Eric Cantor was on MSNBC last night with a shit eating grin (as Keith suggested, why not?) and was full of shit. This included the "failed policies" of the last few years that led to the new Republican majority in the House. The need for fiscal responsibility really pissed me off. The f-ing Dems are the adults there as Lawrence O'Donnell noted separately. They also legislate:
The way we do things doesn't help. Republican regulars vote for opposition to the Democrats on Election Day. There was a few surprises in the Republican primaries, some costing them actually, but not too many. So, discontent often meant voting for old timers. That is one thing that depresses me. A balanced dissent, but that is asking too much, would kick out Republican old timers too. Again, that happened a few times -- Murkowski got a second chance it looks like -- but not much. Arkansas by the way is telling -- Blanche Lincoln was a goner but Obama et. al. felt it necessary to help her int he primary. He didn't do that for the Democrat running against independent Lincoln Chafee, did he? The value of new blood was shown in Pennsylvania, where the Sestak lost in a close race. I doubt Specter, the tired old Republican turned Democrat insider would have made it that close. So it goes.
[A bit more: Bad times and discontent led to the voter rebellion with the basically conservative, moderate at best, approach of many Democrats -- again the Senate helped here -- part of the mix. But, we don't live in the 1930s or 1960s. A President didn't just die with a legislative lion in power. There aren't bread lines in the streets. Vietnam led to tens of thousands of deaths, not thousands (Americans that is). So, structural change IS needed, but the Declaration of Independence underlines it is not quite in our blood to risk it, even if we don't like the current reality. I'll stop there. Post mortems now and in the future will be tedious. And, this has probably started to sound that way.]
These times require legislation. We got some but apparently a bad economy that the Dems did some -- if not enough (whatever that is) -- to help requires that we kick out some good people (and dweebs) and bring back into power a party who has not shown itself to be an opposition worth respecting. I realize it is hard for me to look at them with a neutral eye since I oppose what they stand for, but this conclusion did not come haphazardly. It has been years in the making. I'll try to be kind here. I reckon that there are some -- as back in 1996 -- in the new class that actually are serious about change. This includes even a few from NY, even though the Democrats as a whole did pretty well here, down to our two senators.
Under the same leadership of tools like Eric Cantor. Enjoy your mandate. Will the Dems in the Senate suddenly decide that blocking legislation passed by the House would be anti-democratic? Would be a good time for filibuster reform -- Republicans might see it as a way to ease their legislation! And, it took a couple close calls and Tea Party voters going too far for the Dems to retain the Senate. I'd gladly trade two of them for Feingold and Sestak, the two hardest blows, probably worse than Kennedy dying and being replaced by Scott Brown. Obama's seat going to a Republican didn't help. At least, Delaware is safe. And, Connecticut.
Still, there's this. One more depressing act of voters lashing out. Just one bit of bad news on the local front.
Asked shortly after Obama's 2008 victory (in an election in which the Democrats' majority in the House expanded to 255 seats) what she wanted to achieve in the next two years, Pelosi identified "growing the economy, expanding healthcare, ending dependence on foreign oil and ending the war in Iraq" as her priorities. And she largely delivered.Some will be happy because we have divided government though (damn if this wasn't probably familiar to many) the filibuster in effect made that so repeatedly before the election of lots of traditional Republicans, including those who screwed things up a few years back, while newcomer career navy vets (Sestak), independent reformers (Feingold) and gadflies who join with the less asshole R. Paul to targeted the FED (Alan Grayson) lose out to a bunch of losers, including yet another Republican lifer.
The story of the first half of Obama's first term, let's not forget, is one of partial legislative triumph. On issue after issue, Pelosi's House produced for the president. The stimulus was larger before the Senate watered it down. Cap-and-trade made it through the House, before dying in the Senate. A stronger healthcare reform package -- one with a public insurance option -- was pushed through the House, only to be stripped down by the Senate. Ditto for Wall Street reform. And let's not forget the lower-profile legislation, on fair pay, student loan reform, cash-for-clunkers, and credit card reform, that made it through both chambers. The 111th Congress will be remembered for the way it ended, with a seismic Democratic defeat, but that doesn't change the fact that it was one of the most productive -- ever.
The way we do things doesn't help. Republican regulars vote for opposition to the Democrats on Election Day. There was a few surprises in the Republican primaries, some costing them actually, but not too many. So, discontent often meant voting for old timers. That is one thing that depresses me. A balanced dissent, but that is asking too much, would kick out Republican old timers too. Again, that happened a few times -- Murkowski got a second chance it looks like -- but not much. Arkansas by the way is telling -- Blanche Lincoln was a goner but Obama et. al. felt it necessary to help her int he primary. He didn't do that for the Democrat running against independent Lincoln Chafee, did he? The value of new blood was shown in Pennsylvania, where the Sestak lost in a close race. I doubt Specter, the tired old Republican turned Democrat insider would have made it that close. So it goes.
[A bit more: Bad times and discontent led to the voter rebellion with the basically conservative, moderate at best, approach of many Democrats -- again the Senate helped here -- part of the mix. But, we don't live in the 1930s or 1960s. A President didn't just die with a legislative lion in power. There aren't bread lines in the streets. Vietnam led to tens of thousands of deaths, not thousands (Americans that is). So, structural change IS needed, but the Declaration of Independence underlines it is not quite in our blood to risk it, even if we don't like the current reality. I'll stop there. Post mortems now and in the future will be tedious. And, this has probably started to sound that way.]
These times require legislation. We got some but apparently a bad economy that the Dems did some -- if not enough (whatever that is) -- to help requires that we kick out some good people (and dweebs) and bring back into power a party who has not shown itself to be an opposition worth respecting. I realize it is hard for me to look at them with a neutral eye since I oppose what they stand for, but this conclusion did not come haphazardly. It has been years in the making. I'll try to be kind here. I reckon that there are some -- as back in 1996 -- in the new class that actually are serious about change. This includes even a few from NY, even though the Democrats as a whole did pretty well here, down to our two senators.
Under the same leadership of tools like Eric Cantor. Enjoy your mandate. Will the Dems in the Senate suddenly decide that blocking legislation passed by the House would be anti-democratic? Would be a good time for filibuster reform -- Republicans might see it as a way to ease their legislation! And, it took a couple close calls and Tea Party voters going too far for the Dems to retain the Senate. I'd gladly trade two of them for Feingold and Sestak, the two hardest blows, probably worse than Kennedy dying and being replaced by Scott Brown. Obama's seat going to a Republican didn't help. At least, Delaware is safe. And, Connecticut.
Still, there's this. One more depressing act of voters lashing out. Just one bit of bad news on the local front.