Dems warn Baucus with gavel threat

[kpete]

Source: The Hill

Dems warn Baucus with gavel threat
By Alexander Bolton
Posted: 07/29/09 08:26 PM

In an apparent warning to Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.), some liberal Democrats have suggested a secret-ballot vote every two years on whether or not to strip committee chairmen of their gavels.

Baucus, who is more conservative than most of the Democratic Conference, has frustrated many of his liberal colleagues by negotiating for weeks with Republicans over healthcare reform without producing a bill or even much detail about the policies he is considering.

“Every two years the caucus could have a secret ballot on whether a chairman should continue, yes or no,” said Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), the chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee. “If the ‘no’s win, (the chairman’s) out.

..............

Liberals have stifled their gripes for the past several weeks, but it appears their patience is nearing its end.



Read more: http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/dems-warn-baucus-with-gavel-threat-2009-07-29.html

[Blaze Diem]

1. Yep, cuz they're all in deep dodo with their constituents if Health Care sinks...

They better darn well start making some noise.
We'd all like to see just who is with us & who is not.

Fight you fu*kers !!!

[harun]

45. Damn right they are.

[lsewpershad]

111. "bout time.

[bemildred]

2. Or every year, or once a month. nt

[Journeyman]

3. Or better yet, at daylight and dusk until we get who we need. . .

[zbdent]

40. Murphy Brown's "one day" contracts ...

[SammyWinstonJack]

81. +1

:thumbsup:

[David Zephyr]

4. K&R. Hooray for Tom Harkin.

Tom!

[avaistheone1]

22. I love that man.

He has got a lot of heart and true grit.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mikelgb]

5. Excellent Idea in theory but I bet it will only be used to vote out the libs

[Sherman A1]

33. Precisely

This is a two edged sword, but I think it a good idea in any event as a little rotation might not be such a bad thing.

[peace frog]

72. Exactamundo

and nobody knows it better than Baucus and the mother frickin' repukes he caucuses with.

[No Elephants]

101. Both of them?

[bitchkitty]

125. LOL! So true. n/t

[sasquatch]

6. Let the wolves eat my friends

[louis-t]

78. A well placed comma would clarify your analogy

:rofl:

[No Elephants]

93. I don't usually enjoy posts that correct other posters publicly. But yours is funny.

But, while we are in correcting mode, peace frog's post is a metaphor, not an analogy.



:hi:

[louis-t]

112. Right, I couldn't think of the word when I was typing. Thanks.

The only spelling error that makes me nuts is 'loose' for 'lose'. I think it's because it's so common. I wonder why?

[sendero]

118. It's because...

... the uuuuu sound in "loser" is typically (in other words) spelled with "oo" rather than "o".

[louis-t]

113. Ha! It was Sasquatch's post.

So there!

[sasquatch]

109. HAHA!!

:rofl:

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

7. meanwhile, lets raise money to primary him

get someone more worthy in office.

Glad to see Dems paying attention to this asshat.

[radhika]

13. He doesn't run again until 2014

That's one reason he gets to thumb his nose at the public.

[mdavies013]

64. He won't run again...and if he can deliver more of the same...he will get a cushy job earning

millions from the insurance industry.

[peacetalksforall]

86. Imagine how rich he will be by then. nt

[followthemoney]

59. How are you going to get Obama to support ...

the winner of a primary who knocks out Baucus. Obama doesn't want universal single payer so he has more in common with Baucus than the American public.

The Ned Lamont example negates the feasibility of a primary challenge to change the direction of the party.

[No Elephants]

98. One primary does not determine the fate of all primaries to come. BTW,

Obama, too, is subject to a primary. It's our responsiblity to keep contacting Obama and the DNC and everyone else to let them know how we feel. And, if they ignore us, it's our responsiblity to work hard to primary whomever we can primary. If not, shame on us.

[No Elephants]

95. He was re-elected in 2008, so has a while. However, I think Democrats should establish

a permanent fund for the purpose of primarying DINOs, as and when they come up for re-election.

[farmboxer]

8. Baucus = insurance/drug companies

I guess he just can't resist all that money?

