IF A SENATOR SWITCHED PARTIES IN THE WOODS AND NO ONE CARED WOULD IT MAKE A DIFFERENCE?
I've been swamped, crushed, buried, and overwhelmed at work lately. But I have a job, so trust me, I ain't complaining. I'm also a bit numbed by the constant barrage of lies and stupidity of Obama's Crack (-smoking) Economic Team. Add to that living within a couple miles of the United States' swine flu ground zero, and I'm at a bit of a loss to rev up my usual outrage & commentary.
And then along comes the news that Arlen Spector is switching parties! "Yea," the hopeful masses shout, "we is saved!" Apparently the fact that the Dems -- who already have a sizable Senate majority yet have done nothing of consequence except shovel money to the world's largest banks, and send the exhausted troops from Iraq over to Afghanistan -- may now have a non-Constitutionally-significant super-majority of 60 is gonna save us from cynical leadership, cronyism, and incompetence.
Well, count me among those who couldn't give a shit. First of all, note the word "may" above. Unless Al Franken final wins his never-ending election battle against Norm Coleman, it'll be 59. And that also assumes no Dem goes over to the GOP.
It also ignores the fact that because of weak leadership (looking at you, Harry), cynical party policies (looking at you, Barry), and a crew of 59 clumsy, foolish, & self-serving legislators (looking at you, Mo, Curly, & Larry), the Dems haven't been able to accomplish a damn thing.
Why the hell does anyone suddenly assume that because the Dems can defeat the GOPers threatened (but not to my knowledge, never implemented) filibusters, they will? Because Snarlin' Arlen is suddenly on-board they're gonna grow a pair? Now they'll fight? Hmmm.
And most importantly, assuming this exciting super-majority leads to a spate of affirmative legislation, so what? I repeat what I've said over-and-over: it doesn't matter. There's been no substantive change of policy from the last administration to this one, and no change in legislative direction since the election of 2006. And there won't be, whether we have 59 Dem Senators, or 60 or 75 or 100. The follow the money. Their masters. The real policy-makers. And that ain;t us, folks.
Before peole get their panties in a twist, let me say, yes, there are a few subtle distinctions between the parties. Similarly, a rabid crocodile and a polar bear with a bad case of jock itch are different. One will maul you while the other spins around and rends your flesh from your bones. They. Are. Different.
But they're both pretty undesirable outcomes, no? This Arlen Spector switch-a-roo means nothing. Well . . . almost nothing.
Because Spector is up for re-election in 2010. In a country that voted Dem in 2006, and elected a Dem prez in 2008. In a state that went for Obama last November. Perhaps this move does mean something.
(Cross-posted at Agitprop)
And then along comes the news that Arlen Spector is switching parties! "Yea," the hopeful masses shout, "we is saved!" Apparently the fact that the Dems -- who already have a sizable Senate majority yet have done nothing of consequence except shovel money to the world's largest banks, and send the exhausted troops from Iraq over to Afghanistan -- may now have a non-Constitutionally-significant super-majority of 60 is gonna save us from cynical leadership, cronyism, and incompetence.
Well, count me among those who couldn't give a shit. First of all, note the word "may" above. Unless Al Franken final wins his never-ending election battle against Norm Coleman, it'll be 59. And that also assumes no Dem goes over to the GOP.
It also ignores the fact that because of weak leadership (looking at you, Harry), cynical party policies (looking at you, Barry), and a crew of 59 clumsy, foolish, & self-serving legislators (looking at you, Mo, Curly, & Larry), the Dems haven't been able to accomplish a damn thing.
Why the hell does anyone suddenly assume that because the Dems can defeat the GOPers threatened (but not to my knowledge, never implemented) filibusters, they will? Because Snarlin' Arlen is suddenly on-board they're gonna grow a pair? Now they'll fight? Hmmm.
And most importantly, assuming this exciting super-majority leads to a spate of affirmative legislation, so what? I repeat what I've said over-and-over: it doesn't matter. There's been no substantive change of policy from the last administration to this one, and no change in legislative direction since the election of 2006. And there won't be, whether we have 59 Dem Senators, or 60 or 75 or 100. The follow the money. Their masters. The real policy-makers. And that ain;t us, folks.
Before peole get their panties in a twist, let me say, yes, there are a few subtle distinctions between the parties. Similarly, a rabid crocodile and a polar bear with a bad case of jock itch are different. One will maul you while the other spins around and rends your flesh from your bones. They. Are. Different.
But they're both pretty undesirable outcomes, no? This Arlen Spector switch-a-roo means nothing. Well . . . almost nothing.
Because Spector is up for re-election in 2010. In a country that voted Dem in 2006, and elected a Dem prez in 2008. In a state that went for Obama last November. Perhaps this move does mean something.
(Cross-posted at Agitprop)
Labels: Dem Versus GOP Doesn't Matter, Insiders And Oligarchs Versus The American People Does
posted by Mike at 7:24 AM
6 Comments:
It's just a circus sideshow.
It doesn't mean a thing.
So long as our candidates are vetted by the PTB, before we get to vote on them, we can't change a thing.
Would it help if I did a fly by in my personal 747 with fighter jet escort?
But they're both pretty undesirable outcomes, no? This Arlen Spector switch-a-roo means nothing. Well . . . almost nothing.It's obvious that Specter's motives are self-serving. Faced with losing a Republican primary because he is not pure enough of a wingnut, he can safely switch to a Dem in a state that is polling highly Dem. He gets to returm to the Senate this way.
The Dems are acting like this is some victory. I agree with you completely: that 1) the Dems can't get their own shit together well-enough to vote their own "priorities" through; and 2) Specter is NOT a guaranteed yes vote on anything Democratic.
You said it: if Franken wins, even with Specter, it's still only 59. On a good day. With the wind behind it. And Reid not in charge.
Would it help if I did a fly by in my personal 747 with fighter jet escort?It'd at least get a new story into the news.
I'll second what Smitty wrote.
I caught enough of the press conference to hear him reference Lieberman's maneuver in CT (running indy because the state Dems dumped him - rightfully so).
Yeah, it's self-serving. The guy's been there since 1981. Isn't 30 years enough? He's 79. Retire already, guy. Kick back and have a few mai tais and call it a career. What are you worried about? Your pension should be fine and dandy at this point. Get a hobby. I recommend stamp collecting.
Really, Mike? You think there is no substantive change of policy since the Bush admin?
Look, as you know, I am not a democrat, and I think you know that I did not support Obama until well after Clinton conceded in the primaries and even then, only begrudgingly. But, really, I felt like I woke up Jan 21 and the whole world changed. He closed Guantanamo Bay and repealed the Global Gag rule in his first week. Those are real things that make a difference in real lives. And while Paulson's bailout just gave hundreds of billions to banks, no strings, Obama's bailout focuses on people and services. He is trying to engage Iran, rather than start yet another war. Yesterday he was at Notre Dame trying to build bridges with the anti-choice movement, over protesters there. You may not like this administration but i don't see how you can say that he is the same.
Post a Comment
<< Home