Thursday, May 21, 2009

Fighting the consequences of elections

Republicans oppose democracy:

NRSC Chairman John Cornyn has said Coleman's challenge could go through federal courts and take "years" to resolve. He also threatened "World War III" if Democrats try to seat Franken prematurely.
Yet there's no hue and cry from the big media, who continue to think bipartisanship is even possible with these anti-election extremists.

Go nuclear on Cornyn. He's asking for it. Do it in such a way as to preserve the traditional prerogatives of the minority - so long as they don't abuse it.

But let Cornyn not make the mistake of believing there's any comity left in the Senate.


Silence DoGood said...

LL "the big media, who continue to think bipartisanship is even possible"

Who could have told the big bad media such a terrible tale that bipartisanship is possible?

You realize that was a MAJOR campaign promise from Obama. Now it is either a lie or he was totally out of touch to say he could do such a thing.

In fact he had biting comments against HRClinton and others that they would be mired down in the exact partisan situation he has now.

I find that zealots have a frighteningly short and selective memory. You know we can see past news articles on the internet right?

lovable liberal said...

You Greens are so obsessed with your single goal that you can't see how off-putting you are. And you imagine that you're persuading people at the same time. You guys will never understand how important broad consensus is - because that means you won't get your heart's every idiosyncratic desire. The Ron Paulists are similarly purist.

So I guess you're calling me a zealot. Whatever... I just consider the source.

Obama, for his part, has tried outreach, but the Republicans continue to cling to a meaning of bipartisanship that means Democrats doing what the Republicans want, and that's just not the right course.

Silence DoGood said...

LL: "but the Republicans...." Yeah the same thing happened when Clinton attempted her health reforms. The difference was that Obama blasted her for it, Repugs or not. Now we get to see if he can do what he promised.

If I promise to stop the rain and it does not stop it is not the weather's fault. I am deluding people with a hopeless promise.

More telling is the fact that a broken promise (don't remember how many we are up to) doesn't bother you. You have blanked it out apparently. May I suggest a job in the Ministry of Truth (from "1984" - I highly recommend it to you even though you will find it "off-putting")

My "idiosyncratic desire" for today is: Obama - keep your promises, stop pandering to corporate pigs, really end torture, really bring the troops home. Crazy, I know.

lovable liberal said...

Your pox-on-both-their-houses false equivalence is immature bullshit. Obama is not perfect, no doubt about that. But politics is the art of compromise, and it doesn't give you your heart's every desire unless you're dictator. Democracy inevitably results in half a loaf. You're too purist to understand that.

I led a meeting for my state rep last night, and she heard some pretty strong (and adverse) commentary on her vote for the Massachusetts sales tax instead of the gas tax. Yes, she acknowledged, the choices she faced weren't a great set of choices, but she was comfortable with her decision that the best shot she had to stanch the bleeding budget and save the programs that everyone in the room cares about was to vote for the sales tax instead of the gasoline tax she supported during the campaign.

Does that make her a craven promise-breaker? Uh, quite the contrary. It means she evaluated the proposals before her and chose the one that matched her clear convictions. The gas tax was dead anyway with only 43 votes in a chamber of 160.

The truth about you, SDG: You'd rather snipe from on high than roll your sleeves up and get the best you can. This is typical of Greens and the reason I despise your approach to politics. I'll take a compromising Democrat any day over your cavils.

Your concern trolling about a Minitru job is fatuous bullshit. I think you're projecting. As if I haven't read 1984, when somehow I still manage to refer to it constantly.

Silence DoGood said...

I have no problem with compromise.

I have a problem with lying and breaking promises as if they do not matter.

I respectfully disagree with your lack of distinction between the two.

I hold out hope that a politician can both not-lie and compromise.

lovable liberal said...

Why use 'respectfully' as a meaningless intensive when there are so many more emphatic choices?

Silence DoGood said...

I always know when you cannot address my arguments.

You resort to prep-school grammar corrections.

lovable liberal said...

It's not your grammar I object to; it's your insincerity.

You went to prep school? I sure didn't.

Addressing your arguments gets pretty tiresome. Don't expect me to keep repeating myself. I have lots of better uses for my time. There's some paint somewhere I need to watch dry.