Reid simply CANNOT REMAIN as Senate leader

[FourScore]

for the democratic party any longer!!!

What the HELL was he thinking when he led the party into unanimous consent on a few amendments that didn't have a snowballs chance in hell of passing???

Why the f*** didn't the dems filibuster this bill? I know, I know...it was all for show anyway
(see http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/9/28/193836/545)
but I wanted, no...not wanted...I NEEDED to see a different show from my party!!!

I needed some spine. I needed a fight. I needed a real "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" moment. That's what I needed. I think that's what this country needed. What is the message we just sent to the world anyway? "Don't worry folks, it's all politics as usual, only this time we're gonna' stomp all over our forefathers and our Constitution in the process. We'll just give George another win...don't wanna' look weak on terror now...no sirree not with elections just days away..."

WELL...F***!!! THAT!!!! SHIT!!!

Everyone is so damn sure the Supreme Court will overturn this decision. Well, what if they don't? And even if they do, what the f*** is all this kabuki theater about anyway other than to give Georgie-Boy another big win right before an election!!! All I can say: I can't imagine the democrats will win any elections anytime soon...They don't know how.

CHUCK Reid NOW!

[BuyingThyme]

1. We have to keep him until after the elections.

[tsuki]

2. They are keeping their powder dry. nt

[Julius Civitatus]

9. For when??? When they march us all to reeducation camps?

They've been keeping their powder dry for six fucking years!!!!

They lost me, and I bet they lost lots of supporters as well.

[MannyGoldstein]

11. Yes, Well Done

We'll be needing that powder for issues that are of fundamental importance. Like, um, ... hell, I need a beer.

[JCMach1]

50. We can see where that strategy has gotten us the past

6 years!!!

[autorank]

77. They kept their powder dry for...

...the Patriot Act,
...the Iraq war resolution,
...the innumerable tax cuts,
...Alito
...Roberts
...the Help America Vote Act (author of our nightmarish voting system)
...the Bankruptcy bill,
...the mercury in your stream and other environmental horrors bill,
...torture ratification legislation

All of which makes me wonder, is there any powder?

I'm a Democrat and I'm looking forward Al Gore or Wes Clark as our nominee and to a total house
cleaning of party leadership in both houses.

Dean, the Congressional Black Caucus and other hard core House Dems, and Byrd and some elders in
the Senate are the only folks who have joined the battle. Remember that. It's pertinent history.

[creeksneakers2]

3. Most Dems did show spine

Voting against torture is a very risky vote politically. 35 of 44 voted against torture. Even better counts on some of the other bills.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

7. Why the hell is it risky?

[creeksneakers2]

18. Because too many Americans don't think

Democrats who voted against these bills will face commercials that say they are more concerned with terrorist rights, blah blah blah. Almost half of those watching the ads will buy into them.

[FourScore]

21. And the dems could have run ads

on how the Republicans are abolishing constitutional rights.

[Frazzled Educator]

56. And then the Republicans will counter by saying that

"The Constitution is not a suicide pact. Trust me. . .our arguments are based in logic and intelligence. Theirs are based on the platitude and the sound byte.

And we over-estimate the intelligence of the Average American.

Right now, it's government for assholes, of assholes and by assholes.

There is no room for logical debate. Black and White is all most Americans know.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

31. Why are the Republicans the only ones who get to shape the popular views

of these issues?

Why the hell can't the Dems get an effective ad campaign on something simple as no torture?

Show what it looks like when someone is getting waterboarded.

Jesus, how hard could it be?

[PassingFair]

39. DAMN STRAIGHT!

It's not hard. Clinton sasses back in ONE INTERVIEW and the
nation sits up and takes notice.

Our country is CRYING for leadership! We get DLC WIMPS instead.
CORPORATE SELL-OUTS EVERYTIME!

Since when is a filibuster HEROIC?

SPEAKING is HEROIC?

What have we BECOME?

The nation is looking for a voice. The dems are corrupted and divided.

The "new democrats" are voting for torture and warrantless wiretapping.

We are now being exhorted to vote for them and to "keep our powder dry".

For what?

[Occulus]

80. That assumes the Dems will say nothing about those ads

Oh, WAIT.......

