Just flashed across the screens was that the final vote on the tax portion of so-called Plan B had been cancelled tonight because John Boehner did not have enough votes.

What a mess.

You don’t go there unless you are certain you can get there.

Plan C, The Christmas Plan, is the only alternative right now:

I say call his bluff. If a deal which tackles deficits from both revenue and spending can be reached this month, great.

If not, pass a 90 day extension of current tax rates and whatever else is needed to postpone the “cliff,” and go home for Christmas to give time for a Grand Bargain which puts Democratic sacred cows on the table.

Let Harry Reid refuse to bring it to a vote, and Obama refuse to sign it. Their inaction will be the reason for taxes rising for everyone.

Here’s Boehner’s statement:

“The House did not take up the tax measure today because it did not have sufficient support from our members to pass.  Now it is up to the president to work with Senator Reid on legislation to avert the fiscal cliff.  The House has already passed legislation to stop all of the January 1 tax rate increases and replace the sequester with responsible spending cuts that will begin to address our nation’s crippling debt.  The Senate must now act.”

From my post earlier today:

Preserve the status quo pending negotiations on spending reductions and entitlement reforms until after the artificial year-end deadline, which is Obama’s big pressure point, passes.

It will be harder for Harry Reid to table, or Obama to veto, something which preserves the status quo pending further negotiations, even if they know it ultimately weakens their hand.

And if they do nix it, they will not have the smokescreen of claiming Boehner and the Republicans walked away from negotiations.

Update – For those of you who have not been following, Plan C has been my plan since early December, it is not a reaction...

In the days after I reported here on the Sandy Hook Elementary School tragedy, the gun control debate has raged.

The first gun control argument was leveled, quite literally, before the deceased children and adults were even removed from the school. Indeed, in laying the groundwork for his public policy push to increase gun control in America, President Obama promised the nation that “meaningful action” would occur in a statement the afternoon after the shooting took place.

It was actions like these that struck me as inherently wrong for two reasons. The first of which is articulated extraordinarily well by Jonah Goldberg at National Review Online.

The human need to “do something” is primal after moments like this, not just for those in mourning but for those who want to help those in mourning. Most of us who’ve lost a loved one know someone — or perhaps ourselves — who had to cook, or organize, or clean, or plan or do anything that lets us grasp the handrail of sanity or hold at bay the uncompromising vacuum of grief, if only temporarily. Likewise, we’ve known people who’ve implored us: What can I do? Is there anything I can do? But, often, trying to translate human impulses into government responses is the source of great folly.

Contrary to a lot of sloppy prepackaged rhetoric, these weren’t “our” children. They were their parents’ children. To claim otherwise is to try to purchase the sympathy rightly reserved for the grieving on the cheap. Still, we can imagine, at least a little, that they were ours. We can glimpse, however imperfectly, what that horror would be like for ourselves, and touching the dread that lurks just beyond reason we instinctively try to impose reason upon it.

In the wake of the slaughter, there are arguments I agree with and arguments I find ridiculous. And everything in between. What I dislike is the immediate rush to turn the slaughter into an any argument at all. The problem, alas, is that the moment one “side” tries to translate this carnage into a public-policy victory, arguments are not only inevitable but required. Because in a democracy, the way you make laws is by arguing over them first. I just resent the forced necessity of it all. I wish the parents could just bury their children first.

This tragedy would doubtless have led to a debate on gun control. But people began the debate on a...

Can you blame him?

From NBC news (h/t Hot Air):

Newark Mayor Cory Booker says he will not challenge New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie in next year’s gubernatorial race and will instead explore a run for U.S. Senate in 2014.

Booker, in a video posted to his YouTube page Thursday, said he would finish his term as mayor and “explore the possibility of running for the United States Senate in 2014.”

NBC 4 New York was first to report the decision Thursday.

Booker says he will consult with Democrat Frank Lautenberg, the 88-year-old senator whose term is up in 2014 and is the oldest serving senator.

“It would be a privilege, an honor, to continue his legacy of service,” Booker said.

Booker’s decision not to challenge Christie comes as the Republican incumbent enjoys record-high approval ratings in polls taken since Sandy hit the Garden State.

Many Democrats considered Booker, the two-term mayor of Newark, to be their best chance to take on the popular Christie.

Earlier today, Booker sent out this tweet:

While I generally agree with the tweet, I have a feeling that the popularity currently being enjoyed by a certain New Jersey resident might have nudged him in the direction of the U.S. Senate.

+16

0

  

A follow up to Hopeless in Rhode Island.

Boston talk radio host Michael Graham writes, DON’T Run, Scott, Don’t Run!

Actually, I have no problem with Scott Brown running in the special election we all expect to have in a few months after John Kerry becomes Secretary of State (could he do any WORSE than Hillary’s done?).

Sure, Scott—run! Have fun! Spend another 18 months or so as a US Senator. Polls show you’d be a very strong candidate in a special election….

ANOTHER $50 MILLION ON A PART-TIME SENATE SEAT!

Because Sen. Brown will not be able to hold the seat in a regularly scheduled election. Not gonna happen. How do I know? Because since 2000, only one federal or statewide Republican has won a special election. ONE. And that was the “fluke” election of Mitt Romney, a guy who couldn’t get 40% of the vote here running for president.

Republicans look at Scott Brown’s high approval rating and say “He’s a winner!” Have they forgotten that Sen. Brown had high approval ratings in November when he got crushed by amateur/first-time candidate/serial liar Liz Warren?

Massachusetts voters told pollsters again and again: “I like Sen. Brown, he’s doing a good job, he really is an independent voice…and I’m voting for the Democrat!” Why? Because this is Massachusetts, and Massachusetts doesn’t elect Republicans.

But Obama won’t be at the top of the ticket in 2014, Michael! You’re right—have you forgotten 2010? No Obama, huge GOP tidal wave, great candidates like Charlie Baker and Mary Connaughton…and Republicans lost EVERY FEDERAL AND STATEWIDE ELECTION.

I’m not trying to be mean, I’m not trying to be negative. I’m simply pointing out what should be screamingly, ridiculously obvious: Massachusetts doesn’t elect Republicans. Period….

Sen. Brown is such a good candidate (and great guy) that he might—MIGHT—be able to survive in a special election. But the GOP just spent $65,000 a day holding a US Senate seat for less than two years. Is it worth it to do it again?

I say … um, …, yes, maybe probably who knows.

I can’t see 18 months ahead.  It’s possible I can see June, although I could be convinced otherwise.

+34

-2

  

John Robitaille is the type of moderate Republican we constantly are told is needed to win over centrist Democrats and independents.

But it’s not true in Rhode Island and many other blue states.

There are not enough centrist Democrats or independents willing to  consider moderate Republicans in states like Rhode Island.  In my home district, RI-01, we just reelected David Cicilline, someone even the liberal Providence Journal rejected as being untruthful, over the solid moderate Republican Brendan Doherty.

This state is run by the unions who have the Democratic policiticans in their pockets, and a populace which loves big government despite the state’s horrible fiscal position, including cities which have or are on the brink of bankruptcy.

It wasn’t always this way.  Rhode Island had a history of electing moderate Republicans to statewide office, even if the legislature was controlled by Democrats.  It was a balancing of power.

No more.  Rhode Island is a death spiral state, and we’re loving it.

Robitaille, who ran a strong race for Governor in 2010, is bowing out of running in 2014, finding that Rhode Islanders are too in love with big government for a Republican to win.  Via WPRI.com (emphasis mine):

The man who came within two percentage points of Gov. Lincoln Chafee in the 2010 gubernatorial race won’t be running for the office in 2014.

John Robitaille made the announcement on his Facebook page Wednesday morning, citing the outcome of the 2012 election as one of his reasons…

Robitaille ran on the GOP gubernatorial ticket in 2010. He garnered 34-percent of the vote, just two points shy of the 36 percent Chafee received.

