E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS From NBC’s Ken Strickland and Carrie Dann
Sen. Jim Bunning isn’t exactly known as a warm and fuzzy character on Capitol Hill.
Bunning, who won a reputation as something of a poster boy for Senate obstruction after he launched a tenacious one-man filibuster of an extension of unemployment benefits in March, told NBC News that the Senate rules that allow such log jams are the most frustrating part of working on Capitol Hill.
“The hardest part of working in the Senate is the fact that you have a hundred individuals who could stop anything,” he said. “You've got to get the agreement of a hundred people to proceed. Do you know how hard that is?”
Members of his own party certainly know. Bunning’s blockage of the unemployment package earned him the criticism of many of his fellow Republicans and verbal lashings from pundits on both sides of the aisle. (He was enthusiastically backed by party leadership when the issue came up again several months later, however.)
Bunning also said in his Exit Interview that the most politically savvy legislator with whom he has worked was the late Alaska Republican Sen. Ted Stevens, although it took him some time to understand the veteran Republican’s “my way or the high way” demeanor. “I disliked [Ted Stevens] with a passion when I first got here because he was so gruff and so short and to the point,” he said.
That’s a sentiment that might prompt some grins from those who have worked with the Kentucky lawmaker, who has developed a curmudgeonly reputation during his 12 years in the Senate. His testy exchange with ABC reporter Jonathan Karl in the doorway of a Senate elevator earned him a memorable lampooning by the Daily Show’s Jon Stewart. He also famously told reporters on a conference call last year, when was still considering running for re-election, that the results of an internal campaign poll were “none of your goddamn business.”
Asked to name senators with whom he liked working, the Kentucky Republican made a point to name legislators with whom he disliked working as well.
Senate Finance Committee chairman Max Baucus, Bunning said, is the “most difficult” to work with because he “looks down" on Republicans in the committee's minority.
“I have difficulty with Durbin and Schumer,” he added. “Maybe it’s their personalities; maybe it’s my personality.”
Leave a Comment:
From Howard Fineman, Newsweek's Senior Washington Correspondent (and frequent MSNBC "contributor"):
"Democrats are trying to convince themselves that the GOP is hopelessly divided, but that's wishful thinking."
Howard also laments the fact that lefties are upset with him for telling the truth about the beatdown awaiting Democrats in November.
Now, Howard...could you possibly have a word with Keith Olbermann, and Gene Robinson?
I'm not sure it's the fact that people ar upset with Howard for telling the truth about the beatdown awaiting Democrats in November. We're hearing that everywhere, not just from Howard. Many pollsters have been saying it for months. As have tv hosts on cable tv.
Way before Howard said it.
I actually agree with this. I see no difference between the teabaggers and Karl Rove, Glenn Beck and the rest of the GOP. To me they're all one in the same.
I haven't agreed with Howard too much lately. But I'm not going to badmouth him. I've been watching him on MSNBC/Countdown for many years and I have always liked him. I always thought that if there was a journalist out there who I would like to meet in person, it would be Howard. He comes off on tv as very personable and down to earth. And a good sense of humor.
There are many I haven't agreed with on occasion this past year. Keith is one. Rachel is one. Lawrence O. is one. But I wouldn't stop watching them. There are some on tv who are just out and out dishonest and I won't watch them. Howard is not one of them.
Hi Pat, I have mixed feelings about Howard Fineman. He is from the right but I often find myself agreeing with his analysis, if not very often with his conclusions. The most memorable was during the 2008 election. He kept describing candidate Obama as intelligent, gracious, moderate, a good father, an excellent leader, very talented, having great ideas, understands the economy, understands foriegn relations, understands military issues, etc. but just could not bring himself to say that Obama would make a good president. It was surreal, he described Obama as someone who would make a great president but just couldn't bring himself to say it.
P.S. Pat. I think Fineman is a very intelligent and moderate right winger who I admire and respect. He has often gone against the right wing when the honest analysis showed that the right wing was wrong.
I think it's not the fact that Democrats think the GOP/Tea Party is "hopelessly" divided, so in that sense, I think Fineman is wrong. Democrats know they have an uphill climb this year, based on gerrymandered districts from 2000 that they won two years ago that they will lose in this election.
But what Fineman misses is that even quite conservative GOP'ers really ARE divided against some of the Tea Party fringe folks. I mean, Lisa Murkowski not only lost to one, she even SAID these people are extremists! The GOP in Delaware wants nothing to do with the newly-nominated GOP/Tea Party candidate. Sharron Angle gave Harry Reid's campaign new life. These are but a few examples; there are more.
These are not some isolated incidents. Sure, some Tea Partiers have lost, and others will win in very, very red states. But the Establishment GOP vs. the Jim DeMint GOP have very, VERY different goals. It simply is, finally, getting some public attention beyond the whisperings of Capitol Hill. Fineman ought to know better.
But him saying so doesn't get eyeballs on his articles like saying "Democrats will lose" does right now, because the CW/Washington narrative doesn't support the "Tea Party is tearing up the GOP" storyline... yet.
But it will.
Defining Howard as a right wing journalist defines the definer as so far out in left field that they can't even see home...
Fineman has also covered political topics from a liberal, or progressive, point of view and ideology. To showcase these views, he has written stories dealing with the rise of the "religious right," the power of talk radio, race and politics, the Pledge of Allegiance controversy,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Fineman
Jose Von Hussein:
Several conservative pundits llike David Frumm have already said that candidates like O'Donnell are hurting the GOP.
As for Howard Fineman, with what does he back up his claim that any Democrats think the Republicans are "hopelessly divided"? The "hopelessly" part would imply that some Democrats think that the Republicans are going to suffer big losses rather than big gains this November. But I haven't heard a single Democrat say anything so silly.