[mhatrw]

83. How do you know it's a terrorist unless the accused can SEE a judge?

This isn't about whether we are or are not too squeamish to waterboard terrorists, folks. Everybody hates terrorists. Nobody wants to coddle them. Sure, many of us don't think torture should ever be legal, for many reasons including the potential for even worse abuses than those that we've already seen at Abu Ghraib and the fact that the information gleaned from this sort of questioning is almost never reliable. But the torture aspects of this bill are no more than the sensationalistic cover story for a wide ranging assault on the fundamental rights of US citizens (as well as all other human beings in the world).

This is about the same people who told us the best way to fight terrorism was to start a war that had nothing to do with it now telling us that we all have to give up our basic right to a fair and speedy trial at the whim of our monarchical executive. This bill reverses over 790 years of Anglo Saxon legal tradition starting with the Magna Carta and extending through our revered Constitution and Bill of Rights.

[WildEyedLiberal]

24. Because a lot of Americans aren't like you and me.

I've heard AD NAUSEUM from all sorts of people I know in the "real world" that "they all want to kill us, so we can't fight fair" and "what if torturing the 9/11 hijackers would have saved 3000 lives, would you be for it then?" On and on.

Yes, those rationalizations are evil. Yes, these are the same people who had they been born 60 years earlier and in a different country would have thought it was A-OK to ship Jews off to camps. BUT as evil as that is, they vote. And any Dem willing to take a stand for CONSCIENCE and MORALITY is taking a big risk. It is sad, but it is true.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

33. They need to take that stand, and if the country truly wants torture,

then they can vote for it.

[WildEyedLiberal]

37. I agree

But it IS a brave stand to make, so I applaud the 34 Senators of conscience who opposed torture and supported the Constitution today.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

52. But the job of LEADERSHIP is to try twist arms, cajole, do whatever it

takes to swing votes.

I don't get the feeling that was really done at all in this case, and I think this principle is not only much more important than social security, Medicare and even the IWR, it's much SIMPLER!!!!!

[WildEyedLiberal]

53. I don't disagree -

I've been infuriated at Harry Reid all day. But his poor leadership doesn't take away from the Dems who chose to vote no, IMO.

[Moochy]

36. The poster like pro-torture dems, has a very low opinion of Americans

Plain and simple. he /she thinks that by and large they are racist xeonophobes who support torture despite getting by 200+ years without it.

Selling us short?

[mhatrw]

82. Torture isn't half of what's wrong with this bill!

This isn't about whether we are or are not too squeamish to waterboard terrorists, folks. Everybody hates terrorists. Nobody wants to coddle them. Sure, many of us don't think torture should ever be legal, for many reasons including the potential for even worse abuses than those that we've already seen at Abu Ghraib and the fact that the information gleaned from this sort of questioning is almost never reliable. But the torture aspects of this bill are no more than the sensationalistic cover story for a wide ranging assault on the fundamental rights of US citizens (as well as all other human beings in the world).

This is about the same people who told us the best way to fight terrorism was to start a war that had nothing to do with it now telling us that we all have to give up our basic right to a fair and speedy trial at the whim of our monarchical executive. This bill reverses over 790 years of Anglo Saxon legal tradition starting with the Magna Carta and extending through our revered Constitution and Bill of Rights.

[havocmom]

4. Just how much can the minority do - in real terms?

[FourScore]

17. With the polls showing a 25% approval rating

for Congress, they may have tried going against the majority! Maybe rally the base a little...

[havocmom]

20. They can't get squat on the floor. They're the minority.

Best they can do is try to dilute some of the crap that gets to the floor. THEY CAN TRY, which they did. But since they don't have the numbers, they will fail at just about everything.

That's the problem with being the minority party, you don't get much say at all, you don't have enough voice.

[FourScore]

46. It's called a filibuster.

[havocmom]

51. Run for the Senate and do it yourself

You seem pretty confident you know all it takes to make it all work. I would love such a Senator myself. Sadly, I am stuck with a mortal human as Senator.

[mhatrw]

84. FILIBUSTER! n/t

[stepnw1f]

5. He Goes When We Say He Goes

Altogether.... first we win back the House and maybe the Senate. Then we start cleaning house by grabbing these piss-ants by the balls and making them respect "We the People" and our Constitution. The constitution is not a political football, and anyone playing with it so, should be removed from office. But first things first....

[Kelvin Mace]

10. The Vichy Dems who voted for torture

just lost quite a few votes. Rather than help them ge re-elected, their vote just handed victory to the GOP.

