If you have "no place to go," come here!

"We're one, but we're not the same. We get to carry each other carry each other"

The two legacy parties, that is. Why, what did you think? Read this pathetic effusion from Jon Walker:

Senate Democrats had an opportunity to get together and make the Senate a working, majority-rule-based chamber. They could have recently used the “Constitutional Option” at the start of this new Congress to rewrite the Senate rules to either eliminate the filibuster outright or at least make staging a filibuster more difficult. Yet, due to a combination of a greedy refusal to give up any individual power, and a pitiful cowardice about a potential future in which the voters reject them, Senate Democrats collectively chose to throw away this opportunity. By doing nothing, they effectively voted to give Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell total veto power over everything.

Mission accomplished! At some point, long, long past for both Obama and the Ds, the best test of intentions is outcomes.

What, you thought the Ds and the Rs were somehow different? Sure, they hate each other, but that just gives the kabuki some spice! The hate is all part of the fun!

No votes yet


Submitted by Hugh on

LOL. I was just writing on this for my Obama scandals list and decided to post it here. I didn't see yours until I got mine up. I contend they didn't throw away the opportunity to eliminate the filibuster. Senate Democrats were never going to do it because the conservative legislation they produce is exactly what they want.

Like you, I'm tired of this hackneyed line that the Democrats mean well but they just aren't effective or are constantly being snookered by the Republicans. You would think the umpteenth time it happened that they would give up on this explanation. But so far not.

CMike's picture
Submitted by CMike on

This session the Senate is made up of 53 members who caucus with the Democrats and 47 members who caucus with the Republicans. The latter group has the solidarity of a parliamentary caucus and on controversial issues going forward is likely to be able to line up some combination of four DINOs, from among the many, to create voting majorities whenever they would be crucial to the interests of the right.

According to Wikipedia:

Elections to the United States Senate will be held on November 6, 2012, with 33 of the 100 seats in the Senate being contested...Democrats are expected to have 23 seats up for election, including 2 independents who caucus with the Democrats, and Republicans are expected to have 10 seats up for election.

Regardless of which party controls the White House after the 2012 elections it sure looks like the Republicans will be in charge of both Houses of Congress by then if they aren't all ready. If there is any left of center-right sentiment in the Senate these days it will be best served by having the filibuster in place.

Submitted by lambert on

because at least it gives Bernie a chance to go down fighting, even if the D/Rs do what they do.

For the rest of it, the fix was in since 2009; if the Ds had any intention of not being hostage to the Rs, they would have gotten rid of the filibuster when they had the chance. Instead, we got a solid year of "we need 60 votes."