home

January Special Election Likely To Fill Kennedy Senate Seat

Politico:

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy urged Massachusetts lawmakers last week to give Democratic Gov. Deval Patrick the power to name his successor. But with reactions to Kennedy’s proposal mixed – and with the legislature not due back until after Labor Day – it appears for now that Massachusetts will be without a second senator until a special election can be held early next year.

That sounds right. It presents an interesting situation. Without Kennedy, Democrats no longer have the vote to close debate on a health care bill that is not enacted through reconciliation. If President Obama wants a HCR bill this year, it will have to be done through reconciliation. In a way, he now has an out. He can reset the debate, heck even argue for Senator Kennedy's Medicare For All Bill. What's clear though is anything passing prior to a Massachusetts special election will be weaker than necessary. In short, Democrats should delay a health care reform bill vote until after the Massachusetts special election.

Speaking for me only

< Yglesias: Tomorrow's Compromise Is Today's Triumph | Digby On Kennedy >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    "Democrats should delay " (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 11:29:57 AM EST
    I think I agree.  the republicans wanted a delay to do the summer or Hitler but I think its wearing thin.
    I think the more the haters are on TV the more people they turn off.
    delay might not be a bad idea at all.  for more than one reason.


    Oh thank God... (5.00 / 2) (#36)
    by masslib on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:19:13 PM EST
    I love Ted, but this is an incumbent state and pledges here don't mean much.  I want a chance to vote for my next Senator, and I want the career long bureaucrats here to have a chance to run in an open election.

    This:
    "heck even argue for Senator Kennedy's Medicare For All Bill."

    From your keyboard to God's blackberry, please make it so!

    Please share God's e mail address. (5.00 / 2) (#51)
    by oculus on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 01:01:59 PM EST
    email? or kneemail? (none / 0) (#84)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 04:54:18 PM EST
    Badda bing!

    Parent
    pleamail?..n/t (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by kdog on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 05:11:13 PM EST
    If you love Ted, (none / 0) (#68)
    by ChiTownDenny on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 02:01:26 PM EST
    what are you doing to foster his legacy?  Obama is Ted's legacy.  We all fought the fight for Hillary.  Obama won.  Ted made it so.  What will you do for Ted's legacy?

    Parent
    B.S. (5.00 / 2) (#69)
    by CST on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 02:06:00 PM EST
    His life's work is his legacy. His work in the senate, the legislation he leaves behind, that is his legacy.

    Ted Kennedy endorsing Obama didn't even win Obama MA.  So no, Ted Kennedy did not "make it so".  The people who voted for him did.

    Parent

    With all due respect, (none / 0) (#72)
    by ChiTownDenny on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 02:11:13 PM EST
    my comment was specifically to masslib.  masslib probably has a faint knowledge of me, if at all.  
    To your point; I agree, and have stated so, that EMK's legacy is significant.  I now have the opportunity to state also that he is the catalyst for our current president, good or bad as that may be!

    Parent
    Well, the "people" were split. (none / 0) (#79)
    by masslib on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 03:18:10 PM EST
    Yes I know (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by CST on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 03:35:52 PM EST
    my point was, Kennedy was not a king-maker.  He didn't even swing MA.  I really don't see how his endorsement had such an impact.  I wasn't trying to get into the primary vote details.

    Parent
    Agreed. (none / 0) (#86)
    by masslib on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 05:20:18 PM EST
    Um, as an MA resident, I don't consider his (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by masslib on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 03:19:20 PM EST
    legacy a person.  I mostly consider his legacy holding back Reagan from completely dismantling the safety net, and his awesome constituent services.

    Parent
    So you don't think Obama is Ted's legacy? (none / 0) (#87)
    by ChiTownDenny on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 06:43:20 PM EST
    No part at all?  That's fine.  But I think, given your regard for Kennedy, and given Kennedy's role in getting Obama elected president, some deference, at the least, should be shown to Obama.  
    I hope this message finds you well.  And I hope everyone has moved beyond the primaries.

    Parent
    No, I could care a less (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by masslib on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 07:03:10 PM EST
    who Ted Kennedy supported in the primaries.  And, no, I give no quarter to Obama because he was supported by Ted Kennedy.  Why on earth should I?

    Parent
    Kennedy's passing (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by NYShooter on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 01:28:16 PM EST
    gives everyone a chance to take a break, reconsider, and reflect on things. Of the two most important issues, the economy and health care, healthcare has had the front pages recently, but now the economy will take center stage.

