moderate and sensible Dems who think this spending is reckless, amoral and insane applaud those like Warner and Bayh who wish to stop this madness .

I like Claire McCaskill. She's well to my right, and I knew that when I contributed to her campaign, but she's smart and seems tough and principled and is one of the best of elected Dems at TeeVee.

But when she twittered during the budget negotiations that she and her co-conspirators had gotten rid of a lot of the "silly stuff", she pissed me. The flip and dismissive reference to cutting an (IMHO) already too-small stimulus (including a personal priority of mine, the green vehicles for gov't use) still gnaws at me. Because we see, once again, a potentially potent Dem buying into the center-right Broderist rhetoric of the Beltway instead of taking a stand and making the case for something that could benefit the country, and/or prevent the country from going down the wrong path... we've seen that movie before. Too many damn times.

(And I did let my Bayhite Senators know that at least one of their constituents in paying attention, and is not happy).

Fact is if you read the report from the CBO today, you would realize that we cannot afford the reform that the  President is pushing at this time. The CBO and others have stated that the current budget over the next 10 year projection is unsustainable. Bayh and the others realize the jeaporday here. Blind partisans do not. Just becuase you want something doesnt make it right. Fact is our priority needs to be fixing the financial and housing situation first. Everything else is irrelevant right now.

Seriously, I have respect for independent opinions. And sometimes, when ideology veers too much one way, a correction MAY be needed based on the mistakes made.

But in the current era, how exactly can self proclaimed moderates claim to be disenfranchised enough to come up with this ridiculous group? We had 8 years of Bush. The so called left side of the spectrum's needs have been underserved for 8 years and weren't exactly at top of the agenda in Clinton's tenure. So where is this reactionary attitude coming from?

Obama has bent over backwards to accomodate self proclaimed moderates. What more do they want?

AND HERE IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING. People who tend to be non ideological are usually those who like to reward a meritocracy. The conservative ideas these people want to champion have proven to be failures. These democrats were wrong on Iraq. They were asleep during the deregulation era. They were asleep during consolidation of corporations into unwieldly huge entities.

WHAT IS THEIR TRACK RECORD to be show such audacity?  Why don't they compare their actions with a liberal like  Feingold's? Who has been more on the mark in the last 8 years? I thought moderates were more concerned about RESULTS and not ideology. But when they make MODERATION an ideology instead of a pragmatic means to an end, they are strarting their own niche group.

Look, I have been one of the few who actually said government should not increase taxes until it proves it can spend current money wisely. But I find it rich that these so called moderates target social projects only because of ideology and not because they do a cost benefit analysis on the projects. In the process, they show a rigid ideology unbecoming of someone aspiring to be a moderate.

A lot of Obama's social programs may not have tangible wealth created to show on a spreadsheet. But one needs to develop human assets to enable them to develop material assets in the future. if you forgo reforms just because you have a knee jerk reaction against liberal programs, then you are fiscally costing the country down the road when these human assets end up with dysfunctional lives.

You know what burns me up. They have given other presidents the courtesy of testing their ideas. A lot of them have failed. Yet they do not extend Obama the same courtesy to try out his ideas despite his watering down of the radicalism of such ideas. The same President who has brought glory back to the Democratic party. Do they not owe Obama the courtesy of cooperation ? It won't stop them from making their suggestions to follow a different path, but they need to work with the President once they have made their case. It doesn't prevent them from shutting up in case they see something really wrong that has been tried out in the past. But they have nothing in their track record to be such intra party obstructionists.

Getting health care passed is important right now.  Cap and trade is not.

If this cantrist caucus can get spending under control, while allowing health care reform to pass, then the Democrats will do well.  But if health care reform is blocked in the name of cutting spending, then a lot of Democrats will stay home.

Health care reform is the second stimulus, it's that important.  And I mean one with a public component.

I will say this:  ANYONE, anyone, who says that we cannot "afford" to reform the health care system DOES NOT KNOW what they are talking about, does not understand how health care is funded right now, and DOES NOT KNOW how much is being paid in right now.  Really.  You are STUPID, as in you have been given the fact or the ability to get the facts, but you deny them because you do not like them.

I looked at my health care coverage and it is 40% of my pre-tax paycheck.  I have good coverage, but that is a 40% health care tax, just not doen by the govt.  

I really wish all these "not afford" people would be honest and just say "WE have totally bought Regan's line that govt. is ALWAYS the problem".  We WANT corporations to get rich off of us and grossly mis-manage the money we give them just because we don't like the word socialism."

As for the whole "live on your feet than die on your knees" comment...I guess you just don't see who you are on your knees to, cause I noticed you ain't dead.

The way forward is almost always up the middle. I look forward to helping the President find that way forward on health care, energy, and our struggling economy. The left and the right shouting at each other hasn't gotten much done. Red vs Blue hasn't been very successful either.

She's a moron if she believes the above. Splitting things down the middle is a recipe for disaster.

Senator Claire McCaskill: helping keep the "Overton Window" to the right

Senator Claire McCaskill: that "Overton Window" keeps getting pulled right

Claire McCaskill (D): "Kitchen Table Talk" in Kansas City

Claire McCaskill (D): "Kitchen Table Talk" in Kansas City, part 2

Claire McCaskill (D): "Kitchen Table Talk" in Kansas City, part 3

Claire McCaskill (D): "Kitchen Table Talk" in Kansas City, part 4

Claire McCaskill's Kitchen Table Talk in St. Louis: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

Holding Bush and Cheney accountable for torture

does anyone know all eight senators that signed that letter?

Think of the Republicans like the posturing dictator of a middle eastern country (saber rattlers).  Think of the Conservadems as the diplomatic corps of the Democratic party. (extending hand to those who will unclench fist)

The Republicans have been hunkering down in their bunkers and refusing to cooperate to get legislation passed.  They have offered nothing but obstructionism.  

The members of the Conservadems do not intend to obstruct the passage of Obama's legislation and budgets.  Their job is to accept any positive suggestions, ideas or alternatives coming from the conservatives and present them for consideration.  The President encouraged formation of this group.

I talked about this with Senator Bennett's assistant yesterday and she confirmed they will not obstruct the passage of Obama's agenda(s).  Both of CO's Senators are members and I told her many of us were concerned.

President Obama is very savvy when it comes to politics.  We should trust him.