July 09, 2009
Can you imagine if the Republicans had the White House, the House of Representatives, and a 60-vote majority in the Senate?
<p>We would have an evangelical theocracy and thermonuclear war with Iran AND North Korea right about now. Wouldn't that be swell?</p><p>But instead the Democrats have this kind of power, and <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/08/AR2009070803884.html?hpid=topnews">they're STILL curled up in a fetal position in the corner</a>, waiting for Newt Gingrich to steal their lunch money:</p><blockquote>Senate Democrats spent their first full day holding 60 votes just as they have spent the previous 2 1/2 years without such a supermajority: scrambling to find Republican support for their key initiatives in order to choke off potential filibusters.<p>In short, Tuesday's seating of Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) did little to change the balance of power in the chamber.</p><p>Democrats have a large enough majority to pass bills without any GOP support, but they are grappling with internal divisions on key issues such as health care, climate change and union organizing. In addition, caucus leaders and President Obama would like at least some Republican backing on key measures so they can say they are enacting a bipartisan agenda, which then-Sen. Obama made a cornerstone of his 2008 campaign.</p></blockquote><p>This is what happens when you listen to David Broder and the rest of the Washington press idiots who are hedging their bets in the current power structure and still sucking up to Republicans "just in case." Republicans are ruthless and brutal, and Democrats are wusses. It's really become that simple. Does anyone recall any effort whatsoever during the Bush years to seek "bipartisanship"? My recollection is eight years of "My way or the highway" and "You're with us or you're with the terrorists."</p><p><br/></p>
Keep reading... Show less