    On the economy, the two important numbers, of course, are GDP & unemployment. I believe unemployment, while being a lagging indicator, is the more important number as it's what most people are worried about. If you have a job you can get by without health care, but not the other way around.

    Many of the economists I have faith in believe GDP will improve before the jobs numbers. And, the Obama administration will probably point to improving GDP as proof their "green shoots" are blossoming, and "prosperity is just around the corner."

    The problem for the Democrats is that the GDP numbers are misleading, as many economists think changes need to be made in how the number is formulated. People now think if GDP is rising then the economy is growing and that job growth will follow. But that's not necessarily so. A lot of the GDP number is financial in scope, not productive, industrial, job creating growth. J.P. Morgan swapping financial instruments with other institutions may add to their bottom line, and add to GDP growth, but does little for real growth, or job growth.

    And I think that fact, if used smartly by the Republicans, gives them a big leg up going into the '10 elections.


    January (none / 0) (#2)
    by eric on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 11:31:38 AM EST
    2010 is the beginning of an election year.  Forget about getting ANY HCR passed in an election year.

    Backwards imo (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 11:43:43 AM EST
    Better to have the accomplishment in an election year.

    Parent
    I disagree on a few counts: (none / 0) (#13)
    by steviez314 on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 11:56:27 AM EST
    1.  I think a bill done through reconciliation would (or at least should and could) be stronger than one that needs the 60th vote.

    2.  While I understand that Jan is 2010 and Dec is 2009, that won't really register with voters as much as the most important item--the unemployment rate (and maybe GDP) through Summer/Fall 2010.


    Parent
    Relevance of point 2 (none / 0) (#17)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 11:58:42 AM EST
    to the timing of HCR bill is not apparent to me.

    Parent
    You said it would be better to have the (none / 0) (#25)
    by steviez314 on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:04:21 PM EST
    accomplishment in an election year.  My point is that Dec 2009 and Jan 2010 are equal from that point of view.  And, if unemployment is 9.5-10% in Nov 2010, it really won't matter that the Dems can say "we passed HCR in 2010."

    I know the MA Senate is reluctant to change the law again to allow an appointment, but maybe they can compromise and reduce the window for a special election to 90 days (I know, hard to squeeze in primaries and campaigning), so a senator can be seated in late Nov.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#29)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:07:04 PM EST
    Nothing will matter then.

    But if unemployment is going down (HUGE if, hell doubtful IF), being able to point to it will help.

    Parent

    Another reason to do it fast: (none / 0) (#32)
    by steviez314 on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:13:46 PM EST
    I think a 59-40 vote, where everyone knows what would have happened if Teddy was there, and yet no Republican shows any honor, has some political advantages.

    Then go to reconciliation with a better bill, pass it maybe 54-45 and it's a win-win.

    Parent

    in my experience (none / 0) (#31)
    by The Last Whimzy on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:10:18 PM EST
    as desperate as some of us are, job creation insofar as a president does impact job creation, and i believe the president does, most people do understand that an economy doesn't turn on a dime.  president clinton was able to give people the impression things were going in the right direction, but most of the jobs created during his two terms were created in the second term.

    as much as i'd like obama to prioritize job creation higher, i think obama knows he'll be given a pass on that if he can show progress elsewhere.

    also.  in this case it might make practical sense too.

    lack of health care reform will hinder the job creation process much more today than it would have in 2004.


    Parent

    I wish Obama would point out that (none / 0) (#54)
    by hairspray on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 01:06:35 PM EST
    health care, particularly a public option would allow more businesses to hire the unemployed.  Particularly possible are the small businesses with less than 20 employees who would start out.  And my feeling it is these little businesses  are in the alternative energy field. Where I live small enterpreuners are starting solar systems left and right and they are 2 or three person operations (Usually a family)A lot of these people are laid off construction/architecture types who know a lot about the job.

    Parent
    in corporate speak (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by The Last Whimzy on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 01:10:30 PM EST
    obama has not fully utilized all synergies in this initiative.


    Parent
    Feingold (none / 0) (#26)
    by waldenpond on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:04:25 PM EST
    says not before Christmas or not at all.  He prefers an experiment... does not think a national system would work.  He must be glad the bill is stuck, so he gets the chance to push his agenda.

    Seems to me more time will confuse the public  even more when each option of the experiment would need to be debated and which states would win.  I'm for reconciliation.

