>Subject: Re: fightin' Dems
Well, feets, do their stuff! The 'transition' excuse was entirely predictable. "Later" they'll skewer the right wing bastards.
>Yep- they don't actually have control yet- the GOP could filibuster, so a
>filibuster at this point didn't make sense, especially with Zell Miller
>making Jeffords-like noises himself.
What evidence is there that this was Daschle's primary motivation?
And the courts are already pretty far to the right - the Senate ain't going to change that, I predict.
A more 'structural' (therefore more plausible) explanation - being voiced in the mainstream press - is that the whole political regime, Dems included, is skewed way too far to the right of the American mass, and volatility of this sort is the result. It's a skew that damages Dems, as part of the regime, as well. We see this clearly in the increasing one-party State of California, in the context of the fabricated "energy" crisis.
>As far as I am concerned, Daschle deserves an award for maneuvering to
>save the courts from the rightwing.
>
>In the end, it really doesn't matter that much who gets appointed to
>administration positions- they take orders from Bush and will be as
>conservative or moderate as he decides on an issue. It's not like having
>Christie Todd Whitman at EPA makes a damn bit of difference.
Yes, we know already - only a few big shots matter. Not little people like us.
>So the Dem leadership have been smart as far as I'm concerned to save
>their filibusters for judicial nominations, especially since they now may
>be able to kill a lot of the worst in committee.
>
>So go Dems! :)
Yeah, well if I were you, I'd be a little nervous at the prospect of a Democrat ascendency in the US Senate, especially with a weak Republican President in office.
In fact, it would be edifying to put the Demo Senate under a fricking microscope here on LBO, to the soundtrack of Stings' creepy 80's tune. As Doug has begun to do. Make it an historical archive, visit the Thomas site often.
I'd love to be wrong, since gridlock is preferable to reactionary bipartisanship.
But Nathan, dust off your dancin' shoes, because you are likely to have a lot of fancy steppin' ahead of you.
-Brad Mayer Oakland, CA
>Nathan