Home Contact Us

Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

Inside are bill amendments that came to vote as of yesterday.

Posted By: Backwards typist on 2009-03-11
In Reply to:

I wanted to put them in some sort of order, but gave up and just put them in the numerical order. You will see lots of numbers not there because they haven't been voted on yet, not agreed to, were tabled, ruled out of order, or withdrawn.

450. S.AMDT.50 to H.R.2 To restore fiscal discipline by making the Medicaid and SCHIP programs more accountable and efficient.
Sponsor: Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] (introduced 1/27/2009) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 1/29/2009 Senate amendment agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 50 agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.

95. S.AMDT.95 to H.R.2 To make technical corrections to the State option to provide dental-only supplemental coverage.
Sponsor: Sen Baucus, Max [MT] (introduced 1/29/2009) Cosponsors (1)
Latest Major Action: 1/29/2009 Senate amendment agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 95 agreed to in Senate by Unanimous Consent.

96. S.AMDT.96 to H.R.2 To clarify that no eligible entity that receives an outreach and enrollment grant is required to provide matching funds.
Sponsor: Sen Baucus, Max [MT] (introduced 1/29/2009) Cosponsors (1)
Latest Major Action: 1/29/2009 Senate amendment agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 96 agreed to in Senate by Unanimous Consent.

102. S.AMDT.102 to H.R.1 To ensure that assistance for the redevelopment of foreclosed and abandoned homes to States or units of local government impacted by catastrophic natural disasters may be used to support the redevelopment of homes damaged or destroyed as a result of the 2005 hurricanes, the severe flooding in the Midwest in 2008, and other natural disasters.
Sponsor: Sen Landrieu, Mary L. [LA] (introduced 2/2/2009) Cosponsors (6)
Latest Major Action: 2/4/2009 Senate amendment agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 102 agreed to in Senate by Unanimous Consent.

104. S.AMDT.104 to H.R.1 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow an above-the-line deduction against individual income tax for interest on indebtedness and for State sales and excise taxes with respect to the purchase of certain motor vehicles.
Sponsor: Sen Mikulski, Barbara A. [MD] (introduced 2/2/2009) Cosponsors (7)
Latest Major Action: 2/3/2009 Senate amendment agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 104 agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.

106. S.AMDT.106 to H.R.1 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide a Federal income tax credit for certain home purchases.
Sponsor: Sen Isakson, Johnny [GA] (introduced 2/3/2009) Cosponsors (3)
Latest Major Action: 2/4/2009 Senate amendment agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 106 as modified agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.

125. S.AMDT.125 to H.R.1 To limit compensation to officers and directors of entities receiving emergency economic assistance from the Government.
Sponsor: Sen McCaskill, Claire [MO] (introduced 2/3/2009) Cosponsors (8)
Latest Major Action: 2/5/2009 Senate amendment agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 125 agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.

138. S.AMDT.138 to H.R.1 To provide for reports on the use of funds made available under this Act and the economic impact made by the expenditure or obligation of such funds, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Dorgan, Byron L. [ND] (introduced 2/3/2009) Cosponsors (1)
Latest Major Action: 2/5/2009 Senate amendment agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 138 as modified agreed to in Senate by Unanimous Consent.

176. S.AMDT.176 to H.R.1 To require the use of competitive procedures to award contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements funded under this Act.
Sponsor: Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] (introduced 2/3/2009) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 2/6/2009 Senate amendment agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 176 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 97 - 0. Record Vote Number: 52.

178. S.AMDT.178 to H.R.1 To provide an additional $6,500,000,000 to the National Institutes of Health for biomedical research.
Sponsor: Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] (introduced 2/3/2009) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 2/3/2009 Senate amendment agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 178 as modified agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.

236. S.AMDT.236 to H.R.1 To establish funding levels for various offices of inspectors general and to set a date until which such funds shall remain available.
Sponsor: Sen McCaskill, Claire [MO] (introduced 2/4/2009) Cosponsors (1)
Latest Major Action: 2/5/2009 Senate amendment agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 236 as modified agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.

237. S.AMDT.237 to H.R.1 To amend certain provisions of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, related to the surety bond guarantee program.
Sponsor: Sen Cardin, Benjamin L. [MD] (introduced 2/4/2009) Cosponsors (2)
Latest Major Action: 2/4/2009 Senate amendment agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 237 agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.

274. S.AMDT.274 to H.R.1 To improve provisions relating to energy tax incentives and provisions relating manufacturing tax incentives for energy property.
Sponsor: Sen Cantwell, Maria [WA] (introduced 2/4/2009) Cosponsors (11)
Latest Major Action: 2/6/2009 Senate amendment agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 274 as modified agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.

300. S.AMDT.300 to H.R.1 To clarify that the Buy American provisions shall be applied in a manner consistent with United States obligations under international agreements.
Sponsor: Sen Dorgan, Byron L. [ND] (introduced 2/4/2009) Cosponsors (4)
Latest Major Action: 2/4/2009 Senate amendment agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 300 agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.

306. S.AMDT.306 to H.R.1 To require recipients of TARP funding to meet strict H-1B worker hiring standard to ensure non-displacement of U.S. workers.
Sponsor: Sen Sanders, Bernard [VT] (introduced 2/4/2009) Cosponsors (1)
Latest Major Action: 2/6/2009 Senate amendment agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 306 as modified agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.

309. S.AMDT.309 to H.R.1 To ensure that taxpayer money is not lost on wasteful and non-stimulative projects.
Sponsor: Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] (introduced 2/4/2009) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 2/6/2009 Senate amendment agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 309 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 73 - 24. Record Vote Number: 51.

354. S.AMDT.354 to H.R.1 To impose executive compensation limitations with respect to entities assisted under the Troubled Asset Relief Program.
Sponsor: Sen Dodd, Christopher J. [CT] (introduced 2/4/2009) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 2/5/2009 Senate amendment agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 354 agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.

359. S.AMDT.359 to H.R.1 To expand the number of veterans eligible for the employment tax credit for unemployed veterans.
Sponsor: Sen Udall, Tom [NM] (introduced 2/4/2009) Cosponsors (2)
Latest Major Action: 2/6/2009 Senate amendment agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 359 agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.