Whatever, it's about time. And to Hell with Republican approval!

[JohnWxy]

56. Get him out of there. We can't delay or undermine reform which everybody wants.

[Oldtimeralso]

9. K&R Great for Tom Harkin

He was my man in 92
long before the DU

Gee I'm a poet
and didn't know it.

I know keep my day job, but I don't have one anymore. Thanks to the GreedyOilParty

Does anyone know when Harkin's next steak fry is?

[Ken Burch]

20. One of the great tragedies of the Nineties

Was that the so-called "liberal" press ganged up on Harkin and forced him out of the race. Harkin never did anything to the press to deserve that treatment. And Harkin would've beaten Bush the First just as solidly as ol' what's-his-name did.

[Common Sense Party]

87. What did the press do to force him out of the race? n/t

[justgamma]

116. Sept., 13th with guest Al Franken.

Too bad that Grassley is all over the "news" in Iowa, but when it comes to Senator Harkin, it's Tom Who? He sends them press releases and statements every day, but they just absolutely refuse to air anything about him.

[glinda]

10. Baukus has the Dems by their nuts. For one, he can cross over to the Repugs because he is

basically one. On the other hand, he can fan his self-impotence....ooops...I meant "importance" by getting as much as he can. He has a maturity problem I think. Insecure. Besides being a grandiose ass.

[No Elephants]

97. Let him cross over. I think Democrats are much worse off having

60 Senators in name only than they would be if they had fewer. With 60 in name only, they have no excuses whatever, yet they don't have the votes. Having to take the blame for whatever Congresd does without actually having had the power is, IMO, the worst scenario. And that is where the DINOs put us, in the worst case scenario. Let them go.

[Divine Discontent]

11. NOTE!!

Dems will be in a heck of a lot of trouble in '10 if a real overhaul of health care fails to go through - a good chunk of the liberals will be angry at the right wing "Dems" who sabotaged it and not vote at all.

It has to pass for us to maintain our majority... and "it" is a Public-Option Health Plan!

[JDPriestly]

19. If Baucus and his ilk don't get behind the public option in the health

care reform bill, Democrats will look like fools. In that case, don't expect a Democratic majority in the Senate in 2010. Baucus will definitely lose his chairmanship if that happens. He needs to realize that he has to get with the program even if it isn't what he wants. Unless Democrats can unite around the public option health care reform bill, they will look like they can't be trusted in government. Baucus is making a huge, huge political miscalculation. He is not up for re-election. Why is he catering to the insurance and pharmaceutical companies? It makes absolutely no sense.

[Divine Discontent]

25. makes you wonder what they have on him, other than donations... because he's risking a collapse of

the Democratic majority with these political moves. Agreed, if they don't get together and make agreements on the public option (let alone a single-payer plan) they'll look like fools. At the minimum, this public option plan will make 10's of millions more get insurance for health coverage - I'm just concerned about the costs, but we'll see. I know the public option will force the corporations to lower there charges, or they'll become irrelevant! (hopefully)

[billyoc]

51. It's not what they have ON him, but what they're offering him.

A lifetime of employment as a lobbyist.

[myrna minx]

67. Exactly.

He's been payed handsomely by the health insurance industrial complex to sabotage the health care bill (and subsequently the Democratic majority) so he can ride off into the sunset with a cushy lobbying job. :puke:

[howmad1]

84. You know the old saying:

"Profit over patriotism". The mantra of every friggin politician.

[No Elephants]

100. It makes no sense for the nation or the Party, but it makes lots of cents for Baucus. Lots and lots

and lots and lots.

[Sherman A1]

34. Precisely

If we don't get a good health plan with a public option (I would prefer single payer, but sometimes half a loaf is better than none) I will sit out the next election as will my campaign contributions.

[closeupready]

55. Yes, in 2010, Dems will be in trouble, and deservedly so, IMO, if it's because

they fail to reform the health care system.