    Parent

    Well I would rather have no legislation (5.00 / 3) (#48)
    by MO Blue on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:39:40 PM EST
    than pass bad legislation. Sinking money into state by state experiments may well fall under my definition of bad legislation. States are cash poor. People need health care. Being used as guinea pigs to find out how many ways you can fail to provide affordable health care using variations on the private insurance model, does not seem to be in their best interests.

    Parent
    Delaying anything until after the 2010 (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by MO Blue on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 11:49:42 AM EST
    election would be even better for Democrats.

    I can see the solicitation letters now. Help us pass health care (notice change from insurance to care) reform. In order to defeat the horrible Republicans (notice no bipartisanship is ever in letters for money) who want to deny you health care, we need 90 senators to pass legislation. Send us all your money.

    Back room conversations with insurance and Pharma etc.: If you want us to give you more customers and prevent a real government alternative, all your contributions and support must go to the Democratic Party.

    <snark ?>

    Parent

    were they (none / 0) (#3)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 11:34:32 AM EST
    not planning to do it in NOV anyway.
    dont see a huge difference in two months.


    Parent
    But will Michelle Bachmann (none / 0) (#4)
    by oculus on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 11:39:04 AM EST
    be able to fast and pray that long re HCR?

    Parent
    unfortunate end (none / 0) (#5)
    by bocajeff on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 11:42:11 AM EST
    this should have been done awhile ago and it would have been the responsible thing to do. Can't go backwards, but this responsibility to the people of Mass (and others) was forgotten...

    Delay? (none / 0) (#6)
    by Spamlet on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 11:42:23 AM EST
    I don't know. It might mean that the reforms would have to take effect sometime after the currently scheduled 2013.

    Who are the likely candidates (none / 0) (#9)
    by Radiowalla on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 11:50:47 AM EST
    for the seat?  

    A MA resident at another site (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by MO Blue on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 11:56:07 AM EST
    mentioned Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley as their first choice.

    Parent
    Me. Yes, please. (5.00 / 3) (#37)
    by masslib on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:20:07 PM EST
    Me too! (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by dk on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:21:45 PM EST
    And i would like another liberal woman. (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by hairspray on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 01:13:12 PM EST
    Frankly I am tired of some of these old geezer gasbags even if they are Democrats. As an old timer I know for a fact that conservatism can set in.  Michael Krasney our wonderful PBS commentator in SF. admitted recently that he has become more conservative as time went on.  As he accumulated, he grew that way, he said.

    Parent
    Yes it was you (none / 0) (#43)
    by MO Blue on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:25:06 PM EST
    I was just too lazy to go back and get your correct user ID. Sorry about that.

    Parent
    Wow. After watching her constantly (none / 0) (#89)
    by Inspector Gadget on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 07:15:13 PM EST
    being interviewed during that Nanny trial, I found her attitude so grating that I just can't stand the sound of her voice. Has she changed?

    Parent
    This article (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by CST on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 11:57:04 AM EST
    goes into the details.

    But to paraphrase the leading candidates are:

    Stephen Lynch (currently in house)
    Michael Capuano (currently in house)
    Martha Coakley (attorney general)

    All Dems, I don't really give the republicans much chance here.  There is also a possibility that Joe Kennedy might run.  People have been floating Vicki's name as well but I doubt it.

    Parent

    Who do you think... (none / 0) (#20)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 11:59:52 AM EST
    ...would be the most suitable replacement, CST?

    Parent
    I like (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by CST on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:03:43 PM EST
    Marhta Coakley.  Solid liberal.  Not afraid of a fight.  Not a gasbag either.

    After her, probably Capuono.  I kinda like him in the house though.  Lynch is too conservative.

    Parent

    What about Barney Frank (none / 0) (#41)
    by Radiowalla on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:23:59 PM EST
    or is he too ensconced in his chairmanship to want to leave the House?

    No mention of Edward Markey either.  I had thought he was interested at one point.

    Well, the main thing is to get a good progressive who will help push through health care reform...and who can get re-elected.

    Parent

    I doubt he will leave the house (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by CST on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:29:25 PM EST
    Edward Markey was mentioned (I believe) in the article.  He doesn't quite have the name recognition built in that some of the others do.

    The problem with some of these guys (Capuono and Frank) in my opinion is that they are in some ways too big characters for the senate.  They can be loose cannons in the house where it is more common and effective to be individuals.  In the senate you need someone more widely appealing.  It would be like having Menino in there.  So blatantly Bostonian that it's hard to take them seriously on a national level.