468. S.AMDT.468 to H.R.1 To require financial institutions receiving TARP assistance to redeem from the United States preferred stock in an amount equal to excess bonuses for 2008 or to pay a 35 percent tax on such amount.
Sponsor: Sen Wyden, Ron [OR] (introduced 2/5/2009) Cosponsors (3)
Latest Major Action: 2/6/2009 Senate amendment agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 468 agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.

Complete Discussion Below:

marks the location of current message within thread

Inside are bill amendments that came to vote as of yesterday. - Backwards typist

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

Other related messages found in our database

Inside amendments from yesterday and how they voted

Adopted:
Sanders/Grassley Modified Amendment No. 306 (to Amendment No. 98), to require recipients of TARP funding to meet strict H-1B worker hiring standard to ensure non-displacement of U.S. workers.

Pages S1775, S1803

By 73 yeas to 24 nays (Vote No. 51), Coburn Amendment No. 309 (to Amendment No. 98), to ensure that taxpayer money is not lost on wasteful and non-stimulative projects.

Pages S1775, S1803-04

Udall Amendment No. 359 (to Amendment No. 98), to expand the number of veterans eligible for the employment tax credit for unemployed veterans.

Pages S1775, S1804

By a unanimous vote of 97 yeas (Vote No. 52), Coburn Amendment No. 176 (to Amendment No. 98), to require the use of competitive procedures to award contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements funded under this Act.

Pages S1775, S1804-07

Baucus (for Dodd) Modified Amendment No. 145 (to Amendment No. 98), to improve the efforts of the Federal Government in mitigating home foreclosures and to require the Secretary of the Treasury to develop and implement a foreclosure prevention loan modification plan.

Pages S1775, S1850-51, S1852

Cantwell Further Modified Amendment No. 274 (to Amendment No. 98), to improve provisions relating to energy tax incentives and provisions relating manufacturing tax incentives for energy property.

Pages S1819-26, S1853-54

Wyden Amendment no. 468 (to Amendment No. 98), to require financial institutions receiving TARP assistance to redeem from the United States preferred stock in an amount equal to excess bonuses from 2008 or to pay a 35 percent tax on such amount.

Pages S1834-38, S1855

Enzi Further Modified Amendment No. 293 (to Amendment No. 98), to provide for a manager's amendment.

Pages S1831-34, S1856-59

Rejected:
By 39 yeas to 57 nays (Vote No. 53), Graham/Conrad Modified Amendment No. 501 (to Amendment No. 98), to limit wasteful spending, to fund a systematic program of foreclosure prevention, to be administered by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

Pages S1808-17, S1831, S1851-52

By 47 yeas to 49 nays (Vote No. 54), Grassley Amendment No. 297 (to Amendment No. 98), to provide the same temporary increase in the FMAP for all States and to permit States to choose the period through June 2011 for receiving the increase.

Pages S1817-19, S1852-53

By 45 yeas to 51 nays (Vote No. 56), Vitter Amendment No. 107 (to Amendment No. 98), prohibiting direct or indirect use of funds to fund the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN).

Pages S1808, S1854

By 41 yeas to 55 nays (Vote No. 57), Bunning Amendment No. 531 (to Amendment No. 98), to temporarily increase the limitations on offsetting ordinary income with capital losses and to strike the 5-year carryback of general business credits.

Pages S1826-27, S1855

Inside are billamendments that came to vote as of yesterday.(long)

27. S.AMDT.27 to S.181 To limit the application of the bill to discriminatory compensation decisions.
Sponsor: Sen Specter, Arlen [PA] (introduced 1/15/2009) Cosponsors (1)
Latest Major Action: 1/22/2009 Motion to table amendment SA 27 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 55 - 39. Record Vote Number: 9.

31. S.AMDT.31 to S.181 To preserve and protect the free choice of individual employees to form, join, or assist labor organizations, or to refrain from such activities.
Sponsor: Sen DeMint, Jim [SC] (introduced 1/21/2009) Cosponsors (1)
Latest Major Action: 1/22/2009 Motion to table amendment SA 31 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 66 - 31. Record Vote Number: 11.

34. S.AMDT.34 to S.181 To preserve open competition and Federal Government neutrality towards the labor relations of Federal Government contractors on Federal and federally funded construction projects.
Sponsor: Sen Vitter, David [LA] (introduced 1/21/2009) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 1/22/2009 Motion to table amendment SA 34 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 59 - 38. Record Vote Number: 13.

37. S.AMDT.37 to S.181 To limit the application of the Act to claims resulting from discriminatory compensation decisions that are adopted on or after the date of enactment of the Act.
Sponsor: Sen Isakson, Johnny [GA] (introduced 1/22/2009) Cosponsors (1)
Latest Major Action: 1/22/2009 Motion to table amendment SA 37 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 59 - 38. Record Vote Number: 12.

41. S.AMDT.41 to H.R.2 To strike the option to provide coverage to legal immigrants and increase the enrollment of uninsured low income American children.
Sponsor: Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] (introduced 1/27/2009) Cosponsors (4)
Latest Major Action: 1/28/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 41 not agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.

45. S.AMDT.45 to H.R.2 To prohibit any Federal matching payment for Medicaid or CHIP coverage of noncitizen children or pregnant women until a State demonstrates that it has enrolled 95 percent of the children eligible for Medicaid or CHIP who reside in the State and whose family income does not exceed 200 percent of the poverty line.
Sponsor: Sen Hatch, Orrin G. [UT] (introduced 1/27/2009) Cosponsors (2)
Latest Major Action: 1/27/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 45 not agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.

46. S.AMDT.46 to H.R.2 To reinstate the crowd out policy agreed to in section 116 of H.R. 3963 (CHIPRA II), as agreed to and passed by the House and Senate.
Sponsor: Sen Kyl, Jon [AZ] (introduced 1/27/2009) Cosponsors (1)
Latest Major Action: 1/28/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 46 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 42 - 56. Record Vote Number: 22.

47. S.AMDT.47 to H.R.2 To ensure that children do not lose their private insurance and that uninsured children can get access to private insurance.
Sponsor: Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] (introduced 1/27/2009) Cosponsors (1)
Latest Major Action: 1/29/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 47 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay. 36 - 62. Record Vote Number: 24.

49. S.AMDT.49 to H.R.2 To prevent fraud and restore fiscal accountability to the Medicaid and SCHIP programs.
Sponsor: Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] (introduced 1/27/2009) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 1/29/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 49 not agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.