[w4rma]

49. I doubt LIEberman or Carper care which party controls Congress. (nt)

[xxqqqzme]

6. the rethugs have the elections rigged

so we will almost get a majority. The races that are runaway, lopsided to the Dems will go that way; the races that the corporate media have decided are are to close to call will go rethug and all will be good in the nation. I suspect this is what will happen and if it is as I suspect, I am leaving the country - I know when I'm not wanted anymore.

[Julius Civitatus]

8. Democrats just lost November today

I am extremely disappointed at today's events. This marks an uphill battle for November, with the Republicans winning another battle on destroying the constitution, and the Democrats unable to fight back or rally their own to a decent filibuster.

Let me see the score since 1999....

Rove 473 - Democrats 0

[FourScore]

13. EXACTLY!!

I don't need all this other enabling crap. The dems should have fought this one! Yeah, we'll keep Reid. But he'll go after we LOSE the elections in November (not win them), cause this is no way to win. And that's a brutal fact! Beautiful speeches don't mean SHIT to most Americans. They're only listening to CNN and Katie Couric out there in the real world. So if you wanna' reach Americans, then you've gotta' do it with a VOICE? You know the one: THE STRONG UNIFIED PARTY VOICE OF DISSENTION!!!!Remember what that was like?

On the other hand, why bother -- the democrats would've only been using that voice to defend the American Constitution. Defending the war on terror is so much better!:sarcasm:

[TankLV]

26. Yep - I'm afraid you're right...

God help us all.

I will vote Democratic this time around, too, just like all the other times since 1976.

But if we don't win and if we win and things don't change, I'm officially leaving the Dem party and becomming and independant.

The Dem party is far becomming further removed with each passing day in representing my interests anymore.

Keeping that powder dry...

Democracy died - with a wimper - today...

A nation of kings and a nation of torturers...

[leftchick]

30. exactly right

I have NO DESIRE TO VOTE DEMOCRAT after this shameful vote. They will never get it. They are far too compromised.

[brentspeak]

41. Bye. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

[brentspeak]

40. In other words, you're wasting both ours' and your own time being here

The rest of us who aren't quitters have work to do. You can thank us after the law is emasculated or even repealed under a Democratic-controlled Congress in Febuary or March.

[Julius Civitatus]

43. At this pace? With these methods? I doubt it

And you are nobody to invite me "leave". Get over yourself.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TheFarseer]

14. Harry Reid is a mixed bag

I think he is playing politics and picking his battles, which is not all bad. I think (and I know I might get flamed for this) that this is a loser issue for us. Sometimes I can't see the logic on which battles he picks, but hey, not everyone has to agree with me!

[FourScore]

19. Okay. I could buy that

if I could think of a battle they DID pick. Hmm. Let's see about this..Alito? No, gave into that. Tax cuts? Nope, didn't put much fight up there...War resolution? Noooo...Patriot Act, mmm...nope, no fight. Umm, which fights are you talking about? I'm missing them somehow.

[TheFarseer]

29. Hmmmmm, I have only two examples

they stood up (kind of) for the right to filibuster and they stood up to Social Security privatization. There's got to be more, right?

[FourScore]

38. I can't think of any.

And with all due respect (and I really mean it), I find those examples pretty weak.

[Art_from_Ark]

79. They might have stood up for the right to filibuster

but it increasingly seems like that right is just some sparkly trinket to decorate the shelf with.

[TankLV]

28. Yeah - another in a long line of "loser issues"...

Fuck principles...

Fuck fighting for what is right, and even risk LOSING for what is right...

It's a "loser issue" - might as well lie low and hide...

Simply sickening...

[walldude]

15. I'm on the fence about Reid, he has made some clever moves

and you can't blame him for not having the votes to filibuster. Blame these folks:
The dishonorable list of Democrats voting for the bill: Carper (Del.), Johnson (S.D.), Landrieu (La.), Lautenberg (N.J.), Lieberman (Conn.), Menendez (N.J), Nelson (Fla.), Nelson (Neb.), Pryor (Ark.), Rockefeller (W. Va.), Salazar (Co.), Stabenow (Mich).

[Julius Civitatus]

16. Well, yes, that's true

But Reid should have whipped THOSE into voting against this bill. Actually, more Democrats voted for this atrocity than I thought would dare to do so. I expected three (Lieberman, Landrieu, Salazar). I didn't expect TWELVE of them! TWELVE!!!!