    Parent

    I think Barney (none / 0) (#47)
    by dk on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:38:19 PM EST
    could have managed it, since he is widely respected in congress for his intellect.  If it were 15 or maybe even 10 years ago, I think he definitely would have.

    Parent
    Really no point... (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by Jerrymcl89 on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:49:37 PM EST
    ... in going from House powerbroker to freshman Senator when you don't have the ability to stay in the Senate for decades.

    Parent
    Barney is too ensconsed in (none / 0) (#42)
    by dk on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:24:59 PM EST
    the House.  And, he's getting on in years.

    Parent
    All good qualities. (none / 0) (#90)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 08:32:28 PM EST
    We need more solid liberals who aren't afraid of a fight.  

    I guess I'm just a little leary of the whole DA thing, given our "liberal" ex-DA governor.  Just another centrist and not much of a fighter at that.    

    Parent

    Joe Kennedy (none / 0) (#23)
    by BobTinKY on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:03:24 PM EST
    an experinced pol, six terms in the House.  HOpefulyl he will run but after his marriage dissolved and he lost his brother he seemed to grow tired of being in the public eye.

    Parent
    Representative Patrick Kennedy? (none / 0) (#10)
    by oculus on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 11:54:12 AM EST
    RI (5.00 / 2) (#16)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 11:58:00 AM EST
    isn't that a county in Massachusets? (5.00 / 4) (#30)
    by jeffinalabama on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:09:57 PM EST
    Just kidding, Rhode Islanders! Your Highway Patrol has the best uniforms, also! ;-)

    Parent
    You know those posters minimizing (none / 0) (#33)
    by oculus on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:15:55 PM EST
    everything west of the Hudson River?  This is the West Coast version.

    Parent
    Delay is likely death for HCR (none / 0) (#11)
    by andgarden on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 11:55:30 AM EST
    One option is to take a test vote and say to the MA general assembly "see, we need an extra vote now."

    Only if Obama wants it dead (none / 0) (#15)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 11:57:34 AM EST
    Blanche Lincoln has ugly numbers (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by andgarden on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 11:58:54 AM EST
    She's going to want to distance herself from Obama. And there's no more public way to do that than to repudiate his healthcare plan.

    IMO, it's time to go with the reconciliation option ASAP>

    Parent

    She can vote no (none / 0) (#19)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 11:59:43 AM EST
    But for cloture.

    Parent
    That's an option (none / 0) (#22)
    by andgarden on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:01:57 PM EST
    But it seems clear to me that if we really need a cloture vote, Snowe is going to have to be guilted into voting for Ted Kennedy's legacy.

    Parent
    Meh (5.00 / 3) (#55)
    by cawaltz on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 01:09:33 PM EST
    I don't see why we couldn't apply pressure to someone like Burr who is up for re election in 2010, didn't win by huge margins  and is in a state that just elected a Democrat in 2008.

    or we could go heavily after Coburn who actually doesn't have alot of money on hand and got mixed reviews when he held his town halls.

    http://newsok.com/u.s.-sen.-tom-coburn-finds-mixed-views-at-forum-on-health-care/article/3395387

    Getting the Maine Senators onboard would be nice but I don't think they should necessarily be our only go to option. Particularly when there is little risk or reward for them at this point in time.

    Parent

    You expect to get Burr? (none / 0) (#77)
    by andgarden on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 03:10:45 PM EST
    Talk about dreaming!

    Parent
    I expect pressure to be applied to him (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by cawaltz on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 10:17:47 PM EST
    North Carolina has trended blue. He didn't win his seat by a wide margin the first go round and we picked up a seat from a Republican in 2008. North Carolina could be a doable win. I see no reason to make him comfortable whatsoever.

    Collins and Snowe have absolutely no skin in the game since they aren't up for re election going to them everytime the Democrats need a token Republican is just plain stupid.

    Parent

    Almost 1 in 5 (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by cawaltz on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 10:28:43 PM EST
    in North Carolina are uninsured. The numbers are about 1 in 3 for those the are in the 100-200% above Federal Poverty Guilines. It's 16.9 % for the 200-300% poverty level.

    There is an opportunity to connect with people in NC and tell them it could be different.

