« | »

What Harry Reid Wants In First 100 Days

This almost slipped past us, from the Detroit Free Press:

Reid says Democrats to tackle big issues


WASHINGTON — Buoyed by more Democrats in the House and Senate and a Democratic president-elect, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said he expects lawmakers next year to take on hot-button issues from immigration to health care.

The Nevada Democrat also said Congress will try early on to undo some of President George W. Bush’s recent executive orders, including ones on environment policies.

Last week, Reid discussed his priorities for the next Congress.

QUESTION: What are your priorities for the first 100 days of the session?

ANSWER: We’re going to have to take care of a lot of nominations. … We have to finish our appropriations process. We have a number of issues to repeal — presidential orders (Bush) put in in the last few weeks. … On the environment, for example, we’re looking at clean-air regulations.

Q: Will it be an easier pitch with more Democrats in Congress?

A: Yes, next year it will be much easier to do. … I’ll have a larger majority here; so will ( House Speaker Nancy) Pelosi. We’ll have a new president. And I think the Republicans come from the same states we come from. They have a lot of issues they need help with.

Q: What failed efforts disappoint you?

A: I wish we would have passed the speculation bill dealing with oil. I wish we could have gotten more money for infrastructure. We got quite a bit. But … we should have a major infrastructure development program in our country.

Q: With more Democrats in the Senate and the House and a Democrat in the White House, how do you see congressional efforts playing out on such issues as health care and immigration?

A: On immigration, there’s been an agreement between (President-elect Barack) Obama and (Arizona Republican Sen. John) McCain to move forward on that. … We’ll do that. We have to get this economy stuff figured out first, so I think we’ll have a shot at doing something on health care in the next Congress for sure.

Q: Will there be as much of a fight on immigration as last time?

A: We’ve got McCain and we’ve got a few others. I don’t expect much of a fight at all. Now health care is going to be difficult. That’s a very complicated issue. We debated at great length immigration. People understand the issues very well. We have not debated health care, so that’s going to take a lot more time to do.

Well, here we are getting the government we voted for.

(Or at least the government ACORN voted for.)

This article was posted by Steve on Tuesday, November 25th, 2008. Comments are currently closed.

19 Responses to “What Harry Reid Wants In First 100 Days”

  1. Liberals Demise says:

    From immigration to health care…….Not much more was dwelled on. Can’t this guy check out and take that HORRIBLE skin suit with him? Talk about pollution!! It hurts my eyes loking at it with him stuffed in it!

  2. proreason says:

    Other than the fat gay hetero-hating dinosaur, Barney Fife, Harry Reid is the most difficult personality to understand in the Congress.

    Why on earth do people vote for that guy? Can there be a more incompetant person in the world (I’m excluding Rosie O’Donnel and Nancy Pelosi because I’m not sure they are human).

    But beyond that, if you set out to develop a cast of characters that could never ever possibly be elected to positions of responsibility in the greatest country, I think you would come up with…………….Congress.

    Honestly, I’m having to reconsider my “the greatest country of all time” belief.

  3. JohnMG says:

    Good ol’ Harry. He’s going right to work on all that economy………stuff.

    What a maroon!!

  4. BillK says:

    I love the Dem myopic view that doesn’t realize that oil speculators have, for the large part, lost their shirts in the last two months and those “windfall” profits? Also “poof.”

    That’s what happens when the market causes the price of your product to drop by half in eight weeks…

  5. GuppyNblue says:

    “I wish we could have gotten more money for infrastructure.”
    This government is collecting more money from taxpayers than ever before. The problem is they spend it on politically rewarding pork instead of the intended use. With the biggest budget in the world in his hands, Harry has the balls (sorry) to want more from us.

  6. DEZ says:

    Guppy I seem to recall the federal tax receipt for 2006 was 2. 4 trillion dollars.
    The states take was .8 trillion.
    I am going from memory here with those numbers, but they will not be far off.
    That’s a huge chunk of change,and as you have noted mostly wasted on pork, and asshats like Reed have the nerve to ask Americans to suck it up while they confiscate more.
    Averaged out that number comes to over 11000 dollars for every man, woman and child in the US.
    Taxpayers are not the ones that should tighten their belts, its jerks like Reed, and I would love to tighten his belt for him, it would just be used about 2 feet higher.