[donquijoterocket]

66. possibility

I suppose that's a possibility, but fortunately or unfortunately, depending on your perspective the alternatives offered up by the repcons are generally worse much worse than even the blue dogs.IMO the opposition to health care reform is such a losing proposition regardless of where it comes from that even the dogs will soften their stance.The repcons never will they've decided opposition to the "interloper" is the core of their policy and details be damned.The anger you mention ought to be channeled into an effort to put pressure on the naysayers and waverers.Firedoglake's whip count effort might serve as a good model.I ginned up a letter to my reps that with some editing based on developments gets sent daily to all of them.I consider it my version of the chinese water torture- drip, drip, drip.

[Divine Discontent]

92. oh, good idea! eom

[No Elephants]

99. Voting third party is a much clearer message than staying home on election day.

I don't think people would have been so concerned with the budget deficit 1992-2000 if so many had not voted for Perot, knowing full well he would never win.

[No Elephants]

102. +1 They are already in trouble if you believe the polls.

[radhika]

12. Gavel vs Millions from Lobbyists?

I'm not getting that gavel bit. If Baucus derails healthcare, as he's being paid to do, he can retire on lobbyist welfare.

[Hawkeye-X]

28. That is why I want him indicted ASAP

for influence peddling.

[DaLittle Kitty]

35. AGREED! This Whole Facade Is Little More Than A Mafia Shakedown! Indict All These Bastards!

Then NAtional Referendum on Campaign Finance and Election Reform! www.johnrussellforcongresss.com

[No Elephants]

103. Would that be Holder's job? Lots of luck.

[Umbral]

14. Yeah right, maybe after Harry Reid loses his re-election bid. nt

[depakid]

15. "bout time we flexed a little muscle

Hell, we only have 70+ percent of the people in America behind us....

[Frank Booth]

16. This may have been posted here already, but anyway, this has some good info on Baucus:

When Baucus ran for his sixth term last year, his campaign raised $11.6 million, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Nearly half of the funds came from out-of-state donors, including millions from health care and other industries overseen by Finance and Baucus' other committees.

Just 5 percent of Baucus' re-election funds came from Montana donors. . .

The fundraising balance for Baucus tips even more sharply when his personal "leadership PAC" is factored in. The committee, called Glacier PAC, raises money to pay for Baucus to travel, raise his political profile and support other Democrats.

Over the past six years, Glacier PAC raised 76 percent of its funds from political committee ties to corporations, unions, trade associations and lobbyists.

Baucus courts these inside-the-Beltway donors by inviting them to Montana for weekend getaways — skis and snowmobiles in February, fly fishing and golf in June, and coming up on July 31, "Camp Baucus," which is billed as "a trip for the whole family."

Tickets start at $2,500.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106655060

And there's a great chart here showing how Baucus's former staffers have become lobbyists for the insurance industry and big pharma:

http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/projects/2009/healthcare_lobbyist_complex/

It's like a bad joke. The insurance industry's inside man is deciding the future of American healthcare.

[foginthemorn]

37. Thanks. I saw several articles like this when he had his June

party. But, few seem to care. OR, what to do about it. Campaign finance is in order, but too many congress critters will vote that idea down.

[Phlem]

17. Harry Reid

What a POS

-phlem

[autorank]

18. Good start but how about one of those votes right now

It's never a bad time for democracy and a secret vote.

"The Gang of Six"

[edc]

48. Wow!

Congress operating democratically? What a novel idea! By the way, can any one explain to me exactly why a democratic republic needs a senate?

[autorank]

120. Well, just drop "democratic" and you've got it.

In the middle of the english Civil War, the fighting men of the parliamentary faction ("The Levelers") met and drafted a bill of particulars as to how England should be governed. These were the men who fought the King. Cromwell was among them but not the leader at that time. Here's some of what they proposed, which in truth is well beyond our current system.


