Collins' "Legacy" Tied To Kavanaugh Vote

After her oddly full-throated endorsement of preppy drunk assaulter and rageaholic Brett "KavaNut" Kavanaugh's elevation to the Supreme Court -- an endorsement that could have been written by despicable human-turtle hybrid Mitch "Missy" McConnell -- Maine's faux "moderate" Rethuglican Susan Collins will face some angry Mainers when she returns for the Columbus Day weekend and beyond. After pretending to be "undecided" for weeks, it was clear from the strong endorsement that it was just a veneer to preserve her undeserved image of a "moderate" conservative, while voting with neo-fascist fraudster Donald "Rump" Trump nearly 80% of the time. The Portland Press Herald, one of Maine's major papers opposing KavaNut's confirmation, had this to say in an editorial last night:

"Only Collins appears to believe that Kavanaugh considered Roe v. Wade “settled law” or that he was deeply committed to preserving precedent, something legal scholars say is inconsistent with the way the Supreme Court works. It makes precedent when it wants to, and it takes only five votes to do it.

Maybe Collins will be proven right. Maybe Kavanaugh will defy the experts and not join a series of 5-4 decisions like Citizens United, the 2008 case that eliminated the spending limits for electioneering by corporations, or last year’s Janus decision, which overturned a 40-year “settled law” precedent governing public-sector unions’ ability to collect fees.

Maybe no more witnesses will corroborate the accounts of the three women who have come forward so far with stories about their mistreatment at Kavanaugh’s hands. Maybe he will never again show the angry, intemperate and partisan face he revealed to a national TV audience on Sept. 27, calling into question his capacity to be an impartial and dispassionate judge.

Maybe none of those things will happen. But if they do, Collins’ vote should be remembered for a long time." (our emphasis)

It's not that long before she faces voters in November 2020. They should remember and Vote. Her. Out.

BONUS:  Paul Waldman and Greg Sargent on Collins' "bad faith" performance --

It was obvious from the moment Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) began her speech Friday that she’d announce her support for the nomination of Brett M. Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. And so she did — in a performance that was saturated in misdirection and bad faith, making it the perfect capstone to the Republican treatment of this whole affair. 

Collins condemned Democrats for having their minds made up before Kavanaugh was nominated (as if Republicans did not), expressed dismay at misrepresentations of his record (though not his flood of deceptions), and decried the “dark money” mobilized to oppose him (the dark money mobilized to back him didn’t seem to annoy her). 

Meanwhile, her treatment of the Christine Blasey Ford affair was so shamelessly disingenuous that it is hard to avoid the conclusion that her call for an FBI inquiry was really about gaining the cover to do what she intended to do all along. Hearing her speak, it seemed she regarded the biggest injustice in the whole saga to be the fact that Ford’s charges were leaked, putting Republicans through the inconvenience of having to deal with them. (our emphasis)

She's as conscience- free as everyone else in her rotted out party.

Weasels Meet, Exchange Weasel Words

Weaselly Republican Sen. Susan Collins (R- Windsock) really, really wants to vote for Brett Kavanaugh and is trying to convince us she's got his assurances on no messing with Roe (starting at about 1:33):

Following her meeting with #SCOTUS nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh, @SenatorCollins says on Roe v. Wade that "he said that he agreed with what Justice Roberts said at his nomination hearing in which he said that it was settled law." pic.twitter.com/mHmFD3b6Tr

— CSPAN (@cspan) August 21, 2018

Here's what Kavanaugh's weasel words actually mean, courtesy of Americans United for Life (but only before birth):

Responding to @SenatorCollins, anti-abortion group Americans United For Life says Kavanaugh calling Roe "settled law" merely states what SCOTUS has done and doesn't indicate he'd uphold it. pic.twitter.com/q3yA03fECp

— Sahil Kapur (@sahilkapur) August 21, 2018

Collins is not running for re- election until 2020, and she knows striking down Roe is very unpopular (63% want it upheld;  49% of her constituents don't want her to confirm Kavanaugh), but is afraid of the wrath of the frothing Republican base as well as Mitch McConnell.  She previously said she wouldn't vote for a nominee who would be "hostile" to Roe, but she knows full well what Kavanaugh's weasel words mean. So, that's how she's playing this out; she's going to vote to put Kavanaugh on the Court, and he'll work with the other four white Republican males to chip away at Roe just like Republicans are sabotaging the Affordable Care Act, and if Collins reacts to that someday, it'll be along the lines of "Whoda thunk it?!"

