Tonight's guests:
- Senator Tom Coburn
- Senator Jeff Merkley
- Julian Sanchez, research fellow at the CATO Institute
And here's executive producer Bill Wolff with a preview of what you'll see tonight for a while, maybe longer:
Ahead on the 12/28 Maddow show
-
Fri Dec 28, 2012 8:01 PM EST
Leave a Comment:
Senator Tom Coburn.
he was at the Caucus Room. an expense-account steakhouse, halfway between the White-House and the Capitol on the night of President Obama's inauguration. it was there that he pledged to about 15 of his white REPUBLICAN colleagues and friends (including fred barnes, newt gingrich, and the sissified frank luntz) to say NO to all economic policies the President put forth.
it is another pledge (grover norquist, anyone?) that the repub party kept.
DO NOT ASK WHAT GOOD WE DO...
When are you going to get some facts?
I don't know what is worse; having Tom "Dr. No" Coburn as a guest or inviting a spokesperson for the Koch Brothers Randian Cato Institute. I'm not opposed to differing opinions, but c'mon! At the very least, the guests should be honest and somewhat sane.
Come back soon, Rachel. You are missed.
Cliff,
if the repubs said "yes", we'd be over 20 trillion in debt
the only time repubs complain about the debt and deficit is when a democrat holds the office of the presidency. when repubs had that power, cheeeney and reagan both said, "deficts don't matter". both administrations grew the deficit at record amounts.
now that a democrat holds the presidency, repubs are all of a sudden deficit hawks? now that a democrat is president, all of a sudden President Obama is blamed for the deficit? it might help you to know that the two wars (afghanistan and iraq) WERE KEPT OFF THE BOOKS BY BUSH/CHEEEEENEY!. when President Obama took office he did two things IMMEDIATELY: he RAMPED UP THE HUNT FOR BIN LADEN, AND HE SAID, "WE WILL NO LONGER LIE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ABOUT THE COST OF THE WARS (AND MEDICARE PART D, ALSO KEPT OFF THE BOOKS).
President Obama gets the blame for WHAT REPUBLICAN/BAGGER americans THINK is an INCREASE in spending BECAUSE THEY DO NOT KNOW THAT BUSH/CHEEEENEY KEPT THE WARS AND MEDICARE PART D OFF THE BOOKS, HE PUT THEM ON THE CREDIT CARD.
the debt ceiling increase is to pay for past debt, DEBT THAT WAS NEVER REPORTED TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, BECAUSE BUSH/CHEEENEY KEPT IT OFF THE BOOKS.
history has PROVEN since nixon on that REPUBS/CONSERVATIVES are responsible for MOST of our debt. a democrat always has to come in and CLEAN UP after a big-spending, big gov't repub (reagan and bush/cheeeeney). repubs are very good at blaming democrats for the VERY THINGS that only they are doing, it is called PROJECTION (an example of that would be voter fraud).
you should also know that the economic policies that President Obama has put forth to the repubs, are policies that THEY HAVE SUPPORTED IN THE PAST (the individual mandate is ONLY ONE EXAMPLE). but in keeping with their pledge to each other to say "no" to all economic policies that President Obama puts forth, they (tom coburn, john ensign, jim demint, eric cantor, jon kyl, pete sessions, jeb hensarling, paul ryan, kevin mcCarthy, bob corker, pete hoekstra, dan lungren) did nothing to help the recovery of our country, and THOUGHT THEY WERE DOING EVERYTHING THEY COULD TO MAKE PRESIDENT OBAMA A ONE TERM PRESIDENT, their most important goal. also included in that obstructive SELF-SERVING MEETING THAT BACKFIRED was fred barnes, newt gingrinch and the sissified frank luntz.
repubs love to say that President Obama doesn't know how to lead. yet they were led by the most ignorant President our country has ever had, W. bush. he led them into two wars, into huge deficit, and an economic collapse. they agreed with and loved everything bush/cheeeeney wanted.
I AGREE WITH LARRY74. get some facts!
Remember when Clinton was in the same situation, faced with what was called a threat of "govt shutdown" at the time? To appease the rich and protect the middle class, Clinton agreed to throw the poor off the cliff. Following this evening's brief speech by President Obama, in which he stressed that he would continue to protect the middle class (instead of all Americans) and UI, all commentary I hear has concerned the middle class. The rest of us would like to know if the president followed Clinton's example, this time throwing disabled and/or elderly Social Security recipients off the cliff. What is troubling is that Social Security has been a big part of these budget discussions, yet the president notably said nothing about it -- only that he would protect those still in the middle class.