[Tarheel_Dem]

44. okay...when you say "whip", you mean something

along the lines of what Tom Delay was reputed for? I will agree with you that I wish that Sen Reid had been more persuasive in his role as Minority Leader, but at the end of the day...If the votes aren't there, they just aren't there. While we can pontificate all day long about what Dems should or shouldn't do, it comes down to constituencies, and let's face it, we have no idea what pro or con arguments these 12 people heard from their respective constituents. JMHO.

[FourScore]

42. Somebody, please tell me,

WHAT clever moves???

And about those twelve democratic deserters...That's exactly what I am talking about...Certainly he could've gotten them to stand unified with their party AGAINST torture and to DEFEND habeus corpus!!! And if he can't, then we need a new leader.

[sandnsea]

22. TALKING POINTS

If anybody cares to do something constructive and begin using them:

"By mostly party-line votes, the Senate rejected Democratic efforts to limit the bill to five years, to require frequent reports from the administration on the CIA's interrogations and to add a list of forbidden interrogation techniques."


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2250786&mesg_id=2250786

[FourScore]

32. That's how Kerry lost.

It's too long to be a sound bite...

The Republicans aided Bin Laden today by taking away our freedoms! THAT's a soundbite and the truth.

[sandnsea]

34. Just say it

That's all that matters. Say that instead of beating up Democrats - THAT would be a key difference in what Democrats did to John Kerry.

[MrCoffee]

23. HEAR HEAR!!!!

Reid rolled over for what? For 5 amendments and some meaningless words. I'm sure a copy of today's Congressional Record will be of comfort to those held without charges, without an opportunity to examine the "evidence" that caused their detention, and without recourse.

[Pachamama]

25. Russ Feingold - Future Senate Majority Leader n/t

:kick:

[FourScore]

27. I like the sound of future President Feingold better.

[Pachamama]

35. I know...but he might be Majority leader for 2 years first....

:hi:

[Vidar]

45. Absolutely, if they want a real leader.

[Drewskie]

48. He would be ok

I sorta like Dorgan as well.

[Tatiana]

47. Filibustering was a risk, but I think Reid should have gone for it.

I think with a little momentum, the Dems could have easily sustained a filibuster and given us enough time and room to kill the bill. I'm disappointed in him. Not surprised, but disappointed. The next Dem (majority) leader needs to be from a liberal state.

[KharmaTrain]

54. A Fillibuster Would Have Been A Disaster

First, you need the 60 votes...that means 12 have to cross over and then they have the stay there. The moment the one breaks rank, the fillibuster can be stopped and then what?

I was hoping there were ways to bottle up this crap in committee, but as other have noted, being in the minority, Reid is in no position to stop this sham legislation from coming to the floor...and thanks to Judas McCain, Warner & Huckelberry, the votes were there for passage.

Seems like plenty of people around here were asleep in civics class and how a bill is written and passed. Frist and DeLay (Hastert is a sockpuppet) skewed the rules in both Houses that not only have ignored Democratic motions and manuevers, but have tried to use them against Democrats for their own political gain.

A fillibuster would have been blown out of proportions by the corporate media of Democrats being "against fighting terror" and millions of RNC, RNCC and RSCC money is ready to flow into tight races all around the country to slime and portray "vulnerable" candidates as being weak.

Now, we have Repugnicans on record...who supported this torture and our game should be to force them to constantly explain this vote over and over again until election day.

Reid has few options...and do you really want to rely on a Libermann at this date to support a fillibuster. Yeah, right.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

55. I thought you need 40 votes?

[Tarheel_Dem]

57. Thanks for the civics lesson Kharmatrain.....

I think some here just wanted a "floorshow" that would have yielded nothing, and would have left Dems with egg on their faces less than 2 months from a mid-term. Noone on this thread supports torture, or at least I hope not, but when the majority party continues to vote along party lines, what's the remedy for the minority party?

[Moochy]

59. The Remedy: Voting on Party Lines!!

Your answer was right in your post! Cheers! again sorry for misinterpreting your views as pro-torture, since you have made it abundantly clear you think those yes votes were a mistake.

[KharmaTrain]

66. It'd Be A Losing Floor Show

Remember when Gnewt Gingrich tried to shut down the Government and blame it on Clinton? That backfired bigtime on him.