Her only thought is to cling to office without regard to the consequences of her actions. Remember her in 2020.

Tweet Of The Day

One of the most gutless, worthless members of the Senate (and that's quite a distinction) -- reverently termed a "moderate" by the puerile media and a purported "pro choice" Republican -- sets us all straight:

BREAKING: @SenatorCollins says she will not factor in Roe v. Wade: "she won’t factor a nominee’s support for the landmark abortion-rights ruling of Roe v. Wade into her confirmation decision." This is unconscionable. Set her straight. #mepolitics https://t.co/lkQSXu4OVj

— Topher Spiro (@TopherSpiro) June 29, 2018

Bank on fellow invertebrate Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski (that's her trying her best to look serious/ thoughtful in the pic above) to follow suit.

Especially if you're a Maine or Alaska voter, let them know what you think.

Existential threat Donald "Rump" Trump is also assiduously working three conservaDem Senators, Heidi Heitkamp (ND), Joe Donnelly (IN), and Joe Manchin (WV), all of whom are up for reelection this year.   Especially if you live in those states, tell them cozying up to Rump on this will depress Democratic turnout for them -- best to stick with the rest of the party and be on the right (and popular) side of history.

Monday Reading

As always, please go to the links for the full articles/ op- eds.

This week, the focus is on one issue, the one that most clearly defines the repugnant, sociopathic Trump Republican Party:  separating immigrant families at the southern border as leverage for enacting extremist immigration laws.

Proving there are really no "moderates" in the Trump Republican Party, gibbering sneak and Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins tries for the umpty-ninth time in her useless career to go MIA when the chips are down:

U.S. Senator Susan Collins (R-ME), often described as a “moderate” Republican is no moderate when it comes to separating children from their parents. She refuses to sign on to a Democratic bill that would end it – effectively derailing the legislation from Senator Dianne Feinstein of California. Without the support of a GOP Senator like Collins, the Feinstein bill has little chance. [snip] 

After praising Sen. Feinstein as “compassionate,” Collins said she would not support Feinstein’s bill, which currently has 43 signatories, claiming it is “far too broad.”
Collins claims the bill would “prevent arrests within 100 miles of the border, even if the person has committed a serious crime or suspected of terrorist activity.” She appears to be the first and only Senator to make the allegation. 

The Senator from Maine could bring her objections to Sen. Feinstein, who has a strong law and order record, to reach a compromise. She could have legal experts weigh in, and offer a compromise. 

Instead, Collins says she wants her bill that fully finds President Trump’s wall to be passed. It’s been languishing since February. She says it provides a pathway to citizenship form DREAMers. 

It does nothing for the nearly 12,000 migrant children separated from their families and currently being held by the Dept. of Health and Human Services.  (our emphasis)

She's up for re-election in 2020. Keep her in your thoughts.

E.J. Dionne, Jr., must've had Collins and a number of other Trump Republican Party hoplites in mind when he recalled a quote from former Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank:

“Moderate Republicans are the people who are there when you don’t need them.”

Dionne goes on to describe what actions the Trump Republican Party is proposing in the House:

The Republicans who purport to be above Trumpian nativism briefly threatened to show some spine by taking a stand in defense of immigrants brought to the United States without authorization when they were children. Referred to as “dreamers,” they are functionally American in every way except in their legal status. 

Rep. Carlos Curbelo (R-Fla.) organized what is known as a discharge petition to force votes on a series of immigration bills. One of them was a clean effort to give the dreamers a path to citizenship that was favored to pass if it got a vote. 

Every one of the 193 Democrats in the House signed the petition, and so did 23 Republicans. It needed only two more GOP signatures to force action. 

And on the cusp of victory, the so-called moderates caved in to Ryan. The last two endorsements would never come. 