Full Statement:

After careful consideration and a thoughtful analysis of the outcome of this past election, I’ve decided not to run again for Governor of RI in 2014. Among other things, the fact that the voters of this state chose not elect some very good and well-funded Republicans who could have made a difference by restoring sound fiscal policies and changing the status quo. The voters also approved every bond issue and added more debt to our state.

While the pundits, the media and political consultants say that Republicans must change in order to win, I will not change who I am nor what I believe in to win an election.

For example, during the 2010 campaign I said repeatedly that RI does not have a revenue problem, it has a spending problem. We must look seriously at every program and every dollar spent to...

This is a follow up to my post, I would never be so insulting as to accuse the NY Times of tokenism, regarding the demeaning accusation by University of Pennsylvania Politic...

I agree with this assessment by Erick Erickson:

Republicans in Congress intend to vote today on Plan B, John Boehner’s fall back plan on the fiscal cliff.

The President says he will veto it.

In other words, the Republicans are going to go on record that they will sell out their last remaining principle...

The first American killed in the Afghan war, on November 25, 2001.

I’ve told his story before (also here), but it is worth remembering every year.

As we just finished Hanukkah and approach Christmas, we also remember the others featured previously at Legal Insurrection, Jonathan Daniel Porto, U.S. Army, Spc. Dennis Weichel , Lt....

I’m overwhelmed.

I can’t zero in on any one bumper sticker.

It worked.

From Jon, taken at the Perimeter Mall in Atlanta/Dunwoody, Georgia, with images of the other sides of the vehicle to follow:

Here is a mini-van tesselated with bumper stickers.

Methinks these stickers may be serving a functional purpose, not just opinion.

One, no one can have that many opinions. Two, check out the condition of the paint at the edge of the roof.

Sharp looking lady who was almost certainly an Obama voter was walking into the mall as I was heading out (with son’s birthday cookie cake in one hand), snapping some supplemental photos. She, too, got a real chuckle out of the van, and my observation that it must be cheap substitute for a paint job, as no one could have that many opinions – to which I hastily added, “at least, that’s what I think.” And, she got the joke.

+28

0

  

You’ve heard about Erik Loomis, the University of Rhode Island assistant professor of history who launched an almost psychotic, foul-mouthed Twitter tirade against the NRA, accusing it of being a terrorist organization, of complicity in and criminal culpability for murder, and a host of other invectives culminating in his wish to see...

The New York Times today ran a demeaning Op-Ed about Tim Scott, the Republican Congressman from South Carolina who was just appointed to the seat being vacated by Jim DeMint.

The Op-Ed was written by U. Penn. Political Science Professor Adolf L. Reed Jr.,  The Puzzle of Black Republicans, and accused Republicans of engag...

Obama held a press conference today about gun legislation, but almost all of the press questions were about the “fiscal cliff.”

Obama’s responses were truly amazing, a spiking-of-the-football approach in which he pocketed Boehner’s concession on tax rates for those making over $1 million, then moved the class warfare down to those...

The president has just promised to submit gun-control legislation (though not a budget) to Congress in a matter of weeks.  So now is a good time to point out that our national debate over a citizens’ ownership of guns wouldn’t be necessary—nor would the kinds of laws that the Heller and

This reprehensible column about Tim Scott by Adolf L. Reed, Jr., a U. Penn. Political Science Professor, The Puzzle of Black Republicans:

… But this “first black” rhetoric tends to interpret African-American political successes — including that of President Obama — as part of a morality play that dramatizes “how far we...

Robert Bork has died.

Roger Kimball (via Instapundit), has a good summary of Bork’s importance, which unfortunately ended up being not his scholarship but the vicious attacks by people like Ted Kennedy which gave rise to the modern left-wing smear machine:

Judge Robert H. Bork, one of the the greatest jurists this country...