50. S.AMDT.50 to H.R.2 To restore fiscal discipline by making the Medicaid and SCHIP programs more accountable and efficient.
Sponsor: Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] (introduced 1/27/2009) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 1/29/2009 Senate amendment agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 50 agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.

65. S.AMDT.65 to H.R.2 To restore the prohibition on funding of nongovernmental organizations that promote abortion as a method of birth control (the "Mexico City Policy").
Sponsor: Sen Martinez, Mel [FL] (introduced 1/27/2009) Cosponsors (13)
Latest Major Action: 1/28/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 65 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 37 - 60. Record Vote Number: 19.

67. S.AMDT.67 to H.R.2 To ensure redistributed funds go towards coverage of low-income children or outreach and enrollment of low-income children, rather than to States that will use the funds to cover children from higher income families.
Sponsor: Sen Cornyn, John [TX] (introduced 1/27/2009) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 1/28/2009 Motion to table amendment SA 67 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay. 64 - 33. Record Vote Number: 20.

71. S.AMDT.71 to H.R.2 To extend the State Children's Health Insurance Program for 6 quarters in order to enact bipartisan, comprehensive health care reform.
Sponsor: Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] (introduced 1/27/2009) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 1/29/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 71 not agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.

74. S.AMDT.74 to H.R.2 To eliminate any exceptions to the prohibition on States receiving an enhanced Federal matching rate for providing coverage to children whose family income exceeds 300 percent of the poverty line.
Sponsor: Sen Bunning, Jim [KY] (introduced 1/28/2009) Cosponsors (2)
Latest Major Action: 1/29/2009 Motion to table amendment SA 74 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 54 - 44. Record Vote Number: 25.

75. S.AMDT.75 to H.R.2 To prohibit CHIP coverage for higher income children and to prohibit any payments to a State from its CHIP allotments for any fiscal year quarter in which the State Medicaid income eligibility level for children is greater than the income eligibility level for children under CHIP.
Sponsor: Sen Roberts, Pat [KS] (introduced 1/28/2009) Cosponsors (2)
Latest Major Action: 1/28/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 75 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 36 - 60. Record Vote Number: 21.

77. S.AMDT.77 to H.R.2 To provide for the development of best practice recommendations and to ensure coverage of low income children.
Sponsor: Sen Murkowski, Lisa [AK] (introduced 1/28/2009) Cosponsors (3)
Latest Major Action: 1/28/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 77 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay. 47 - 51. Record Vote Number: 23.

80. S.AMDT.80 to H.R.2 To codify regulations specifying that an unborn child is eligible for child health assistance.
Sponsor: Sen Hatch, Orrin G. [UT] (introduced 1/28/2009) Cosponsors (26)
Latest Major Action: 1/29/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 80 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 39 - 59. Record Vote Number: 26.

85. S.AMDT.85 to H.R.2 To provide an above-the-line Federal income tax deduction for health care costs of certain children in an amount comparable to the average federal share of the benefit provided to any non-citizen child for medical assistance or child health assistance.
Sponsor: Sen DeMint, Jim [SC] (introduced 1/29/2009) Cosponsors (1)
Latest Major Action: 1/29/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 85 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 40 - 58. Record Vote Number: 27.

86. S.AMDT.86 to H.R.2 To ensure that American children have high-quality health coverage that fits their individual needs.
Sponsor: Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] (introduced 1/29/2009) Cosponsors (14)
Latest Major Action: 1/29/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 86 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 36 - 62. Record Vote Number: 28.

93. S.AMDT.93 to H.R.2 To provide assistance for States with percentages of children with no health insurance coverage above the national average.
Sponsor: Sen Hutchison, Kay Bailey [TX] (introduced 1/29/2009) Cosponsors (1)
Latest Major Action: 1/29/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 93 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 17 - 81. Record Vote Number: 30.

94. S.AMDT.94 to H.R.2 To make a technical correction to the option to cover legal immigrant children and pregnant women.
Sponsor: Sen Baucus, Max [MT] (introduced 1/29/2009) Cosponsors (1)
Latest Major Action: 1/29/2009 Senate amendment agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 94 agreed to in Senate by Unanimous Consent.

107. S.AMDT.107 to H.R.1 Prohibiting direct or indirect use of funds to fund the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN).
Sponsor: Sen Vitter, David [LA] (introduced 2/3/2009) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 2/6/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 107 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 45 - 51. Record Vote Number: 56.

109. S.AMDT.109 to H.R.1 To strike the $246 million tax earmark for Hollywood production companies.
Sponsor: Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] (introduced 2/3/2009) Cosponsors (3)
Latest Major Action: 2/3/2009 Senate amendment agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 109 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 52 - 45. Record Vote Number: 34.

140. S.AMDT.140 to H.R.1 To provide greater accountability of taxpayers' dollars by curtailing congressional earmarking and requiring disclosure of lobbying by recipients of Federal funds.
Sponsor: Sen Feingold, Russell D. [WI] (introduced 2/3/2009) Cosponsors (7)
Latest Major Action: 2/5/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 140 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 32 - 65. Record Vote Number: 46.

179. S.AMDT.179 to H.R.1 To eliminate unnecessary spending.
Sponsor: Sen Vitter, David [LA] (introduced 2/3/2009) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 2/4/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 179 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 32 - 65. Record Vote Number: 37.

189. S.AMDT.189 to H.R.1 To allow the free exercise of religion at institutions of higher education that receive funding under section 803 of division A.
Sponsor: Sen DeMint, Jim [SC] (introduced 2/3/2009) Cosponsors (6)
Latest Major Action: 2/5/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 189 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 43 - 54. Record Vote Number: 47.

238. S.AMDT.238 to H.R.1 To ensure that the $1 trillion spending bill is not used to expand the scope of the Federal Government by adding new spending programs.
Sponsor: Sen Thune, John [SD] (introduced 2/4/2009) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 2/4/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 238 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 35 - 62. Record Vote Number: 39.