Yes, the same Howard Fineman who has collegial discussions with Keith Olbermann on a seemingly daily basis is, of course, a right-winger.
Just like all the other wingers at that conservative hotbed, Newsweek.
Just like Olbermann's other usual suspects, Jonathan Alter, and Richard Wolffe.
I suspect that Keith himself is a right-winger...based on the company he keeps.
Mixed Bag
"Democrats are trying to convince themselves that the GOP is hopelessly divided, but that's wishful thinking."
Now you can look at other lamenting curmudgeons; white, middle aged male leaders . Mind you these are not my words.
G.O.P. Is Using Obama’s ‘Otherness’ as Campaign Tactic
White, middle aged male leaders build up a new narrative about who exactly is a conservative or republican, who exactly the united states really belongs to, and under no uncertain terms will portions of the electorate support or follow a president based on his skin color, the international reach of his upbringing, and his ability to overcome the very setbacks that ensnare so many minority peoples. Tea Partiers are one thing, but racist rants against a black man of authority are another.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/16/us/politics/16bai.html
Perhaps, I wonder, if you can honestly address their fears; especially people like Newt Gringrich, Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly, Glenn Beck, Savage, Levin, Boehnor, McConell, and other curmudegons like them and Bunning?
Mixed Bag
Fineman is clearly more conservative than Alter or Wolffe, at least in the sense that he wants to come across as an impartial observer. He does step out of character now and then. When Olbermann was talking about Gingrich's calling President Obama a Kenyan socialist, Fineman said that was "outrageous." Of course, most people except for the rabid right think Gingrich is a disgusting excuse for a human being, so I guess Howard was still being rather cautiously middle-of-the-road.
Senator Jim Bunning:
Jim Bunning is remembered for his role in the pennant race of 1964, in which the Phillies held a commanding lead in the National League for most of the season, eventually losing the title to the St. Louis Cardinals. Manager Gene Mauch used Bunning and fellow hurler Chris Short heavily down the stretch, and the two became visibly fatigued as September wore on. The collapse of the 1964 Phillies remains one of the most infamous in baseball history. With a six and a half game lead as late as September 21, they lost 10 games in a row to finish tied for second place.
Bunning would routinely shake off catchers' pitch signs that he knew to be signaled into the game from the dugout by Mauch. This would have the effect of irritating Mauch, who broadly applied the practice of signalling pitches from the dugout to his catchers at a time when this was not typically done.[4]
Bunning pitched his first no-hitter on July 20, 1958, for the Detroit Tigers against the Boston Red Sox. His second, for the Philadelphia Phillies, was a perfect game, which came against the New York Mets on June 21, 1964, Father's Day.[2] Bunning's perfect game was the first in the National League in 84 years. He is one of only six pitchers to throw both a perfect game and an additional no-hitter, the others being Randy Johnson, Sandy Koufax, Addie Joss, Cy Young, and Mark Buehrle.[2] He is also one of only five players to throw a no-hitter in both leagues. He played in the All-Star Games in 1957,[2] 1959, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, and 1966. He is also tenth on the list of pitchers who have hit batsmen during their career.
On August 2, 1959, Bunning struck out three batters on nine pitches in the ninth inning of a 5–4 loss to the Boston Red Sox. Bunning became the fifth American League pitcher and the 10th pitcher in Major League history to accomplish the nine-pitch/three-strikeout half-inning. Bunning's 2,855 career strikeouts put him in second place on the all-time list at the time of his retirement, behind only Walter Johnson.[5] His mark was later surpassed by a number of other pitchers, and he is currently 17th all-time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Bunning
Saw him pitch at Shea...he may have been a lousy, curmudgeonly, cantankerous, senator but he was something on the mound. Not the first time an athlete has disappointed me in the personality dept.
You saw him pitch? He was a great competitor it appears. I have always loved the pitching aspect of baseball. Great hitters were always around. But the really great pitchers - a rarity. They are what drove me to the park every year. It didn't matter what team they pitched for. Great pitching was always the draw with me.
Wish I saw Bunning.
Saw him pitch but I was maybe 8 years old. My uncle would tell my mother that we were going to the world's fair in flushing meadow, but we almost always wound up at Shea. My uncle, like a lot of other nl fans would go to Philly to see national league baseball in the years between the departure of the dodgers and giants and the advent of the mets, so even though I was a tyke, the memory is clear...He shut them out...:)
Senator Bunning inadvertently admitted there is something wrong with the Senate--one person should NOT be able to stop the others. One person should not be able to hold up nominees for anything. The miniority should not be able to stop the majority--the Constitution established majority rule and it did not include a filibuster.
And yet Jody - that is exactly what he did!
For a United States Senator, he was a really good pitcher...
you would think that someone that was a half decent ball player in the majors would not be such a racist right wing SCREWBALL[pardon the pun]. He will be remember as a GOP NUT AND RASCIST AND NOT FOR HIS BASEBALL EXPERTISE.
He wasn't just half decent as a ball player. He is in the Hall of Fame. I think he will be remembered more for that than his less than Hall of Fame political career.
He's a nut and a flake. Good riddence.
I HAVE JUST ONE COMMENT!!!!! The American Public Needs to Totally Clean House on the House and the Senate!!! If we don't do it at election time, this serious mess will go on until this country ends up in a revolution!!!!!! Just like many countries have done under a two class system!!!!!! GH
Changing the laws of this country is SUPPOSED to be hard. Otherwise, we would all be at the mercy of which ever whimsy struck the party in power at the time.