An agreement of the people for a firm and present peace upon grounds of common right and freedom. 28 October 1647

"1. That the people of England being at this day very unequally distributed by counties, cities and boroughs for the election of their deputies in parliament, ought to be more indifferently proportioned according to the number of the inhabitants: the circumstances whereof, for number, place, and manner, are to be set down before the end of this present parliament. (proportional representation in Parliament)

"4. That the power of this and all future representatives of this nation is inferior only to theirs who choose them, and doth extend, without the consent or concurrence of any other person or persons, to the enacting, altering, and repealing of laws; to the erecting and abolishing of offices and courts; to the appointing, removing, and calling to account magistrates and officers of all degrees; to the making war and peace; to the treating with foreign states; and generally, to whatsoever is not expressly or impliedly reserved by the represented to themselves. Which are as follows:

1. That matters of religion and the ways of God's worship are not at all entrusted by us to any human power, because therein we cannot remit or exceed a tittle of what our consciences dictate to be the mind of God, without wilful sin. Nevertheless the public way of instructing the nation — so it be not compulsive — is referred to their discretion.
2. That the matter of impressing and constraining any of us to serve in the wars is against our freedom; and therefore we do not allow it in our representatives; the rather, because money (the sinews of war) being always at their disposal, they can never want numbers of men apt enough to engage in any just cause.
3. That after the dissolution of this present parliament, no person be at any time questioned for anything said or done in reference to the late public differences, otherwise than in execution of the judgements of the present representatives (or House of Commons).
4. That in all laws made or to be made, every person may be bound alike; and that no tenure, estate, charter, degree, birth, or place do confer any exemption from the ordinary course of legal proceedings whereunto others are subjected.
5. That as the laws ought to be equal, so they must be good and not evidently destructive to the safety and well-being of the people."

[JDPriestly]

122. Very interesting. Thanks.

[autorank]

124. Isn't it

anaxarchos, a sometime poster here pointed me to the English Civil War and I'm glad he did. This is quite a statement
for true democracy and something we can learn from.

[JDPriestly]

121. Grassley is way over the top!

Do Iowans know how much money he takes from the insurance companies that are denying them health care?

[autorank]

123. Same corporate media everywhere, I'm sure that they don't

Plus Grassley is one of those blusterers, a fatuous factotum, fulminating fabrications (ok, I'll stop;)

[KelleyKramer]

21. Good! Its time to take the gloves off, call his bluff

About damn time the Dems started standing up

How many millions of dollars has this guy taken from the 'healthcare' lobbyist?

He is stonewalling

Good for the Dems, call his bluff

[avaistheone1]

23. I would love to see someone shove that gavel up Baucas' butt.

I can't stand that insurance company whore.

[Third Doctor]

24. Baucus

should have been sent packing years ago. He's just a Repub with a D in front of his name.

[PBass]

26. Baucus and Blue Dogs are going to stifle Obama, the same way that Carter was

I'll be surprised if Obama gets re-elected, if the Blue Dogs are allowed to keep foiling Obama. He's going to be a one-term president.

I heard Baucus only gets 5% of his contributions from individual Montanans... the rest comes from lobbyists and private industries.

WE NEED TO GET THESE WEAK DEMS OUT OF LEADERSHIP POSITIONS, whatever it takes.

[ramapo]

52. Exactly

Carter's worst enemies were his fellow Democrats

[orleans]

29. vote now and get him the fuck out! n/t

[DaLittle Kitty]

36. That's Da Spirit!

:nuke:

[sea four]

30. That's a GREAT idea.

:loveya:

I really hope they do this.

[The Wizard]

31. Senate Majority Leader

Harry Reid has to exhibit leadership and get the shyster Baucus under control.
This looks like Baucus last Senate term so he might be taking as much in bribes as possible. I wonder which country is home to Baucus' slush fund accounts.
That the Democrats can't pass an agenda with large majorities in both houses compared to what the Republicans did with small majorities speaks volumes about party leadership.
If only Baucus was caught in bed with a dead girl or live boy......

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[No Elephants]

105. If Reid were not doing what a majority of Dem Senators want him to do,

he would not continue to hold the position of majority leader.

[democracy1st]

38. Go ahead and do it this guy is playing you all for fools

[cornermouse]

39. Would that be anything like the way

they've banned Lieberman after his defection in pursuit of power? I'm not holding my breath.

[kooljerk666]

41. Pennsylvania is in the balance in 2010 cause of this asshole.

All of the confusion & obstruction this tool is causing is really pissing me off. I worked hard the last few years for dems & they tell me FU!

