… if you control just one of those three branches of government, you can’t hijack the entire system and say I’m going to blow the country up unless you listen to me.

[The Tea Party has] only won one election to one house once.

…

I think they don’t understand the workings of democracy. They have not been elected as dictators of the United States. They have been elected to one house in one branch of the American government. The only way you can translate your wishes into public policy in America is if you can convince your branch and the other one, the Senate and the White House, to go along with it.

If you can’t, you’ve got to figure out amongst yourself what you can agree on. This is why it is fundamentally anti-democratic –”counterconstitutional” in the words of Charles Krauthammer – to be trying to do this. It’s just an extraordinary act of hostage-taking on the part of the Tea Party. It is holding the country hostage.

Completely agree … although I’m having a hard time seeing this as something besides a failure of leadership by Obama. I think Boehner, in his heart of hearts, probably even feels he failed as a leader this summer.

The only reason why this worked for the Tea Party Caucus (which actually accounts for less than 15% of one body of Congress) is that our country’s leadership didn’t have the courage to make it impossible for them to do this by refusing to cooperate with them … by making it clear that no Tea Party item on the Tea Party agenda would see the light of day again if they dared do this to the country. Or some other tactic that professional negotiators can come up with. You just can’t let a vocal minority railroad you like this – whether you’re the Speaker or the POTUS.

Although, it’s entirely possible that this helps Obama’s  re-election chances as it will be something he can campaign on to refute allegations of excessive government spending. I’m not sure this is quite worth “2nd term insurance” for me, but there it is.

via

source: The Telegraph

Yeah, I watched that Jon Stewart/Chris Wallace interview, just like you did.

Yes, it was extremely satisfying to watch Chris Wallace claim that there was no Fox bias and yet is a counter-balance to the liberal bias of the mainstream media. (Aside: how is the number 1 cable news channel not mainstream? I genuinely don’t understand that.)

But here’s the thing … this reminded me that I really don’t want to go through this election cycle thing again. Because I know I’m going to watch it. Probably less than I did during the past few … but enough to get me riled up a few times, I’m sure. There will be some conservative version of Jeremiah Wright that will deliver me to fits of righteous secular indignation.  And I’m sure I will write here about how Obama is being unfairly treated/characterized. I just know it.

But I am not looking forward to it. Because unlike previous elections … I can’t conceive of an outcome that will make me happy. Like any honest left-wing person, I’m thoroughly disappointed with Obama’s first term (although, unlike some extremists, I do think there are some mitigating circumstances). He’s clearly head and shoulders above any other reasonable option … but it’s hard to rationalize where the promised significant and real changes have been enacted. And it’s hard to believe that a second term would hold much more progress. More likely just a self-congratulatory victory lap.

So I feel like following this sort of argument … let alone taking sides in it … is at best a waste of time … at worst feeding into the monster that eats anything true and good about public service.

So now, I’m gonna get sucked into these arguments … without the promise of anything approaching the elation of November 4, 2008.

If a Detroit Muslim put a map on the web w/crosshairs on 20 pols, then 1 of them got shot, where would he b sitting right now? Just asking. (link)

Regardless, a discussion of rhetoric and it’s purpose and effect in political discourse is certainly long overdue. The vitriol that is belched out by the right over a 2% tax increase for people who make a quarter of a million dollars a year should make you cringe and question the person’s perspective and sense of judgment … two significant qualifications for public office. They could end up doing something egregiously foolish … like embarrassing cowboy-ish taunts of “bring ‘em on”. For instance.

As far as people’s criticism of ”politicizing” this tragedy … it’s a fair point, and one I would like to be sympathetic towards … however talking about this aspect of this weekend’s horror feels more proactive than just saying “I feel sorry for the victims and their families.” Who knows. Maybe it’s not … I’ve been wrong before. But I’d like to think it is.

b) The fact that the underlying argument of the Right has a modicum of merit … that it appears that even a supposedly game-changing movement like 2008 doesn’t seem to be able to navigate the ineptitude and brokenness of our national government.

c) The fact that $#*! My Dad Says beats 30 Rock every week in the ratings.

I can’t decide. Both are blowing my mind.

I would like my $15 post-Obama donation back, you spineless pigs. I hope the cheap, plastic mug it got me (which I am sipping from now) doesn’t become an all-too poignant metaphor.

I understand that this Blag stuff is  drawing focus away from what’s important … but how can you let a clearly corrupt man choose a Senator?  If the rule of law demands this (and I’ll concede that it clearly does) … then the law is broken and must be fixed. You could have made it the first order of business in this Congress.  You could have chosen to risk losing the seat to the other side of the aisle. But you didn’t. Spineless.

The Democrats have never been in a stronger position in my adult-life … so if they can’t stand up for something now, when exactly do they plan on doing it?

And if it’s really because you felt uncomfortable turning a black man away from an all-white legislative body … then I feel shame for all of us.

Ugh.