A blue dog is shocked, shocked that his own party leadership is duplicitous:
The seven Blue Dogs on the Energy and Commerce Committee stormed out of a Friday meeting with their committee chairman, Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), saying Waxman had been negotiating in bad faith over a number of provisions Blue Dogs demanded be changed in the stalled healthcare bill.
“I’ve been lied to,” Blue Dog Coalition Co-Chairman Charlie Melancon (D-La.) said on Friday. “We have not had legitimate negotiations.
I’d have some sympathy if I didn’t think that they were so naive as to finally notice this kind of behavior.
Anyway, it’s good news for the rest of us, if the latest radical attack on freedom and the Constitution is stopped in its tracks.
OK, who’s turn is it to pop the popcorn…
If the leaders are lying to the junior members of their own party, what kind of crap’ola are they trying to hide from us?
I refer you to me nome de blog.
Well, in his defense, Waxman is in a criminally psychopathic class by himself. I wouldn’t negotiate with him unless one of the conditions was that his subsequent performance would be guaranteed by having the barrel of a .45 in his mouth the entire time.
Personally, I’m a bit surprised. The blue dogs have a great deal of power. It’d be embarrassing, for example, if control of the House were to switch to the Republicans (in a coalition with the blue dogs) over things like this. They certainly can muster the votes to block anything that Waxmop is trying.
I have no doubt that Waxman is a tough negotiator, and likely to play hardball with people in his party who don’t support the party’s top priorities (e.g. health care reform and cap-and-trade). See John Dingell. But it’s thanks to Waxman that we have things like nutrition information on food products, smoke-free airline flights, and a steep reduction in acid rain. What have these Blue Dogs done to advance the cause of universal health care?
Do I understand correctly that Mr. Waxman did this all by himself? No co-sponsors? No votes?
Wow. Now I know who is REALLY behind the curtain.
And I don’t particularly regard universal health care to be a useful criterion. Rather, what has Waxman done to advance the cause of liberty?
it’s thanks to Waxman that we have things like nutrition information on food products
The Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) was passed in 1938. Henry Waxman was born in 1939.
smoke-free airline flights
Airline flights 2 hours or less in the CONUS were banned in 1988. Smoking on all flights within the US were banned in 1998. 1998, Waxman would have been in the minority in Congress, so he didn’t pass anything alone. In 1988, he needed the help of Republican President. In any case, a decade’s old work is a long time to be milking great progress. Then again, it is shorter than 70 years.
steep reduction in acid rain
Thanks to the Clean Air Act signed by President Bush. And again, over a decade ago. Almost 2 decades ago. Oh yeah, Waxman wasn’t even a co-sponsor, so no thanks to him. That cosponsor thing is no small stuff either, because there were 160 cosponsors in the house. He was one of 401 who voted yes… very courageous.
Is there anything Jim writes on this blog that isn’t complete horse shit?
Leland,
only if his name really IS ‘Jim’.
Leland,
Well said, but you left out the last of Jim’s stupidities…
“What have these Blue Dogs done to advance the cause of universal health care?”
Jim seems to think that this is a criticism of the Blue Dogs…it is in truth one of their virtues…
Leland,
It is NOT FAIR for you to fact check Jim. Even if it IS only with wikipedia or Google.
Seriously, facts are just a tool of oppression, wielded by the white male heterosexual hegemony, against Transterrestrial Musings commenters named “Jim”.
What have these Blue Dogs done to advance the cause of universal health care?
It’s not their job, Jim. Their job is to advance the interests of their constituents. As repeatedly has been pointed out, universal health care probably won’t ever do that.
Leland:
Waxman was the sponsor of the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act, which amended the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to require nutrition information on food. It passed in 1990.
The 1987 law to ban smoking on flights under 2 hours was sponsored by then-Rep. Dick Durbin, but Waxman shepherded it through the Commerce Committee’s Health and Environment subcommittee, which he chaired from 1979 to 1994. He played the same role when the ban was extended to all flights in 1990. He also held the 1994 hearings in which tobacco executives lied under oath, and found the documents that proved they were lying.
Waxman was one of the principal authors of the 1990 Clean Air Act, which set limits on sulphur emissions responsible for acid rain. The bill that eventually passed, H.R. 3030, was based on Waxman’s H.R. 2323. Check the legislative history.
Jim: Modifying labeling isn’t the same as being the principle reason we have nutrion labels. The act you referred to only added restrictions on what can be declared low (such as fat or sodium) or high (such as fiber). It did call for the separation of various fats. Yet fat content was part of the label for the ban. So call it hyperbole rather than a lie. It still common in your horse shit.
For smoking bans, Waxman moved it through a committee. Not exactly the same as being the person we should all thank for making it happen. After all, many airlines had already banned smoking on their flights without governments help. Considering you are now moving the argument to tobacco lawsuits, I see you realize your comment was more of a lie too.
If Waxman was an author, where is his name as a sponsor? I checked the legislative history and provided a link. Yeah, Waxman’s on the HR 2323, which didn’t pass. HR 3030 passed. If we are to genuflex and give thanks for Waxman for his efforts on Acid Rain, why did he choose not to cosponsor the winning legislation? Weren’t you just pushing the nonsense not long ago that we should praise Waxman for the new cap-and-trade pork barrel bill, because he put enough into it to pass? Why not then cosponsor HR3030, like 160 other Congressmen did? It’s this nonsense that you provide Jim that convinced me that “horse shit” is the appropriate description.
I understand you can’t help yourself. But it really is getting pathetic to see you continue with it.
In addition to problems with the Blue Dogs, I understand the dems are having problems with some representatives in districts with lots of rich democrat voters. Amazingly (and I’m not being entirely sarcastic there), many of these voters don’t like the proposed tax increases.