239. S.AMDT.239 to H.R.1 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
Sponsor: Sen Sessions, Jeff [AL] (introduced 2/4/2009) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 2/4/2009 Senate amendment submitted

240. S.AMDT.240 to H.R.1 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
Sponsor: Sen Crapo, Mike [ID] (introduced 2/4/2009) Cosponsors (5)
Latest Major Action: 2/4/2009 Senate amendment submitted

241. S.AMDT.241 to H.R.1 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
Sponsor: Sen Martinez, Mel [FL] (introduced 2/4/2009) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 2/4/2009 Senate amendment submitted

242. S.AMDT.242 to H.R.1 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to suspend for 2009 the 1993 income tax increase on Social Security benefits, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Bunning, Jim [KY] (introduced 2/4/2009) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 2/4/2009 Amendment SA 242 ruled out of order by the chair.

277. S.AMDT.277 to H.R.1 To reduce income taxes for all working taxpayers.
Sponsor: Sen Cornyn, John [TX] (introduced 2/4/2009) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 2/4/2009 Amendment SA 277 ruled out of order by the chair.

278. S.AMDT.278 to H.R.1 To reimplement Gramm-Rudman-Hollings to require deficit reduction and spending cuts upon 2 consecutive quarters of positive GDP growth.
Sponsor: Sen McCain, John [AZ] (introduced 2/4/2009) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 2/4/2009 Amendment SA 278 ruled out of order by the chair.

279. S.AMDT.279 to H.R.1 To prohibit the applicability of Buy American requirements in the Act to the utilization of funds provided by the Act.
Sponsor: Sen McCain, John [AZ] (introduced 2/4/2009) Cosponsors (1)
Latest Major Action: 2/4/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 279 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 31 - 65. Record Vote Number: 44.

326. S.AMDT.326 to H.R.1 To expedite reviews required to be carried out under the National Environment Policy Act of 1969.
Sponsor: Sen Barrasso, John [WY] (introduced 2/4/2009) Cosponsors (7)
Latest Major Action: 2/5/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 326 not agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.

501. S.AMDT.501 to H.R.1 To limit wasteful spending, to fund a systematic program of foreclosure prevention, to be administered by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Graham, Lindsey [SC] (introduced 2/5/2009) Cosponsors (2)
Latest Major Action: 2/6/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 501 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 39 - 57. Record Vote Number: 53.

607. S.AMDT.607 to H.R.1105 To require that amounts appropriated for the United Nations Population Fund are not used by organizations which support coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization.
Sponsor: Sen Wicker, Roger F. [MS] (introduced 3/2/2009) Cosponsors (10)
Latest Major Action: 3/5/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 607 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 39 - 55. Record Vote Number: 81.

608. S.AMDT.608 to H.R.1105 To provide funds for the Emmett Till Unsolved Civil Rights Crime Act from funds already provided for the Weed and Seed Program.
Sponsor: Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] (introduced 3/2/2009) Cosponsors (1)
Latest Major Action: 3/4/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 608 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 37 - 58. Record Vote Number: 78.

610. S.AMDT.610 to H.R.1105 To prohibit funding for congressional earmarks for wasteful and parochial pork projects.
Sponsor: Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] (introduced 3/2/2009) Cosponsors (1)
Latest Major Action: 3/4/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 610 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 34 - 61. Record Vote Number: 79.

613. S.AMDT.613 to H.R.1105 To provide that no funds may be made available to make any assessed contribution or voluntary payment of the United Nations if the United Nations implements or imposes any taxation on any United States persons.
Sponsor: Sen Inhofe, James M. [OK] (introduced 3/3/2009) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 3/5/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 613 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 43 - 51. Record Vote Number: 83.

623. S.AMDT.623 to H.R.1105 To prohibit taxpayer dollars from being earmarked to 14 clients of a lobbying firm under Federal investigation for making campaign donations in exchange for political favors for the group's clients.
Sponsor: Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] (introduced 3/3/2009) Cosponsors (1)
Latest Major Action: 3/4/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 623 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 43 - 52. Record Vote Number: 80.

630. S.AMDT.630 to H.R.1105 To require a report on counter-smuggling efforts in Gaza.
Sponsor: Sen Kyl, Jon [AZ] (introduced 3/3/2009) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 3/9/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 630 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 34 - 61. Record Vote Number: 87.

631. S.AMDT.631 to H.R.1105 To require the Secretary of State to certify that funds made available for reconstruction efforts in Gaza will not be diverted to Hamas or entities controlled by Hamas.
Sponsor: Sen Kyl, Jon [AZ] (introduced 3/3/2009) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 3/9/2009 Senate amendment not agreed to. Status: Amendment SA 631 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 39 - 56. Record Vote Number: 88.

634. Would these amendments be relevant for states that - for example - sm
have passed laws allowing medical marijuana use, but the Federal laws are still being used to prosecute patients?

Talk about a heap of constitutional amendments!
x

American's don't mind "porky" amendments!

I just love this guy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEfICUoWKBw

When Bill Clinton was in office, OHHH you better believe Bill and Carter have had..sm
their day of mudslinging matches, at the pleasure of a many conservatives. So, no there's not a double standard here.

Bill Maher Takes On Bill O'Reilly

BILL O'REILLY, HOST: In the "Personal Story" segment tonight, political humorist Bill Maher (search), he has a new book out called "New Rules: Polite Musings from a Timid Observer." Of course, Mr. Maher is about as polite as I am and as timid as Dracula. He joins us now from Los Angeles.

You know, you've had some celebrities on your HBO show, "Real Time," which begins again on Friday, talking about policy and war on terror and stuff like that. I get the feeling they don't know very much, but you do. So I'd like to make Bill Maher, right now, the terror czar. Bill Maher, the terror czar. Could be a series.

How would you fight this War on Terror? How would you fight it?

BILL MAHER, HOST, HBO'S "REAL TIME": I think the first and most important thing is to get the politics out of the War on Terror. You know, maybe I'm a cockeyed optimist, Bill, maybe I'm naive, but I thought that 9/11 was such a jarring event that nobody would dare return to business as usual on that one subject after that.

But of course, we found out that nothing could be further from the truth. And your president, my president too, but the one you voted for...

O'REILLY: You don't know that. Were you looking over my shoulder there? I could have voted for Nader. I could have voted for Kerry, but Kerry wouldn't come on the program, so I wouldn't vote. But I could have gone for Ralph. Ralph's a friend of mine.

MAHER: Yes. Anyway, I said the guy you voted for, President Bush, you know, how come this guy, who was supposed to be such a kick-and-take- names kind of guy, how come he has not been able to get the politics out of this?