Of two bills Squeaker of the House Paul "Lyin'" Ryan will bring instead, this one is supposedly the "moderate" one:

While offering a less generous approach to the dreamers’ problem, that second bill would also provide billions for Trump’s “beautiful wall,” a series of new restrictions on legal immigration and tougher rules for asylum seekers. 

Its “solution” to the family separation debacle would be to end court-mandated legal protections for children brought across the border so entire families could be jailed together. Now there’s humanity for you.  (our emphasis)

Julie Hirschfeld Davis and Michael Shear at the New York Times trace the child separation policy back to the early days of the Trump regime to dispel any notion this wasn't their "nuclear option" from the beginning, then give us this confirming quote from one of Trump's many evil incarnate advisors, Stephen Miller:

“No nation can have the policy that whole classes of people are immune from immigration law or enforcement,” he said during an interview in his West Wing office this past week. “It was a simple decision by the administration to have a zero tolerance policy for illegal entry, period. The message is that no one is exempt from immigration law.”

So much for "The Democrats made me do it!"

What's the reality on the ground?  Nomaan Merchant of the Associated Press filed this report from a "detention center" in south Texas:

Inside an old warehouse in South Texas, hundreds of children wait in a series of cages created by metal fencing. One cage had 20 children inside. Scattered about are bottles of water, bags of chips and large foil sheets intended to serve as blankets. 

One teenager told an advocate who visited that she was helping care for a young child she didn’t know because the child’s aunt was somewhere else in the facility. She said she had to show others in her cell how to change the girl’s diaper.

Cages. Children. How did this country sink so low? (Rhetorical question.)

Then, there's this disturbing detail on the child forced to watch as her mother was frisked by a Border Patrol officer:

this kid is 2 years old.

they took her shoelaces so she wouldn't use them as a weapon or hang herself.

2 years old. pic.twitter.com/hn3T9psm1t

— m i t h (@ManInTheHoody) June 16, 2018

Finally, as always, we close with a recommendation to check out Infidel 753's excellent link round- up, which also provides more reads on this topic as well as many other issues and "stuff" to provoke, inspire and otherwise interest you.

BONUS:  Good friend P.E.C. emailed us this morning with some good points on false equivalencies going unchallenged in the media, and one potential unintended consequence of detention:

I am so frustrated with msm (I get most of my news from PBS, CBS and the WaPo) where no one has called out the truly false equivalency comparing people here who commit crimes being separated from their children just like those parents at the border. The children of a person living in the U.S. have many resources to lean on for comfort and security. They may have their other parent, they may have other family, they may be in school or have other care givers. There is absolutely no equivalent argument and this needs to be presented in the press. What is being done at the borders is cruel and wrong. 

Further, detaining all those teenagers is creating a hotbed for the development of just the gangs people are fleeing. Everyone wants to feel they belong, and short of parental security and guidance it would be only natural, especially for teens during what can be a difficult time in their development, to seek out a brotherhood of people to whom they can cling and who they feel will have their backs.

The Myth Of The "Moderate Republican" -- Susan Collins Edition

Let's get one thing straight and out of the way: There Are No "Moderate" Republicans.

There are Republican officeholders who, on occasion but not because of "principles," will vote against the rotted out party's agenda.  It's generally based on some calculation involving re-election or extorting some legislative favor (refer back to "re-election"), but not on consistent application of "principles."  If that were the case, neither the House nor Senate Republican wealthfare bill would have been drafted, since they grossly violate the Republican "principle" of reducing the debt -- a "principle" which only comes into play when a Democrat is in the White House. But "moderate Republicans?" Please.

The latest example of this, shall we say, ethical "fluidity" is Maine's Republican Senator Susan Collins, who either just fell off the turnip truck or is willing to believe a number of promises made by notable truth- teller and policy genius Donald "Rump" Trump (via TPM):

Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) walked out of a lunch meeting Tuesday with President Trump and Senate Republicans with a broad smile on her face, telling reporters that promises from the president to support two separate health care bills left her “encouraged” and more amenable to voting to repeal Obamacare’s individual mandate—something just weeks ago she warned would devastate the middle class. [snip] 

Collins insisted Tuesday that she secured support from Trump for two bills she says would mitigate the damage of repealing the mandate—one to restore government subsidies to insurance companies that Trump defunded earlier this year and the other to set up a federal reinsurance program. 