  7. GuppyNblue says:

    ” Averaged out that number comes to over 11000 dollars for every man, woman and child in the US.”

    I think it was Rush that pointed out that the bailouts so far equate to $25,000 per person in the U.S. All I can do is shake my head and rhetorically ask, how the hell did we get here? I don’t think the average Joe understands just how much this is going to hurt. Are we just going to rent our nation from China?

  8. pinandpuller says:

    I read today that Thailand means “land of the free”. I’d like to tell Harry to Phuket and Nancy to Bangkok. That leaves Hillary and the King and I have no desire to get to know either one of them.

    Wes Craven couldn’t make a scarier scenario.

  9. DEZ says:

    Guppy, am I missing something?
    Is not 25,000 per person, assuming 300 million Americans 7.5 trillion dollars?

  10. GuppyNblue says:

    I was going on memory but here’s the transcript.

    RUSH: All right, Barry Ritholtz, a financial blogger, has run the numbers on the bailout, and he cites a guy named Jim Bianco of Bianco Research who crunched inflation-adjusted numbers and compared some previous federal government expenditures to the current total of the bailout.  Now, depending on where you look, the total bailout money to date is either $6 trillion or $7.4 trillion.  These guys, they just ran it up to $4.6 trillion, and it’s more than that now.  It’s at least two trillion more than that.  Now, the current national debt is like $7 trillion. Maybe it’s higher than that.  But regardless, that’s irrelevant here.  This current bailout, calculated only up to $4.6 trillion, has cost more than all of the following government expenditures combined.

  11. DEZ says:

    Holy shiites Batman!!!!

    Thats where I am confused, the financial bailout of wall street was advertised as 700 billion, so now I am really messed up.;-(

    Thanks Guppy!

  12. proreason says:

    “total bailout money to date is either $6 trillion or $7.4 trillion”

    See my post in the Rubin article one lower than this one.

    Counting the bailouts, the lost market value, and lost home value, total cost is about $20 Trillion. so far.

    Annual GNP was over $14 trillion last year, so it’s like you decided to loan you wayward Brother in law a couple grand, and when you look up, you’ve blown 150% of your annual income.

    That’s what Big Government gets you. Don’t you feel secure knowing Harry Reid and his friends are looking out for you?

    Enjoy your $500 tax incentive check, if you are lucky enough to get one.

  13. Perdido says:

    The only way out of this is devaluation.

    Wait until the people of this country get a taste of 1200% inflation. Especially the salary-bound middle class and wage-bound blue collars. I wonder if public hangings will return to vogue.

    I’m trying to imagine how I am going to manage it myself. Will the governments be able to keep pace with the rise by increasing taxes or do they fall behind? Does my mortgage get paid off super quick because I will be repaying with incredibly smaller dollars?

    Inquiring minds want to know.

  14. Lurkin_no_mo says:

    $6 Trillion or $7.4 Trillion, give a Trillion or two….

  15. “…the first 100 days of the session?”

    Party like it’s 2006!, and accomplish just as much.

    Nine percent nancy has the template.

  16. 1sttofight says:

    When is someone going to jail over this disaster?

  17. proreason says:

    From the brilliant Thomas Sowell’s column today: “We have just seen one of the biggest free home demonstrations of what happens in an economy when politicians tell businesses what decisions to make.

    For years, using the powers of the Community Reinvestment Act and other regulatory powers, along with threats of legal action if the loan approval rates varied from the population profile, politicians have pressured banks and other lending institutions into lending to people they would not lend to otherwise.

    Yet, when all this blows up in our faces and the economy turns down, what is the answer? To have more economic decisions made by politicians, because they choose to say that “deregulation” is the cause of our problems.”


  18. mathews says:

    Someone forgot Reid will work extremely hard to “credential” Al Franken, regardless of the recount that’s apparently going Coleman’s way in Mn.

  19. JohnMG says:

    The title of this thread reminds me of a saying we used in ‘Nam; “Sh** in one hand, and ‘want’ in the other, and see which one gets full first”.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »