The Senate is Demented.

[Stinger]

Or De-Deminted

Leading conservative DeMint resigning Senate seat
By By DONNA CASSATA, Associated Press – 1 hour ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — Sen. Jim DeMint, patron saint of the tea party and a would-be Republican kingmaker, announced suddenly Thursday he would resign his South Carolina seat to head Washington's conservative Heritage Foundation think tank, a shift that reverberated through a soul-searching GOP.
Just two years into a second, six-year term, DeMint said he would step down on Jan. 1 to helm Heritage while continuing the conservative fight. The 61-year-old lawmaker, known to hurry home to South Carolina nearly every weekend, had signaled that this term would be his last, but his abrupt announcement shocked even his closest Republican colleagues.
"When he told me this morning, I about fell off my couch," said South Carolina's other senator, Republican Lindsey Graham. "I didn't see this coming."
Prizing ideology over electability, DeMint sometimes infuriated fellow Republicans, picking sides in GOP primaries with decidedly mixed results. He had no patience for centrist Republicans, pushing the party to the right while bankrolling candidates with millions from his political action committee, the Senate Conservatives Fund.
In 2010, candidates he ardently supported cost the GOP eminently winnable seats. This year, DeMint had better success.
"One of the most rewarding things I've done in the Senate is work with the grassroots to help elect a new generation of leaders who have the courage to fight for the principles of freedom that make this country so great," DeMint said in his statement announcing his departure. "I'm confident these senators will continue the legacy of conservative leaders before them."
DeMint also has sometimes been a thorn in the GOP side on legislation, just this week criticizing House Speaker John Boehner's "fiscal cliff' counteroffer to President Barack Obama that would raise tax revenue $800 billion as crushing for American jobs.
DeMint's departure creates an opening for a new generation of hard-charging conservatives in the Senate — Rand Paul of Kentucky, Mike Lee of Utah and soon-to-be Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas. The strong conservative element is pitted against the establishment as the Republican Party tries to figure out its next moves after this year's defeat in the presidential race and the loss of congressional seats.
Shocked Senate Republicans were too courteous to say good riddance to DeMint, but a few made it clear that there were still hard feelings over the senator's political moves.
"I won," Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, said tersely when asked about DeMint backing her Republican primary rival Joe Miller in 2010, forcing her to run as a write-in candidate.
Democrats pointed out that they increased their numbers in this year's elections and will hold a 55-45 edge in the Senate next year.
"His effect on the system may have been more beneficial to Democrats than to Republicans," said Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.
Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, who headed the National Republican Senatorial Committee in 2010 and this year, said he and DeMint agreed as conservatives "on 95 percent of the issues, it's a lot of it has to do with tactics to advance the conservative cause through the electoral process. I wish him well."
Delaware and Colorado in 2010 are sore points for Republicans who were certain they could win the Democratic-held seats. DeMint backed Christine O'Donnell who prevailed over the more electable Rep. Mike Castle in the GOP primary; Democrat Chris Coons easily beat O'Donnell that November.
In Colorado, DeMint supported conservative Ken Buck who stumbled in his race against Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet.
Yet for the defeats, there are several Republicans who owe their seats to DeMint, and they expressed appreciation for a man they consider the chief instigator of the tea party movement.
"We have a much bigger liberty caucus in the Senate than we did before," Paul said. "I think a lot of that is thanks to Jim DeMint."
Said Florida's Marco Rubio: "I would not be in the U.S. Senate had it not been for Jim DeMint taking a shot on me."
In an interview with conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh, DeMint said he was frustrated with the Republican Party when it held the majority during the George W. Bush administration.
"It's part frustration, but I am also reassured that we have now stocked the Senate with some of the strongest conservatives in the country today and that's a big change. So I'm leaving the Senate better than I found it," DeMint said.
Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said DeMint forced Washington to address economic issues.

[O Really]

Not that I don't expect them to replace him with an equally loose cannon, but it's sure glad to see him go. I suspect he recognized he was rapidly becoming a dinosaur. So who'll get the job? Nikki Heat gonna appoint herself?

[Stinger]

Not that I don't expect them to replace him with an equally loose cannon, but it's sure glad to see him go. I suspect he recognized he was rapidly becoming a dinosaur. So who'll get the job? Nikki Heat gonna appoint herself?

I don't know what the deal was. The mill-per-year salary from Heritage probably didn't hurt. I can't see a U.S. senator giving that up and thinking he could be more effective outside government. I think it was take-the-money-and-run.

In the Reagan day, Graham would have been a far-right loon. Today, the Tea Party and DeMint make Graham look all intelligent and middle-of-the-roady.

Two times zero is still zero. Graham's a loon.

[Guest]

Saw a news item the other day.
Seems as though the average citizen trusts Washington politicians as much as they do a used car salesman.

[Supsalemgr]

Not that I don't expect them to replace him with an equally loose cannon, but it's sure glad to see him go. I suspect he recognized he was rapidly becoming a dinosaur. So who'll get the job? Nikki Heat gonna appoint herself?

The early money seems to be on Tim Scott. That would be a good choice and his House district is pretty safely Republican. She could really throw the libs on this board into a tizzy by appointing Trey Gowdy.

[Supsalemgr]

"And, despite Sandy, US economy adds 146K jobs, (unemployment) rate falls to 7.7 pct. "...the lowest since December 2008."

