Markos Speaks For Me

October 15th, 2009at 07:13am Posted by Eli

This is kind of like the Senate counterpart to my FDL post about Obama being the Anti-Bush in all the wrong ways:

Bill Frist never had 60 votes. Bill Frist never cared. Republicans ran the Senate as if they owned the place, even when enjoying razor-thin majorities.

Yet when Democrats took the chamber, the first thing Harry Reid did was complain that he couldn’t do anything because he didn’t have 60 votes.

Then voters delivered 59 votes. And Harry Reid whined that he still couldn’t do anything. In fact, nothing would ever get accomplished unless they had 60, and to do that, they had to bring turncoat Joe Lieberman back into the fold, even though he had spent the previous year making common cause with John McCain and Sarah Palin, even speaking at the Republican National Convention in Minnesota. You see, we were told, Joe Lieberman is with us on everything except the war! So we need him for 60, and when we have 60, everyone will get ponies!


[O]nce again, Reid is complaining that he doesn’t have 60 votes, which is why they need to anoint Olympia Snowe as de facto President of the United States. Maybe SHE will get us to 60! But we all know Snowe has no intention of voting for real reform, and yet Reid (with White House backing) continue to let themselves get played. It’s all a farce.


The notion of “leading” is clearly a non-starter for Reid, according to his office. Well, glad Reid’s office has admitted as such. Time for new leadership.

And take special note of this sentence:

Senator Reid is focused on crafting a health care bill that will overcome a Republican filibuster.

Republican filibuster? Democrats have 60 votes. There is no Republican filibuster, just a Democratic one. The problem is Reid’s inability to keep his caucus together. His office can’t even be honest about Reid’s leadership failures. Fucking liars.

I’ll take a Chuck Schumer-run Senate with 57 Democrats (bye bye Reid, Lieberman, and Lincoln) than a Harry Reid-run one with 75 Democrats.

I like that last sentence in particular (as I’ve said in previous posts, losing Harry’s seat wouldn’t be any great loss, since it’s not like we’re using that 60-vote majority anyway, and trading a seat for an effective leader would be a fantastic trade if we could make it).

I would also like to point out that since Harry believes that it’s utterly impossible to discipline his members in any way for voting to filibuster a Democratic bill, then that means progressive senators can vote against cloture on bad bills with no fear of repercussions.  And if Harry does suddenly find his stick to punish them, he’ll have to explain why only progressives have to face consequences for disloyalty, which should be quite fascinating.

Entry Filed under: Democrats,Healthcare,Politics,Wankers

Contact Eli



Most Recent Posts




October 2009
« Sep   Nov »

Thinking Blogger

Pittsburgh Webloggers

Site Meter

View My Stats *