with that leader against the president. Certainly, in statements on one specific issue or another — building in Jerusalem, or somesuch — lawmakers have taken the sides of other nations. But to have-a-face to face and say, in general, we will take your side against the White House — that sounds to me extraordinary.”
I’m heading off to the Miami Book Fair shortly, but let’s see if I’ve got this straight.:
A Republican leader of the US House of Represetntatives has just told the head of a Foreign Country not to pay attention to the words or actions of the President of the United States, that the Republican caucus in Congress will protect said Foreign Country from any Official Foreign Policy of the United States of America.
I think I got that right. Yeah.