Vrede conveniently leaves out the fact that also 350,000 dropped out of the workforce which caused the decrease. Also, September and October numbers were revised and there was a drop of 50,000 of jobs created.

[rstrong]

Vrede conveniently leaves out the fact that also 350,000 dropped out of the workforce which caused the decrease..

Since that little Republican campaign myth was thoroughly debunked months ago, why would she include it?

[Supsalemgr]

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ti ... 35254.html

Read and weep rstrong. An apology will be accepted.

[O Really]

The "the numbers are better, but...but..." dialogue has some theoretical truth, and undoubtedly the number of people in the workforce (inclusive of those who jumped in and exclusive of those who jumped out) affect the unemployment rate. But as many have said, over and over, that's the way unemployment has been calculated since the beginning of time. Absent a monthly individual survey, you have no way of knowing if a given person dropped out of the labor force because they were discouraged, or whether they started their own small business, or whether they decided to stay home with the baby. Point being, there is some number out there that represents the ones who dropped out from discouragement, but nobody knows what it is, and even if they did, it would have no impact on an apples to apples comparison to the rates over time, all calculated in the same manner.

But Behravesh did say that next year he "expects the unemployment rate to fall below 7% and the economy to expand at a 3% annual rate." If you're going to keep spreading doom and gloom, you might want to redact that part of his commentary.

[rstrong]

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ti ... 35254.html

Read and weep rstrong. An apology will be accepted.

This was a common Republican claim all through the election. For example:

Gingrich: "The biggest contribution" behind a decrease in U.S. unemployment "was 1.2 million people leaving the workforce"
(False)

An interesting twist on the claim reveals more information:

Under Barack Obama, the U.S. now has the "lowest workforce since (President Jimmy) Carter."
(Mostly False)

However, not all the blame for the low participation rates today has to do with the recession and slow recovery under Obama. A portion of the decline has been driven by long-term demographic trends that have nothing to do with the person or the party in the White House.
[...]
That's because economic factors are not the only things that affect the labor force participation rate. The other big one is demographics, particularly the aging of the population.

In the 2000 Census, the number of Americans aged 60 to 69 -- that is, those who had recently hit retirement age or would do so within a few years -- was to about 20 million. But thanks to the Baby Boomers, the number surged in the 2010 Census to more than 29 million, almost a 50 percent increase. This matters because the more people aged 60 to 69, the more people who are passing into retirement age -- or, to put it another way, leaving the labor force. Even though more people proportionally are remaining in the workforce after retirement age, the difference isn’t big enough to cancel out the flood of new retirees.

Your article says that the number of new jobs available went up. Not by much, but it went up. People leaving the workforce - retiring or otherwise - had an effect. But even without that, there would still be a decrease in unemployment.

[Supsalemgr]

I have no cure for "chronic denial syndrome". Might want to check with Doc.

[rstrong]

I have no cure for "chronic denial syndrome". Might want to check with Doc.

Are you looking in a mirror?

I don't deny what the article says. I'm only objecting to your cherry-picking bits from it to give a dishonest picture of what it says.

[Stinger]

"And, despite Sandy, US economy adds 146K jobs, (unemployment) rate falls to 7.7 pct. "...the lowest since December 2008."

Vrede conveniently leaves out the fact that also 350,000 dropped out of the workforce which caused the decrease. Also, September and October numbers were revised and there was a drop of 50,000 of jobs created.

Can't leave that Kool Aid alone, huh? I hear it's powerful stuff.

[Stinger]

I have no cure for "chronic denial syndrome".

That's blatantly obvious.

I doubt you ever will.

[O Really]

Not that I don't expect them to replace him with an equally loose cannon, but it's sure glad to see him go. I suspect he recognized he was rapidly becoming a dinosaur. So who'll get the job? Nikki Heat gonna appoint herself?

The early money seems to be on Tim Scott. That would be a good choice and his House district is pretty safely Republican.

Good to see Republicans may have recognized the value of affirmative action.

[Supsalemgr]

Keep up folks. My original post was pointing out that Vrede had selectively posted. That's all.

[Colonel Taylor]

Keep up folks. My original post was pointing out that Vrede had selectively posted. That's all.

And that surprises who exactly? I said before if they keep knocking folks off the rolls Unemployment may be Zero someday.

[Apache]

I think he took the money and ran. Add the fact he couldnt handle the hard days ahead. Some think his timing is cowardly.

[O Really]

Not that I don't expect them to replace him with an equally loose cannon, but it's sure glad to see him go. I suspect he recognized he was rapidly becoming a dinosaur. So who'll get the job? Nikki Heat gonna appoint herself?

The early money seems to be on Tim Scott. That would be a good choice and his House district is pretty safely Republican.

Good to see Republicans may have recognized the value of affirmative action.

Added after further thought - it's fercertain that she'll appoint some right-wing fanatic - she'd have all the village idiots storming the governor's mansion with pitchforks, torches, tar and feathers if she didn't. So I think Scott is a good choice. The Republicans can say, "lookee here, we got ourselves a real live African-American Senator" and the reaction of those such as Ragin who have constantly lamented the existence of the "Kenyan" President to having a black Senator appointed by a woman of Indian descent would be totally priceless. The only thing that could make it better is if Scott turns out to be gay. Maybe they'd get a real secession going after all.

[Supsalemgr]

And I just added to the story to make it more accurate.