Well, Jim Gerlach R-6 pa, is running for governor.
Pat Toomey For senate.
And Curt Schroder (R-155) is running for Gerlachs seat.

I figure if I get no public option, I will goto work for all 3 of these guys. I hate the GOP, but I really really hate Max Bacus & the blue dogs alot more. Even as I type this & feel a tinge of puke rising from anger, I WILL DO ALL I CAN to make them lose in 2010.

If Gerlach wins, i think he will have control over redistricting in 2010.
if a dem wins the 6th district, solidly GOP will probably cease to exist, with a GOP win PA will be jerrymandered to screw the dems.

If Schroder wins well he replaces Gerlach.

And Toomey is a lying POS that makes the worst GOPer look kind & friendly.

AND Rep Joe Sestak D-pa has given up his seat to run in the senate race, his district lean red, a gop replacement is possible.

At any rate the Democrats have a lot to lose in PA, they best start to fly right!

Before I totally give up I am calling people in montana at random (use 411.com type in a last name & then i start dialing) to tell them what that tool is up to & provide then with contact numbers to call his office & raise hell.

I am using congress.org to find #s for pols who need yelled at & www.411.com to find names of people in the districts so they think I am a constituent and don't just hang up, a trifle dishonest but I ain't losing no sleep.

[frustrated_lefty]

42. Oh NO, NOT the SECRET VOTE!~

Screw these assholes, how about some transparency?

[No Elephants]

106. Exactly. Voters deserve to know who votes to keep Baucus as chair and who keeps

Reid as majority leader, for that matter.

[Joanne98]

43. That's a great idea but make it every two months

[Sarah Ibarruri]

44. Want to know why I think this is happening?

Because congressmen are being inundated by our e-mails, phone calls and snail mails, and we're overwhelming blogs with our disdain of Baucus and our growing frustration with the Dems. We need to keep this up.

[No Elephants]

108. If innundating them gets only a threat to vote him out of a chair in 2 years, I may kill myself.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

117. :( I know. I wish we had more sense in this country nt

[orbitalman]

46. All you have to do is LOOK at him...

to see he is a 'hard-ass' like a republican. He would never sustain my reelection vote if I were from N-S? Dakota. REPLACE him.

[varelse]

47. It's about bloody time! (nt)

[Bjorn Against]

49. Two years is too long, they should do this every two months

The current system is undemocratic as it allows Senators who most of us will never be given the opportunity to vote for to have far more power than anyone who is on our ballot. Seniority should not give anyone significantly more power, no state should be punished for kicking out their incumbent and replacing them with someone new yet that is exactly what the current system does.

[Kingofalldems]

50. Republicans posing as blue dog Democrats are in a state of shock

over this one.

[bertman]

53. I'm sure Baucass is quaking in his boots with fear of the dreaded Liberal bloc. NOT!!

Our Democratic Senators and Reps can't get a spine for anything else, what makes anyone think they'll do it for this? It's all show. As usual.

We're caving to the Blue Cross Dawgs in the House and letting Baucass determine the outcome of health care reform in the Senate. Shameful.

Here's Baucass' D.C. phone # [phone]. Call and tell them we want a strong public option--Medicare for anyone who wants it.

And while you're at it, call Rep. Lynn Woolsey, head of the Progressive Caucus [phone], and Rep. Jerrold Nadler [phone] and let them know that you support their efforts to roll back the Blue Cross Dawgs' changes to the House bill. It's about time that the Progressive/Liberal bloc of Dems flexed their muscle on behalf of Americans.

[PassingFair]

119. It's the best "show" I'VE seen so far...

This is the first time the media has
even ACKNOWLEDGED that there is an
obstruction our democratic colon.

When was the last time you heard the
talking heads calling out "Blue Dogs"?

When they start to take on the DLC
(New Dems) who are the majority of
the "DON'T KNOW" reps and senators,
then we will REALLY know the Exlax
is WORKING.

[closeupready]

54. K&R

n/t

[redqueen]

57. FINALLY!

Maybe we're finally seeing the end of these a-holes dragging our party to the right.