    Parent

    I think (none / 0) (#27)
    by CST on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:04:53 PM EST
    the two ladies from Maine are our best bet at getting a sympathy vote.  Especially since I think they would be representing their constituents as well.

    Parent
    Not after the MA special election (none / 0) (#28)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:05:35 PM EST
    Waiting is risky. . . (none / 0) (#35)
    by andgarden on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:18:25 PM EST
    Sheeeet (5.00 / 2) (#39)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:22:34 PM EST
    Right now  we got nuthin.

    Unless you trust the Progresive Block to hold fast, we are f*cked.

    Parent

    Blue Dogs v Progressives (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by waldenpond on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 01:03:39 PM EST
    Don't the progressives usually fall apart? The pressure must be on getting their committment to collapse.

    Parent
    How many vs. how many? (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by shoephone on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 01:39:06 PM EST
    It's all about the numbers. There are 52 Blue Dogs vs. 80 Progressives. House Democrats, overall, have a 79-seat majority.

    It's all about pushing our reps hard, especially for those of us in states where few reps are Progressives. Mine is in the caucus, but the other 5 WA State Dems are not.

    I've been hounding my senators but I think that die has been cast. The Senate Dems are, for the most part, not with us on this. So, I'm sticking with forcefully encouraging the 80 in the House who can tip it.

    Yglesias and Klein be dam*ed.

    Parent

    Power (none / 0) (#73)
    by waldenpond on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 02:13:17 PM EST
    It is numbers but also about power.  The progressives have the numbers but will they give up their power.

    Parent
    Always hard to predict but... (none / 0) (#76)
    by shoephone on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 02:48:55 PM EST
    the strength of those in the number brings the power. IOW, if enough of the biggies -- Woolsey, Stark, Waters, McDermott, Miller, etc. etc. -- hold fast, they can bring the others along. McDermott is doing a one-hour Seattle Times Q&A with constituents as we speak. His answers make it sound as though he is not willing to vote for anything without a strong public option. He is no fan of the insurance companies.

    Each person's got to harangue their rep. Really. Squeaky wheels...

    Parent

    Then we are, as you say (none / 0) (#45)
    by Cream City on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:32:21 PM EST
    f*cked, because my member of Congress is a signatory on the letters and statements about standing firm . . . and no, I do not trust it.

    But then, that's based on my experience with that member of Congress, and experience doesn't matter.  Ha.

    Parent

    Well, you could be irritating, like me (none / 0) (#65)
    by shoephone on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 01:44:29 PM EST
    and call every day asking for a statement of commitment from him/her...

    Parent
    Been there, done that (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by Cream City on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 09:53:01 PM EST
    and it doesn't matter.  She took lessons in keeping promises from her president.

    She does anything he says, so if he says the "progressives" should fold, she will fold.  And then her office will say she never said otherwise.

    Parent

    Check. (none / 0) (#21)
    by brodie on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:00:18 PM EST
    There's already been enough delay on HCR -- much of it unnecessary thanks to Baucus and whoever it was who might have encouraged him to continue to seek some weak bipartisan compromise.  Delay has not helped our side so far.

    The MA lege could help things by changing their law to enable a temporary replacement before the special election.  

    Parent

    This just seals the deal for reconciliation (none / 0) (#40)
    by magster on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:23:00 PM EST
    although that is one vote harder just to get to 50 even now.  

    (Unless Reid schedules a vote in the days between the appointment for a replacement for Hutchison or Martinez so that 3/5 = 59 instead of 60). Nelson, Lincoln, et al would vote to filibuster anyways.

    Parent

    for the gipper........ (none / 0) (#34)
    by Jlvngstn on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:16:15 PM EST


    The Gipper was Ronald Reagan (none / 0) (#46)
    by Cream City on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:33:31 PM EST
    in filmdom, of course.  So I think that health care reform would need another iconic allusion. . . .

    Parent
    I think the contrast (none / 0) (#50)
    by Jlvngstn on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:54:58 PM EST
    quite fitting based on the context of the original Gipp quote.  When you are feeling broken down.....

    Parent
    Maybe you heard: (none / 0) (#52)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 01:03:22 PM EST
     George W. Bush stopped by Mustangs football practice this morning, where he told the team to "win one for Yom Kippur." Thanks to the SMU media relations department for this end-of-the-day keeper.

