Karl Rove is opposed to the legislative tactic called "reconciliation" -- oh, but wait, he just lfip-flopped -- he wants to use reconciliation to kill health care reform -- but he was against reconciliation when he was in the White House

Why is what he said a lie? He was simply arguing for a tactic that
democrats have used, wans't he?

"Kickin' Ass and Takin' Names" wrote in message
news:email@anonym...




http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/karl-rove-flip-flops-reconciliation-hes


Karl Rove shows us again what a lying piece of shit he is.

He just wrote an op-ed in the WSJ saying that Republicans can use
"reconciliation" to repeal our new health care law:

Former Bush strategist Karl Rove is urging congressional Republicans
to use Democrats’ own tactics against them to force the repeal of
President Barack Obama’s landmark health care law.

Rove said Thursday that he wants to see the Senate GOP use the budget
reconciliation process to repeal the law with a simple majority, not
the 60-plus votes they would need to pass a separate repeal bill.
“Democrats cannot complain if the GOP uses reconciliation after
Democrats used it to pass ObamaCare through the Senate,” Rove wrote on
The Wall Street Journal’s op-ed page. If Republicans are able to pick
up at least four seats in the 2012 election — which would give them a
simple majority of 51 and allow them to take the chairmanships of all
Senate committees — Rove said he thinks the party will be able to roll
back health care reform.

Under reconciliation, “the Senate Budget Committee could instruct the
Senate Finance Committee to reduce mandatory spending on insurance
subsidies and Medicaid expansion. These two items make up more than 90
[percent] of spending in ObamaCare,” he wrote.

“All the changes from all the committees” could then be “bundled into
one measure and voted upon” as a budget bill, meaning it would only
need 51 votes to pass. Because reconciliation is protected by the
rules of the budget process, it doesn’t take 60 votes to overcome a
filibuster threat, and it requires a simple majority to pass.

Jonathan Chait finally writes something that I agree with:

Karl Rove has an op-ed column in the Wall Street Journal today -- and,
yes, I admit that merely typing those words involuntarily triggers my
saliva glands -- that is entirely dedicated to urging Republicans to
use the budget reconciliation process to repeal the Affordable Care
Act:

Fear not, sayeth Speaker Pelosi, all will be fixed with the magic dust
known as "reconciliation"—a process that allows budget and spending
bills to move through the Senate with 51 votes instead of 60...House
Democrats would be foolish to trust a process that has deeply
alienated the American public.

No, wait, sorry! That's his March 11, 2010 column entitled "The
Trouble With 'Reconciliation.'" Here is Rove's pro-reconciliation
column:

Legislation that looks anything like the bill moving through the House
will contain deeply unpopular provisions -- including massive deficit
spending, tax hikes and Medicare cuts -- and create enormous ill will
on Capitol Hill. This will be especially true if Democrats rely on
parliamentary tricks to pass a bill in the Senate with 51 votes.

Argh. Whoops. That turns out to be a Rove column from September, 2009
denouncing the use of reconciliation. Let's see if this is it:

MR. BROKAW: But the fact of the matter is we don't know the exact
definition of the final bill because it'll go through this complicated
process, get to reconciliation, some of the costs will be addressed
then.

MR. ROVE: Right. And, and isn't that amazing? We're asking people of
the U.S. House, House of Representatives not to vote on the bill but
to vote on a placeholder. And the final terms of this huge measure
affecting one-sixth of our economy will be defined later, perhaps in
a, in a bill in the Senate designed to circumvent the normal order of
business. That's a pretty remarkable way to try and go pass a big
piece of legislation without bipartisan support.

Darn it! That's Rove appearing on "Meet the Press" last March.

Republicans like Rove lie with impunity, and it's up to us to always
try and set the record straight. The MSM should do the same, but since
conservative misinformation is permitted they usually don't. I did
think David Gregory sufficiently called out John Boehner over his
refusal to set the record straight for the Birthers