:woohoo:

[Guero]

58. Don't hold your breath ...

because the Dems typically talk tough when it comes to controlling these jerks, but do nothing. And with their benefactor - Rahm - in the WH, so it's hard to imagine anything will be done.

On principle, however, these backwater Senators who represent an insignificant fraction of the population, SHOULD NOT be in positions of power. Baucus and Conrad areonly doing the bidding of the deep pockets that they expect will help keep them in power.

The Senate is our House of Lords and although the Brits stripped theirs of significant power, ours still reigns high and mighty.

[redqueen]

60. Good point about the House of Lords...

I'm not holding my breath, but I still see this as encouraging.

[wryter2000]

61. About damned time

Someone needs to remind these jerks that they're Democrats. We didn't put them in power so they could behave like Republicans.

[Guero]

79. And exactly what does a "Democrat" act like?

There have always been serious divisions within the Democratic Party. The most significant division was regional, with the racist Dixiecrats terrorizing black communities and opposing basic rights for workers - like unions.

Region still is important - the Blue Dogs began as a Southern caucus. While the most racist elements voluntarily joined the Republican Party (and I say voluntarily to point out that they were not purged by the Dems), other divisions prevail.

I don't want to diminish the importance that race plays in US politics generally, but in the Democratic I believe the principle division is around the competing interests of constituents of different socio-economic class.

So, we have Democrats like the Clintons and their DLC compatriots, who are corporate stooges. They have no problem shipping jobs overseas, dismantling the social welfare safety net, engaging in imperial agression overseas, etc. Aren't they Democrats?

I've moved through various stages in my 42 years of political activity (I'm 57 now) and during a brief period I believed there was a chance to turn the Dems into a more social-democratic party. (I was a member of the Democratic Socialists of America for 10 years.) I have no illusions that that is possible any longer.

[wryter2000]

80. Welcome to DU

:hi:

[No Elephants]

104. It depends upon how apathetic voters remain. A really active electorate could

things around. But, that assumes that the electorate is truly as liberal as some folks here think they are. I don't think liberals are a majority of Democrats, let alone a majority of the country. I hope I'm wrong, but the Progressive Caucus has 2 Senators (Udall and Saunders), and only one of the two is a Democrat.

Welcome to DU!

[Swede Atlanta]

62. I've always felt the seniority system was flawed.....

I'm not bashing the seniority system or unions but my experience while I worked in a union was that the supervisor positions were awarded on straight seniority. We definitely did not have the most qualified members of the union in those positions but just those that had the greatest seniority.

Similarly in Congress, I don't think that seniority, at least seniority alone, should determine who sits on what committee or who chairs which committee. It seems to me that just as with the leadership the caucus members themselves should either have direct vote or at least some say...e.g. the 3 most senior senators expressing interest in a chairmanship position are put to a vote..or something like that.

I realize that one reason for the seniority system is exactly to give the incumbents and edge up in elections. If a state re-elects the same person, even if they are totally incompetent, over and over, eventually that person is either a chairman if they are in the majority party or at least ranking members.

The system needs to be overhauled. Max Baucus needs to go from his chairmanship position. Just as a judge would have to recuse themselves if they had personal interests in a matter before them, this slut needs to step aside because he cannot be impartial. He is at the feed trough of the vested health care interests.

[bemildred]

65. Seniority systems in general are very un-democratic.

There is nothing wrong with providing perks to people with seniority, but it should not be the source of power. Power should come from the consent of the governed, and nowhere else.

[LeftishBrit]

88. I agree.

Most other democratic countries, such as the UK, do not formally reward seniority in this way.

[MannyGoldstein]

63. Hmm... Don't Feel Simians Seeking Egress From...

the posterior of my alimentary canal...

I'm thinking that the Battlin' Congressional Dems won't actually do this.

[jimmyzvoice]

68. So... Take Action NOW

Keep the pressure on. Call, write, and e-mail both your Senators and your Congressman once a week, every week until Health Reform is passed. That’s what I am doing.