You know, as a guy who's been accused of treason, I'll tell you what real treason is: Treason is when legislators vote against homeland security measures because it goes against the wishes of their political or financial backers. Treason is the fact that, as a terrorist, you could still buy a gun in this country because the NRA (search) lobby is so strong.

O'REILLY: OK. But you're getting into the political, and I agree with you. I think that the country should be united in trying to seek out and kill terrorists, who would kill us.

But I'd like to have some concrete things that you, Bill Maher, the terror czar � and take this seriously, this could be a series � what would you do?

All right, so you've got bin Laden. You've got Al Qaeda (search). You've got a bunch of other lower-level terrorist groups. What do you do to neutralize them?

MAHER: OK. Well, first of all, you discounted my answer, which is get the politics out, but OK.

O'REILLY: Well, assume you can do that. They're gone.

MAHER: We'll let that go. Keep going. I wouldn't worry that much about bin Laden. I mean, capturing bin Laden at this point, it doesn't really matter whether he's dead or alive. He's already Tupac to the people who care about him and work for him. Capturing bin Laden, killing him would be like when Ray Kroc died, how much that affected McDonald's.

O'REILLY: It would be a morale booster. But I understand. You're not going to send...

MAHER: A morale booster, right. Well, we've had plenty of morale boosting. We've had plenty of window dressing. What we need is concrete action.

In the book I wrote before this one about terrorism, I suggested that we have a Secret Service for the people. I said whenever the president goes anywhere, he has very high-level, intelligent detectives who look around at a crowd. They know what they're looking for. They're highly paid. They're highly trained.

We don't have that in this country. We should have that. We should have a cadre of 10,000 highly trained people who would guard all public events, bus stations, train stations, airports � and stop with this nonsense that this robotic sort of window dressing...

O'REILLY: OK, so you would create a homeland security office that was basically a security firm for major targets and things like that. It's not a bad idea. Costs a lot of money. Costs a lot of money. It's not a bad idea.

MAHER: Costs a lot of money compared to what? If you paid 10,000 people a salary of $100,000 a year, that would, I think, cost $10 billion or something. That's nothing. There's that much pork in the transportation bill before you get...

O'REILLY: Yes, 10,000 wouldn't do it, but I get your drift.

MAHER: Whatever it costs.

O�REILLY: You would create a super-security apparatus. OK, that's not bad. That's not bad. How about overseas now?

MAHER: What we need to do is what I call get Israeli about this. Because the Israelis are not afraid of profiling. The Israelis are not afraid to bury politics in the greater cause of protecting their nation. We don't act that way. You know, I'm afraid 9/11 really changed nothing.

O'REILLY: Boy, your ACLU (search) pals aren't going to like that. You're going to lose your membership card there.

MAHER: I'm not a member of the ACLU.

O'REILLY: Oh, sure you are, just like I voted for Bush. You're a member of the ACLU. I can see the card right in your pocket there.

MAHER: Bill, I'm not a joiner. I'm not a joiner. I don't like organizations.

O'REILLY: They won't have you, Maher, let's be honest about that. All right, now, in your book, which is very amusing, by the way � if you want a few laughs buy Maher's book.

MAHER: Thank you.

O'REILLY: You take some shots at FOX News, which is your wont, and I just want to know why you think we're so fabulously successful here.

MAHER: Well, I think that question has been answered many times. It's because the conservative viewer in this country, or on radio the conservative listener, is very predictable. They like to hear what they like to hear. They like to hear it over and over again.

O'REILLY: All the surveys show that the viewers are all over the map. They're not conservative in a big bloc. Some of them are moderate. Some of them are Democrats. Some of them are Moroccans. I mean, they're everywhere. That's your analysis? That just the conservatives watch us?

MAHER: Well, I think mostly the conservatives do watch you. That's not to take anything away from what you guys have achieved over there. It's a very well-produced broadcast, and they have excellent personalities like yourself, Bill. Who could resist watching you when you get home from work at night?

O'REILLY: Whoopi Goldberg, maybe? I don't know.

MAHER: Yes.

O'REILLY: Anyone who doesn't watch here is misguided. We identify them as such.

But look, I think there's more to it than � you're in TV. You know the ratings game. I mean, if you don't provide a product that is satisfying people, no matter what your ideology, they tell you to take a hike.

There's a guy over at MSNBC. He's a very conservative guy. He was hired and nobody's watching him. They hire liberals. Nobody watches them. Air America (search). Nobody's listening to it.

I mean, there's got to be a reason why we're No. 1, a punch line for you, and No. 2, you know, becoming the most powerful news network in the world.

MAHER: Well, I think, as I say, it's a well-produced product. You know, your program moves along, always at a clip that never seems to bore. You know, you move along to the next topic, the next guest. It never sort of drags. I don't think a lot of people know how to produce that stuff that way.

O'REILLY: All right. It's bells and whistles and my charming personality. That's what I thought it was.

Last thing: You know, one thing I like about Maher is he's not a hypocrite. He drives a little hybrid vehicle. Right? You putter around there. Does it have training wheels? What's it like?

MAHER: Actually, I had the Prius hybrid for three years. I was one of the first ones to get it right after 9/11. And I traded it in a few months ago for the Lexus hybrid.

O'REILLY: I think we should all cut back on our energy consumption, and I think we should all get these hybrids as fast as we can.

Hey, Bill, always nice to see you. Thanks very much. Good luck with the season on the TV show.

MAHER: Continued success there, Mr. No. 1.

O'REILLY: All right. Thank you.

Watch "The O'Reilly Factor" weeknights at 8 p.m. and 11 p.m. ET and listen to the "Radio Factor!"

Content and Programming Copyright 2005 Fox News Network, L.L.C. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Transcription Copyright 2005 eMediaMillWorks, Inc. (f/k/a Federal Document Clearing House, Inc.), which takes sole responsibility for the accuracy of the transcription. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No license is granted to the user of this material except for the user's personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed, nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion that may infringe upon Fox News Network, L.L.C.'s and eMediaMillWorks, Inc.'s copyrights or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation.

Bill Clinton and his ties to India (yes, Bill),...
and China (yes, Bill) sent a lot of our jobs their way. Google it some time. Even I was amazed.