Here we go again. Must we all go down together because of our politician (mainly Republican) stupid arrogance? How in God's name do Republicans think that trashing our economy, and in fact the global economy, will resurrect their party from the depths of despair? Let her go over. If that's what it takes to force the wealth class to contribute more, then, so be it. Hey, I think, most people that live at my level would agree and are fed-up with with a system that no longer works for 98% of the country.
The thng that the 98% need the most is solidarity to force tha real change that we need in our government. That real change must begin with campaign finance reform because without that our country will go off one cliff after another.
Every reason that Ezra Klein gave for protecting/extending UI benefits also applied to welfare. Contrary to some of the more primitive notions about the poor, welfare checks were cashed immediately, with those dollars (by necessity) going directly into local communities for rent, utilities and basic consumer needs. When welfare ended, so did that money that went to neighborhood stores around the country. Welfare provided the stability that was absolutely necessary for young parents to obtain education/skills necessary to secure family-supporting jobs, thereby giving them the means to work their way out of poverty. Some 80% of AFDC recipients were able to quit welfare for work as soon as their children began school, becoming taxpayers, ultimately repaying all the aid they had received. It worked. Of course we had to get rid of it because someone heard from a neighbor that a friend of her cousin's was living in luxury on welfare (which, in reality, provided roughly $5,000 benefits per year). Now, the reason we should NOT extend UI benefits is because the middle class had concluded that providing checks for more than a very short time drains people of the incentive to get up in the morning and find a job, thereby causing dependency.
An insane retired soap salesman told them that when they elected him in 1980 and even though that welfare system no longer exists not that it ever did, it was a lie he made up based on a NJ slum lord who was defrauding the system by double and triple renting apartments. The GOP ended that program in 1995, they continue to believe their are poor sitting around collecting welfare living high off the fat of the land, even though the GOP trimmed all the fat off the poor and gave it to the wealthy. You know our slobbering conservatives once they get a belief its with them for life.
Note to those who imagine that food stamps are used fraudulently: Today, recipients are issued "Food Share" cards that work like a debit card, with which one can purchase only those products are approved by the food stamp program. No cash is exchanged. One cannot receive cash with a Foodshare card. Once one purchases the allotted amount of food, what they do with it is their business. Still, it's rather ludicrous to think of someone walking along with a package of ground beef hoping to exchange it for some drugs. Maybe walk into a liquor store to buy a pint with a bag of potatoes?
Again facts are meaningless to our drooling conservatives their beliefs trump facts. Heres a belief that started in 2000 about SSI, people can walk into an SS office claim they are mentally ill and walk out of the office with $6,000 in their pocket, so SSI checks are now called nut checks. The stupidity of conservatives and their beliefs are limitless, why they actually believe they are smarter then a box of rocks because conservatives like the Koch brothers got rich by working hard so that proves how smart conservatives are. Not 1 fact in that belief but belief trumps fact.
YES BILL! if i sucked at music as much as congress sucks at passing laws I would be done. NO MORE TOUR - no records, nothing. I'd be done.
I liked the song choice tonight. BTW
The upright and pious Tom Coburn who lied about his involvement in the Ensign affair. The same Tom Coburn who lied when he said that he opposed the 9/11 First Responders Bill because it never went through a congressional committee even though the bill went through a committee that Coburn sits on!
This is the same guy who has earned the nickname of "Dr. No" for his reputation in the Senate of placing countless holds and blocking legislation that he disagrees with from being voted on. One of his more infamous holds was placed on the Veterans’ Caregiver and Omnibus Health Benefits Act that would provide care to veterans. Coburn also voted against the Veterans Jobs Corp Act that would have provided aid to veterans to help them get jobs in law enforcement, fire departments and/or federal land. Coburn called the bill "felonious crap".
This is the same guy who spoke out against the threat of filibustering nominations to judicial and Executive Branch positions during the GWB administration, then he led the way in filibustering nominations during the Obama administration.
The same guy who opposed regulation of tobacco on the grounds that it hurts the free market. The same guy who believes in the rights of the individual when it comes to gun control issues, but who supports a constitutional amendment banning marriage equality. The same guy who actually protested the airing of Schindler's List on television, calling it "irresponsible sexual behavior". The same guy who attempted to block two bills honoring the 100th birthday of environmentalist Rachel Carson. The same guy who twice blocked legislation to protect wilderness areas in Oregon, Washington and Idaho.
This is not the first time when Ezra Klein has sat in for Rachel that he has had Coburn on as a guest to discuss economic issues. If Coburn refuses to come on the show to answer questions about his involvement in the Ensign affair or any number of other issues, then he shouldn't be allowed to come on when Rachel is away.
I don't watch this show so I can see creeps like Coburn and hacks from Catro and NRO. I admired Ezra when he first came on the scene. But he is now turning into quite the Villager. I'll no longer watch the show when he's hosting.