I was very much in favor of a showdown during the ScAlito hearings, but learned how difficult the rules have been stacked up against the minority by Frist & DeLay and that prolonging any fillibuster would be difficult at best. Just think of the coporate media howling that would go on and that the Democrats would be painted as obstructionist right on the verge of an important election.

The real question I ponder is if the Democrats do retake the House or Senate, is it payback time?

[FourScore]

67. Yeah this strategy

of caving into fears of what the corporate media would say and do has worked so well for us so far...:sarcasm:

[KharmaTrain]

71. Like They've Helped Us?

This is a demonstration of the golden rule...those who have the gold, make the rules. Give the Democrats control of the House and lets see how the corporate media attempts to portray things.

The Repugnicans are deserate for a fight on "their turf"...and to wedge Democrats. The corporate media would be more than happy to assist in this effort. Why give them that chance.

This election should be on how this regime has mis-managed this ugly war and its draconian measures that have made us less safe. Now we have Repugnicans on record and now let's hit the campaign trali and bash the shit out of these hypocrites with their corruption and ineptness. This now clears the field.

I have posted endlessly here for years about the corporate media games...the first step in forcing some accountability in that area is to have a power base that the Democrats current don't. If you're wanna change things, getting the Repugnicans out of power is the first critical step...then the corporate media will follow.

[FourScore]

58. It takes 41 to filibuster and 60 to end it.

[Tarheel_Dem]

61. can you or kharma provide a link for these senate rules?

n/t

[FourScore]

64. On the Alito nomination:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/01/28/an_uphill_battle_for_filibuster_votes/

"But high-ranking Senate aides said the best Kerry and Kennedy can hope for is to persuade 25 or 30 Democrats to sign on -- well short of the 41 votes they need to lock in unlimited Senate debate and kill the nomination...Under Senate rules, 60 votes are needed to end a filibuster and allow a final vote on a nominee."

Otherwise the minority party could never filibuster. Clearly a majority party has no need to filibuster themselves. To filibuster is the minority party's only recourse against eggregious legislation. Such as was passed today...

[KharmaTrain]

63. Not If Frist Pulled The "Nuclear Option"

How soon we forget about that one. He could have just dropped the dime and then limited any debate...ramming this thing through without anyone having any say.

A fillibuster might have slowed this travesty, but it wouldn't have stopped it under the current "rules". What this vote does now is puts on record whose for torture and whose against. I was hoping Reid could run out the clock here with other parlimentary motions, but I suspect he had few options.

Again, holding the votes on a fillibuster is easier said than done. Be assured that the corporate media would be ready to tar Democrats as "shutting down the government", preventing money and support from getting to the troops and preventing us from "winning the war". The scrutiny would have gotten more intense as the right wing hate machine would really crank up, as we had just played right into their hands...as Democrats being obstructionists and having "no ideas". Instead we now put the screws to those screws. Every Repugnican who voted for this bill should now be constantly asked "how do you feel about voting to destroy the Constitution?" Democrats need to wedge Repugnicans, not the other way around.

Peace...

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

65. If we are totally helpless against the RW noise machine, then why do

anything at all? Seriously?

[KharmaTrain]

68. Guess We All Should Get Out The Purple Nikes Then?

Sadly, it's cause we don't have the money and weapons that controlling the Senate and House bring. It's controlling those branches where the Repugnicans power has flowed from. Our biggest nightmares happened after they captured the House in '94. We've only begun to find our voices and means to communicate with one another and to speak on a voice that is starting to be heard. We're a decade behind and to expect things to change fast is asking a lot. The Progressive movement has come a long way in the past couple years and I see better days ahead...but right now you have to deal with the mess that's out there and the cards you're dealt.

I'm in a district with a Congresscritter who voted for the torture bill. Am I happy about that vote? Hell NO!! I've expressed my dismay with her campaign, but I'm still going to work for her re-election and vote for her in November as I know this district and how a "yes" vote would have been used by her opposition to paint her as being "weak on terrorism"...an issue that polls enough in this "purple" district that it could mean her keeping this seat or losing it to a former intern for Tom DeLay and Dennis Hastert.

Now, AFTER Nov. 8th, all bets are off here. Should the Democrats regain control of the House, I expect to see a different voting record as now it will be our people setting the agenda and have the votes to move things forward or put the brakes on this regime. Now if a better Progressive candidate comes along in this district in 2008 and this seat.