    Parent
    how will history read this? (none / 0) (#57)
    by Jlvngstn on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 01:12:38 PM EST
    Barack Obama who wobbled into office losing several primaries to his chief rival Hillary Clinton.  After narrowly edging Mrs. Clinton and on the cusp of the greatest financial crisis since the Great Depression, Mr. Obama had barely enough support to defeat an incumbent party candidate.  He had demonstrated seriuos concerns as a "closer candidate".

    Despite the severe fiscal crisis and the crippling unemployment numbers Barack Obama placed all of his engines running on Healthcare reform.  As the summer session ended he again found his campaign stalling out.  He lost control of the narrative, waivered on the public option and lost valuable time seeking bipartisanship from a party that had no leader nor direction.  

    Senator Ted Kennedy, beloved brother of John F. Kennedy became the spark that ignited the administration's fire to pass healthcare reform that would honor the life-work of two of our greatest liberals.  His death most appropriately honored, gave us a healthcare system that gave every American security and the right to access to care.

    Barack Obama was supported by Ted Kennedy early.  The amount of influence Ted Kennedy wielded was staggering, and just as loyal.  It was Barack Obama he felt best served the party's long term interest and the party was at odds with itself and the primaries were especially bruising.

    Ted Kennedy staked his final political legacy into a young African American candidate.  He won.

    It is only fitting that the man largely responsible for Obama's presidency was also largely responsible for its success.  We won.

    or is it more poetic to say (none / 0) (#67)
    by Jlvngstn on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 01:48:12 PM EST
    his dying breath gave new life to healthcare reform and a gasping administration......

    Parent
    I think it's likely that (none / 0) (#59)
    by ruffian on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 01:14:26 PM EST
    the concession Obama has won by saying nice things about Olympia Snowe in public in the last week or so is that she agrees to vote for cloture if necessary.

    I guess I'm not completely convinced there is no chance of getting 60 votes for cloture before the special election.

    Seems doubtful to me (none / 0) (#78)
    by Democratic Cat on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 03:17:53 PM EST
    What did he get for saying nice things about Sen. Grassley? Unlike Sen. Kennedy, Pres. Obama is not a good negotiator; he gives away the milk for free.

    Parent
    After giving away the milk, he throws in the cows (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by MO Blue on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 03:41:42 PM EST
    and follows up by giving away the barn too. End result, we wind up with nothing. Well maybe, we get to keep the cow paddies. Or is that bull paddies?

    Parent
    IIt ain't nada. Be grateful. As in India, (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by oculus on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 04:16:48 PM EST
    use the cow dung for cooking.  

    Parent
    this is interesting (none / 0) (#61)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 01:32:30 PM EST
    * BREAKING NEWS *

    Boston's two largest talk radio stations have responded to Ted Kennedy's passing by dumping their usual conservative programming and replacing it with local liberal supporters of the late senator.

    Well, looks like they are doing the (none / 0) (#62)
    by masslib on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 01:35:17 PM EST
    appointment.  Dukakis.  That's the one person I trust not to run.  But I hope he remembers he is a real liberal and reintroduces Kennedy's Medicare for All instead of jumping on the pass anything bandwagon.  I will be calling him about that.

    Dukakis? (none / 0) (#64)
    by shoephone on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 01:42:04 PM EST
    Sheesh.

    Parent
    Yeah, hmmm, I don't believe it. (none / 0) (#66)
    by masslib on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 01:46:55 PM EST
    I'd be ok with that.  But I fear it will be someone who will just rubber stamp for the Dems and wouldn't be so polarizing in MA.  I'll have to see it to believe it.  I'd prefer to wait.

    TPM has the story.  I never know how to link here.

    Parent

    Are you (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by dk on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 02:09:14 PM EST
    talking about this story?

    The Dukakis name, apparently, has only been floated by a former state Democratic party chairman so far.  I agree with you, though, that I'd be ok with it.  This morning I was thinking it would have to be a rather beloved figure and/or an elder statesperson who had a broad amount of respect in the state.  Frankly, outside of certain members of the Kennedy family, I was hard pressed to think of anyone who would fit the bill here in MA.  But Dukakis is one that might work.

    Parent

    Hmm...the link didn't (none / 0) (#71)
    by dk on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 02:10:57 PM EST
    work.  Sorry.

    Parent
    How to link (none / 0) (#74)
    by waldenpond on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 02:16:31 PM EST
    Let's see if I can get a link to work (none / 0) (#75)
    by MO Blue on Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 02:19:48 PM EST
    TPM article regarding replacing Kennedy.

    Parent