Look, it is simple economics. The big bad corporations everyone hates...first of all, it is not 5 or 6 rich guys and that's it. They employee thousands of people just like us...and when the government puts those huge taxes on them, if they want to stay in business, they are forced to move offshore. Higher taxes are responsible for more jobs going overseas than "greed." The DNC has told its members for years that "corporations" and "the rich" are the cause of all their problems and they have bought that Marxist rhetoric hook, line, and sinker. Corporations are not the cause of ill in this country. They are the backbone of the economy in this country. That is simple economics 101. And I am certainly not rich...and I certainly am not on the upper echelon of a corporation, but I do understand reality and I understand how the economy works. Yes, there is wrongdoing by some upper level folks in corporations. There is wrongdoing in the government. Where there is power, there will be wrongdoing. But for every Enron there are thousands of other good, solid companies that employ thousands of Americans, but the DNC does not share the success stories, because it does not promote their agenda. In order to control people they want them beholden to government and hating free enterprise. They want big government, total power, and control. And following Alinksy's program...you have to instill class warfare. You have to make corporations the enemy. You have to make classes envy the next rung up. Classic Marxist socialism. It is being played out in this country every day.

It is just that some of us have not bought the myth and jumped on the socialism train.

Did you read the bill? It was a regulatory reform bill...
asking them to regulate, not de-regulate. But Democrats blocked it...no wonder. Fannie was greasing a lot of Democratic palms...and Frederick Raines, the Dem CEO at the time...was in the Clinton administration. They were taking care of their own...and we are paying for it.

if abe is on the $5 bill & george is on the $1 bill, what is Obama on?
****censored****

I agree neither choice is great, but will vote McCain just as a vote against Obama. nm
x

A vote for Ron Paul is a wasted vote. No chance on Earth he can win. sm
Votes for him only take away from the real candidates.

Good point. I don't vote party, I vote for the
person. Every Democrat is not bad and every Republican good or vice versa.

Then you need to vote for Obama. A vote for McCain will...sm
not help you. Obama wants to give tax relief to 90% of Americans who earn 1% of the gross earnings in this country. The top 1% of earners bring in 90% of earnings. Any one person who earns $250,000 or less will benefit from Obama's tax plan.

they didn't vote - they registered to vote -
that is a big difference. The votes were not counted, they were stopped by the means in which they were supposed to be stopped - ID verification, address verification, etc. The cards were filled out by the ACORN workers and then given to the proper authorities to sort through.

The phony registrations were pulled out by the actual authorities. ACORN is just a middle man.

We get what we vote for. If we vote "party", we get extremes.
If we make it a point to try to identify candidates who hold moderate views and vote for them, rather than voting a "party ticket", we'll have a better chance of getting away from these extremes, whether right or left.

One of the problems, though, is that candidates often play games with their real positions. During the primaries, they talk the "party" line and then they move to the center for the general election. Both sides do this, unfortunately.

The only hope is to look at their past records - and take them seriously. History is prologue to the future. When a man has done certain things in his adult life, it tells us more about him than anything he says. If Obama hasn't taught us this fundamental truth, we'll never learn it. The evidence about him goes all the way back to his days in law school, and it was available for anyone to see. Some didn't bother to look. Others looked and didn't take it seriously. Either way, we weren't paying attention or he'd have probably never made it through the primaries.

No one can pull the wool over your eyes unless you let them, and the way they do it is by making smooth speeches filled with unlikely promises (and even glaring contradictions as they appeal to groups with opposite interests). They believe we won't notice the lies, exaggerations and mischaracterizations of their opponent's positions, etc. Unfortunately, they are often right.

Let's start taking the candidates' prior records and their life histories as the best evidence of who they really are - not their speeches. If we do this, we'll make better choices.

Thanks to you both; yesterday's
it was time to come out of anonymity so we can better identify the trolls in order to ignore them. So thanks to Democrat for making the case.

Actually, I think that is what JM did say yesterday. nml
.

Yesterday's interview on

Matt Cooper pretty much spelled it out. You might not like it, though, because it still holds your boys accountable for their actions. So by all means, read at your own risk.

MSNBC.com

Transcript for July 17
Matt Cooper, John Podesta, Ken Mehlman, Bob Woodward, Carl Bernstein

NBC News

Updated: 1:57 p.m. ET July 17, 2005

PLEASE CREDIT ANY QUOTES OR EXCERPTS FROM THIS NBC TELEVISION PROGRAM TO "NBC NEWS' MEET THE PRESS."

Sunday, July 17, 2005

GUESTS: Matt Cooper, White House Correspondent, Time Magazine; John Podesta, President and CEO, "Center for American Progress" and Former Chief of Staff, President Bill Clinton; Ken Mehlman, Chairman, Republican National Committee; Bob Woodward, Washington Post and author, "The Secret Man: The Story of Watergate's Deep Throat" and Carl Bernstein, former Washington Post Watergate Reporter

MODERATOR/PANELIST: Tim Russert, NBC News

MR. TIM RUSSERT: Our issues this Sunday: the investigation into the leak which identified Ambassador Joe Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, as a CIA operative. This Time magazine reporter says his source released him from his pledge of confidentiality, allowing him to avoid jail by testifying on Wednesday. What did he say to the grand jury? He'll discuss it for the first here this morning. Our guest: Matt Cooper.

Then Newsweek magazine quotes Karl Rove as saying it was "Wilson's wife, who apparently works at the agency, who authorized the trip." What now for President Bush's deputy chief of staff? With us, Rove's former deputy, now chairman of the Republican National Committee, Ken Mehlman, and President Clinton's former chief of staff, John Podesta.

And 33 years ago, another famous source, Deep Throat, provided information which brought about the resignation of Richard M. Nixon. His identity has now been revealed and his story now chronicled in a new book: "The Secret Man." With us, Watergate reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein.

But, first, joining us now is Matt Cooper of Time magazine. Welcome.

MR. MATT COOPER: Morning, Tim.

MR. RUSSERT: This is the cover of your magazine: "Rove on the Spot," subtitled "What I Told the Grand Jury," by Matthew Cooper. And here is an excerpt from your article, which will be available tomorrow in Time magazine.

"So did [Karl] Rove leak Plame's name to me, or tell me she was covert? No. Was it through my conversation with Rove that I learned for the first time that [Joe] Wilson's wife worked at the CIA and may have been responsible for sending him?"--to Niger. "Yes. Did Rove say that she worked at the `agency' on `WMD'?"--weapons of mass destruction. "Yes. When he said things would be declassified soon, was that itself impermissible? I don't know."