Tell them: (1) we must include a Strong, Comprehensive Public Option; (2) we must pass healthcare reform this fall, and (3) support President Obama to reform healthcare for the American People. Tell them, “Either you are supporting the American People or the Insurance Companies. Which is it?”

Even if you never did this before, now is the one time we must all participate. Act like Healthcare Reform is now or never, because it is.

Congressional Switchboard: [phone]
House on the net: http://www.house.gov/
Senate on the net: http://www.senate.gov/

[go west young man]

69. Hell yes.

Boot the clown. He's in the way.

[TheCoxwain]

70. Breaking News: Dems have grown a spine !!!!

[DirtyDawg]

71. Threat Hell...

...do it now! Get that whore the hell out of power...ostracize his ass all the way back to the back country.

[Uncle Joe]

73. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, kpete.:thumbsup:

[SomeGuyInEagan]

74. Grew up in Iowa, met Harken on occasion, wonderful person ...

... great fighter for the greater good. I've been lucky enough to have Harken, Paul Wellstone and now Al Franken represent me in the Senate (sadly, that also means I had Chuck Grassley and Norm Coleman as well).

[Stellar]

75. Oh, please , please please

take his tight money grabbing fingers away from around the gravel, and whatever else you can do to save healthcare. :spank:

[FVZA_Colonel]

76. This would be good even if it weren't (in this instance) about Baucus.

Entrenched power blocs can hold up a lot of good legislation, and we ought to be able to bring in new people if need be. Certainly, if someone did a good job they should be able to remain on. But they shouldn't be able to sit there and just rot away.

[DailyGrind51]

77. Throw him out of the Party, too, while they're at it!

[colsohlibgal]

82. It's A Start

I absolutely despise that excuse for a man. He's a lot of things, but "democrat" he is not.

[Guero]

90. Does Obama's & Clinton's refusal to ostracize Honduran coup

leaders mean that they are not Democrats as well? The Democratic Party has ALWAYS included corporate scum and imperialists. Baucus IS a Democrat, just like the Clintons and other DLCers.

Wall Street insiders headed the Treasury Dept. under Clinton, Bush AND now Obama. Some things just don't change.

The Democratic Party ONLY moves to the left when there's a mass movement pushing them (and it resists all the way). And I don't think 'twitting' will provide the necessary push.

[kevsters]

83. Must Watch Clip...

This isn't about health care, per say, but here is a must watch clip about Glenn Beck and Fox News. Hilarious and disturbing all at the same time.

http://progressnotcongress.org/?p=2337

[KamaAina]

85. Get raucous with Baucus!

:thumbsup:

[LiberalFighter]

89. DO IT!!

[DebbieCDC]

91. Throw him out on his ass

Fucking DINO

[Zorra]

94. Make it one year, have the first vote tomorrow, and strip every Bush Dog

of their chairmanship immediately.

Get 'er done.

Then our Democratic President and Congress might be able to get something done without republican moles making the Democratic Party as ineffective as they possibly can at every turn.

[Botany]

96. Max "They Bought My Office"

watch him laugh as people are arrested.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKP05AyfRsI&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fvideo%2Egoogle%2Ecom%2Fvideosearch%3Fclient%3Dsafari%26rls%3Den%2Dus%26q%3DBaucus%2520laughing%2520as%2520people%2520are%2520arrested%26oe%3DUTF%2D8%26um%3D1%26ie%3D&feature=player_embedded

[No Elephants]

107. Screw every 2 years. REMOVE HIM TOMORROW!

[asdjrocky]

110. Called his office today-

and got nowhere. This guy is a piece of crap and the staffer I spoke with on the phone was uselss.

[Kermitt Gribble]

114. 2 years is too long. n/t

[femrap]

115. Kick Max the hell out....

this is the first time I've seen the Dems get feisty...and here it's with another 'dem.' Good for them. Baucus sucks.

Montana has no people anyway....well compared to our other states. I've been there and know. It certainly is too beautiful a state for Baucus. Hell, Ted Turner would be a better Senator...he owns most of the state.

[Dr Fate]

126. Why does it even need to be secret? THese senators and their "secrets" are a trip.

n/t