Health policy experts are not so sure. 

“The Alexander-Murray bill—while good policy on its own—would come nowhere close to undoing the damage from individual mandate repeal. The same is true of the Collins-Nelson proposal,” writes Aviva Aron-Dine, a senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and a former senior counselor at the Department of Health and Human Services. 

Aron-Dine says the reinsurance funding in the Collins-Nelson bill, about $2.25 billion per year for just two years, falls far short of the $10 billion per year in permanent funding needed to prevent premiums from rising. She added that repealing the mandate is also likely to be the final straw that pushes insurers to flee the market entirely.

Collins can't be unaware of the implications of passing the Senate wealthcare bill, and she also can't be unaware that "promises" from Rump are worth the same as a certificate from Trump University. So, the most reasonable explanation is that now that she's running for re- election, she needs to rejoin the tribe and get with the program, and this is her "get back in the fold" card.

Others not subject to re- election like Sen. Corker of Tennessee and Sens. Flake and McCain of Arizona, have expressed "concerns" over various aspects of the bill, the former focusing on its ballooning the deficit, the latter more for "regular order" issues.  Don't expect their objections to last the week, however. They're posturing for various reasons, none of which will exist once the roll call begins.

Finally, as a fig leaf for her shriveled conscience, Collins is taking refuge in some magical thinking:

Though Collins said earlier this month that she would need these bills passed into law before voting on the Senate tax and mandate repeal bill, she moved the goalpost on Tuesday. 

“I’m pushing to make sure they are passed and signed into law prior to the conference report coming back,” she said, “So I would know for certain that we’re going to be able to mitigate the impact of repealing the individual mandate.” 

When reporters pointed out the possibility that there will be no conference committee, that the House just passes the bill as-is, Collins waved away that fear. “Everything I’m hearing is that there is going to be a conference committee,” she said.

Will she act indignant for the folks back home when the individual mandate repeal ends up in the bill Rump signs and her constituents lose their health insurance? Or when her low- and moderate- income constituents see their taxes go up? Why, of course she will. But only "moderately" indignant.

Former Reagan official Bruce Bartlett explains why these sociopaths need to pass this wealthfare atrocity now (found via NMMNB):

If Democrats get control of one or both houses of Congress next year — a good bet — then obviously the tax cutting will end. That’s why Republicans are working at breakneck speed to get their tax cut enacted ASAP. They will use any lie, any tactic, no matter how underhanded, to achieve their goal. 

Republican deficit hawks, who are now AWOL, will suddenly reappear the moment Trump signs the tax cut. The media will be filled with reports from leading authorities about how the deficit endangers the country in a variety of ways, arguing that action must be taken immediately. 

But taxes will be off the table because of the tax pledge. Therefore, all deficit reduction must come from spending cuts. And of course, defense cuts will be off the table. Therefore, the bulk of cuts will have to come from so-called entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare because that’s all that will be left.

Condensed down:  afflict the afflicted and comfort the comfortable.

Remember on what side those "moderate Republicans" come down. Then we need to vote immoderately.

BONUS:  Another "moderate" rolls over.

(Photo: Sen. Susan Collins - um, no.)

Rethugs Gutted Flu Pandemic Funding in Stimulus

When the stimulus bill was being negotiated in the Senate, Rethugs, led by "moderate" (as in "stupid in a moderate way") Sen. Susan "What Swine Flu?" Collins, demanded that $870 million in flu pandemic preparation funds be stripped out of the bill, reports John Nichols in The Blog. Collins and her Rethug colleagues were largely successful in taking out the flu pandemic monies, with an assist by Turdblossom Rove, who was providing talking points to the Senate numbnuts, and agitating against it in all the usual wingnut venues as an example of wasteful government spending.

More Rethug good government values at work for you!

(Photo: Turdblossom demonstrates his technique for warding off the swine flu - oh wait, he's naturally immune since he's a swine...)