For the record, the first time you learned that Joe Wilson's wife worked for the CIA was from Karl Rove?

MR. COOPER: That's correct.

MR. RUSSERT: And when Karl concluded his conversation with you, you write he said, "I've already said too much." What did that mean?

MR. COOPER: Well, I'm not sure what it meant, Tim. At first, you know, I thought maybe he meant "I've been indiscreet." But then, as I thought about it, I thought it might be just more benign, like "I've said too much; I've got to get to a meeting." I don't know exactly what he meant, but I do know that memory of that line has stayed in my head for two years.

MR. RUSSERT: When you were told that Joe Wilson's wife worked for the CIA, did you have any sense then that this is important or "I better be careful about identifying someone who works for the CIA"?

MR. COOPER: Well, I certainly thought it was important. I wrote it in the e-mail to my bosses moments later that has since leaked out after this long court battle I've been in. You know, I certainly thought it was important. But I didn't know her name at the time until, you know, after Bob Novak's column came out.

MR. RUSSERT: Did you have any reluctance writing something so important?

MR. COOPER: Well, I wrote it after Bob Novak's column had come out and identified her, so I was not in, you know, danger of outing her the way he did.

MR. RUSSERT: You also write in Time magazine this week, "This was actually my second testimony for the special prosecutor. In August 2004, I gave limited testimony about my conversation with [Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff] Scooter Libby. Libby had also given me a special waiver, and I gave a deposition in the office of my attorney. I have never discussed that conversation until now. In that testimony, I recorded an on-the-record conversation with Libby that moved to background. On the record, he denied that Cheney knew"--of--"or played any role the Wilson trip to Niger. On background, I asked Libby if he had heard anything about Wilson's wife sending her husband to Niger. Libby replied, `Yeah, I've heard that, too,' or words to that effect."

Did you interpret that as a confirmation?

MR. COOPER: I did, yeah.

MR. RUSSERT: Did Mr. Libby say at any time that Joe Wilson's wife worked for the CIA?

MR. COOPER: No, he didn't say that.

MR. RUSSERT: But you said it to him?

MR. COOPER: I said, "Was she involved in sending him?," yeah.

MR. RUSSERT: And that she worked for the CIA?

MR. COOPER: I believe so.

MR. RUSSERT: The piece that you finally ran in Time magazine on July 17th, it says, "And some government officials have noted to Time in interviews, (as well as to syndicated columnist Robert Novak) that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, is a CIA official who monitors the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. These officials have suggested that she was involved in her husband's being dispatched to Niger..."

"Some government officials"--That is Rove and Libby?

MR. COOPER: Yes, those were among the sources for that, yeah.

MR. RUSSERT: Are there more?

MR. COOPER: I don't want to get into it, but it's possible.

MR. RUSSERT: Have you told the grand jury about that?

MR. COOPER: The grand jury knows what I know, yes.

MR. RUSSERT: That there may have been more sources?

MR. COOPER: Yes.

MR. RUSSERT: The big discussion, Matt Cooper, has been about your willingness to testify...

MR. COOPER: Sure.

MR. RUSSERT: ...before the grand jury. And let's go through that. This was Wednesday, July 6, Matt Cooper talking to the assembled press corps.

(Videotape, July 6, 2005):

MR. COOPER: This morning, in what can only be described as a stunning set of developments, that source agreed to give me a specific, personal and unambiguous waiver to speak before the grand jury.

(End videotape)

MR. RUSSERT: Now, Karl Rove's attorney has spoken to The Washington Post. "[Karl Rove's attorney, Robert] Luskin has said that he merely reaffirmed the blanket waiver by Rove ...and that the assurance would have been available at any time. He said that [Matt] Cooper's description of last-minute theatrics `does not look so good' and that `it just looks to me like there was less a desire to protect a source.'"

MR. COOPER: Well, can I back up a little bit, Tim? For two years, you know, I have protected the identity of my sources. As you know, I was in a rather infamous court battle that went through all the courts in Washington, right up to the Supreme Court, and we lost there with a special prosecutor trying to get me to disclose my source. My principle the whole time was that no court and no corporation can release me from a pledge of confidentiality with my source. And so even after Time magazine, over my objections, handed over my notes and e-mails, which included, really, everything I had and identified all my sources, I still believed that I needed some kind of personal release from the source himself.

And so on the morning of that clip you just saw, my lawyer called me and had seen in The Wall Street Journal that morning Mr. Rove's lawyer saying, "Karl does not stand by any confidentiality with these conversations," or words to that effect, and then went on to say, "If Matt Cooper's going to jail, it's not for Karl Rove." And at that point, at that point only, my lawyer contacted Mr. Rove's lawyer and said, you know, "Can we get a kind of personal waiver that applies to Matt?" And Mr. Luskin and he worked out an agreement and we have a letter that says that "Mr. Rove waives confidentiality for conversations with Matt Cooper in July 2003." So it's specific to me and it's personal, and that's why I felt comfortable, only at that point, going to testify before the grand jury. And once I testified before the grand jury, then I felt I should share that with the readers of Time.

MR. RUSSERT: Mr. Luskin, Rove's attorney, is suggesting that you had the same waiver throughout the last two years, and only when you were confronted with going to jail did you, in effect, decide to compromise your source or not protect your source.

MR. COOPER: Well, I protected my source all along. I don't maintain that I haven't. I have all the way along, and that's why we went to the Supreme Court. That's why I stood by the source even after Time had disclosed my documents. We went to Rove only after seeing his lawyer, in some sense, invite us to, in that quote in The Wall Street Journal. My lawyers and the editors at the time did not feel it was appropriate for me to go and approach Rove about some kind of waiver before then.

MR. RUSSERT: In your piece, as I mentioned, you said "some government officials," and you said it may be more than just Rove and Libby. Did you get waivers from those additional sources when you testified before the grand jury?

MR. COOPER: I don't want to get into anything else, but I don't--anything I discuss before the grand jury, I have a waiver for.

MR. RUSSERT: Norman Pearlstine, editor in chief...

MR. COOPER: Sure.

MR. RUSSERT: ...of Time magazine, authorized the release of your e-mails and notes to the prosecutor. Pearlstine said this: "I found myself really coming to the conclusion that once the Supreme Court has spoken in a case involving national security and a grand jury, we are not above the law and we have to behave the way ordinary citizens do." Do you agree?

MR. COOPER: In part. I mean, I think Norman Pearlstine made a very tough decision. I spent a lot of time with him and I admired the way he made it. I disagreed. I thought we should have at least, you know, gone forward, gone into civil contempt. I would have been willing to go to jail. I think we should have, you know, held on a little longer, but that's a reasonable, you know, disagreement between people.

MR. RUSSERT: Now, he came to Washington, Pearlstine, and some other editors from New Work and met with the Washington bureau of Time magazine.

MR. COOPER: Sure.

MR. RUSSERT: At least two correspondents produced e-mails saying, "Our sources are now telling us they will no longer confide in Time magazine. They will no longer trust us to protect our sources." Is that going to be a long-term problem for your magazine?

MR. COOPER: Well, I think, you know, Time will have to, you know, reassure confidential sources that we're going to continue to rely on them and continue to protect them. You know, this--Tim, I think the important thing is here that one aberration in this case was it went all the way to the Supreme Court, and it was then--you know, Time did decide in this case to turn over the notes. Now, Pearlstine has said that in other cases he might not. I think the important thing to remember here is that, you know, the reporters of Time will keep their word. I kept my word for two years. I didn't feel like any court or corporation could release me from that confidence, and I kept my word and so only spoke with the grand jury after I received that written personal waiver from my source.

MR. RUSSERT: You are going to testify this week before Congress for a shield law. Explain that.

MR. COOPER: Sure . Well, Tim, you know, this is the 12th day, I believe, of my colleague Judith Miller from The New York Times being in jail in this investigation because she did not get a waiver that she feels comfortable with and she's protecting her sources. There's incredible aberration, Tim. Forty- nine states have some kind of protection for journalists and their confidential sources, but there is no protection at the federal level. And so in a bipartisan way, Republicans and Democrats have put forward legislation in Congress to create some kind of protection for whistle-blowers and confidential sources and other people who want to come forward to the press so there'd be some kind of federal law, too.

MR. RUSSERT: What's your biggest regret in this whole matter?

MR. COOPER: Well, I'm not sure I have that many. I mean, I believe the story I wrote was entirely accurate and fair, and I stand by it. And I think it was important because it was about an important thing that was going on. It was called A War on Wilson, and I believe there was something like a war on Wilson going on. I guess I'd be a little more discreet about my e-mails, I think. I'm an object lesson in that, you know, e-mails have a way of getting out.

MR. RUSSERT: Will this affect your career as a journalist?

MR. COOPER: I don't think it should, Tim. I kept my word to my source. I only spoke after I got a waiver from that source. That's what other journalists have done in this case. I don't think it should.

MR. RUSSERT: How did you find the grand jury?

MR. COOPER: I was surprised, Tim. You know, I'd heard this old line that grand jurors are very passive, that they'll indict a ham sandwich if the prosecutor tells them. I thought this grand jury was very interested in the case. They--a lot of the questions I answered were posed by them as opposed to the prosecutor. I thought they were very involved.

MR. RUSSERT: Where do you think it's heading?

MR. COOPER: You know, I really don't know, Tim. I've been, you know, involved in this case as anyone, I guess, for a couple of years now, and at times I think it's a very big case, at times I think it's, you know, politics as usual and not going to be that big a case at all. I just don't know.

MR. RUSSERT: And we'll find out. Matt Cooper, we thank you very much for joining us and sharing your views.

MR. COOPER: Thank you, Tim.

I saw him on CNN yesterday. Here's the video.

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Seymour_Hersh__U.S._involved_in_0813.html

I found it very interesting, and you're right, he's yet to get it wrong.

Until yesterday, I never saw you post here at all. sm
The moderator has posted several times that as long as the posts remain respectful, we may cross post. Not all liberals, by the way, believe in abortion. This is an ethical issue, not a political one, though it does seem that the liberals fly the abortion banner high and proud.

I saw this yesterday . Wonder if Fox will broadcast this?
zz

check yesterday.
nm

it was on woldnetdaily yesterday & others
Not that y'all would know anything about sources other than MSLSD and the gang.

Yesterday's news.
su

I'm not sure where it is, but one of your friends from yesterday
kept bugging Debbie about it. Maybe she knows where the rule is.

I think it used to be that we were asked to post links, so as to save disk space for the MTStars website, something like that.

That way, we can click over to read what is posted. Also, it gives you backup to your posts for verfication. Much better to see who's point of view it is, and from what website in your link.

Does anybody know if this rule still exists under the new management??

Wow, I posted this yesterday and...
Today there are no comments? Fascinating. I thought surely someone would leap to McCain's defense and/or find a way to justify his behavior.

We were talking about this yesterday...sm
....and thinking it will take years to implement, but still.....we should all be preparing for a career change eventually. I have by branching out into general transcription.

Ain't change grand....I'm wondering exactly whose job(s) it's going to save...

Thanks sam - was just thinking about you yesterday
We miss you here. We need people to post with knowledge and sanity (and links that back up things they say). All I'm reading are nasty hate-filled posts and its quite nauseating. Especially when they don't have facts.

O'Reilly yesterday
Did you see O'Reilly yesterday, it was hysterical watching Joys face and hand motions

There were rumors yesterday
that there was a fight of some kind after the show with Elizaeth and Joy. They said today it wasn't true. When Whoopie was talking about off-shore drilling, Joy made a disgusting remark about Palin's pregnant daughter and drilling.

As I posted yesterday -
Obama did not change his numbers to 120,000 - it was clearly a misspeak on the part of that Richardson guy, as earlier in the day he had said it correctly on a radio show.

Show me 1 person in this world who has not misspoke at some point in their life...

As of yesterday, Chrysler and GM were still
Today's news about cash flow evidently took that off the table pronto.

The EC voted yesterday......... sm
but those votes will not be counted until 1/6/2009 when both houses will convene to certify the votes. One can only hope and pray that there is still at least 1 Senator and 1 Representative with the intestinal fortitude to challenge that certification should it go in favor of Obama.

Just a side note. I was in a bookstore yesterday browsing the books when I came across a book cover designed to look like Time magazine with Obama's picture and the caption President Obama. How's that for audacity?

Thank you for the link!! Why just yesterday.....
The families were kicked off the white house grounds and they all hated Obama and............where do they get this shtik?