Right now with no levers of power, we are have few options...except for one big one. To get as many of our people to the polls on Nov. 7th and use this vote as an example of how out of control this regime and its rubber stamp toadies have become. For once I'd love to turn lemons into lemonaide.

Cheers...

[Bozita]

60. Michigan's Joe Lieberwoman: Debbie Stabenow, the #2 of the Senate Dems

Yes on the bankruptcy bill?

Yes on this terror bill?

NO on Stabenow in any kind of leadership position.

What a fucking leader!

[FourScore]

62. Check this out

for those who didn't think it was worth filibustering. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2251939

[enigmacat]

69. Anyone else tired of soapbox Dems talking down to anyone who is fed up?

I am. Let's face it, the soapbox Dem argument is, here at DU, that the Dems are strategizing, and biding their time to enact some complex plan to retake power. Most of our Dems in politics are spineless, and I am tired of it. Sick and tired. At least the Rethugs stick together. Our Dems in Name only, can't act fast enough to attack each other, and sell each other out: Lieberman springs to mind. But, there are others.
I respect everyone's right to their own opinion, so I think it is even more unfair that some people here at DU like to throw out their same old boring, sanctimonius commentary about how "just wait and see, when we take back power..." or the other pathetic statement, when some people get so fed up that they post that they are thinking about moving out of the country, the soapbox Dems here come out with "Good riddance." SNORE.
I am literally broken hearted, and broken spirited by events that have been happening. I can barely believe what is happening. The saddest thing is, I know that I can not trust my Dem leaders in Congress.
I don't have an answer to the ultimate question: What should we do? But, I think the first step is stop burying our heads in the sand, and repeating the same old mantra, "some day, some day"; and to realize that the Dem party of JFK, and Clinton is not the party we have today.

[FourScore]

70. Exactly.

Look at Bill Clinton and his interview with Chris Wallace last week. He knew going into that interview that he was going to have to put up a fight. And fight he did. It brought up all kinds of questions about not only the medias performance, but GWB's performance on this "fight against terror" as well. The media talked about it all week. Some tried to trash Clinton, but the man still came out on top. One commentator said that he thought BC was trying to show the democrats what a fight is supposed to look like. They didn't learn much from it though IMO.

[Moochy]

72. Soapbox dems talking down

Well said!! :yourock:

like maybe these threads?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2250786

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2252005

[bbgrunt]

73. i agree completely. I feel like there is a death in the family

and all these pollyannas keep repeating the stages of grief and trying to convince us that if we just put our minds to it, we can resurrect the departed.

[diamidue]

74. The Dems have squandered dozens of opportunities

to take a stand and each time, when they backed down, we are told they were "keeping their powder dry". I say "speak out". At least Americans would know where Democrats stand. If they decide not to vote for Dems, then they will have chosen to vote for torturers and warmongerers & if that is what America wants, so be it. But we have to offer a choice, for God's sake. We have to stand up for what is right. Our children are watching.

[Tarheel_Dem]

75. and some of us get tired of the constant handwringing....

and circular firing squads....While I don't disagree with some of your sentiments, the fact is Dems don't chair a single committee in either house right now. Dems don't control what gets brought to floor for a vote. For all the idealistic talk of principles from the "purists", the fact remains that some dems are locked in life & death struggles to hold onto their seats against a reported $60m GOP warchest. Can you imagine the ads?

I'm sure, unless you've been hiding under a rock for the past six years, you know the corporate MSM is not a friend of the Democratic party. If you're a fan of the Sunday morning talk shows, how often do you see a progressive Democrat on the panel?

It's been suggested in this thread that Dems run ads to get their message out, but that costs money, and let's face it...we are not the party of the fatcats. We're always going to have challenges, being the minority party, I just think that we could sometimes remove the rose-colored glasses and be a little more practical.

When/If Democrats regain control of Congress, and can influence the agenda, and we still see no significant changes, then we'll all have a reason to complain. But I say after 12 years of Repub rule, it's time to give the Dems a chance.

[diamidue]

78. True, but how did the Republicans gain all that power?

Was not it in part because of the weakness of the Democrats?

Our leadership has been inept, for the most part, for years. If they can't stand up for something now, when it counts, what makes you so sure they are capable of standing up after November? You have a lot more faith in these politicians than I do. I hope, for the sake of this country, that you are right.

[Tarheel_Dem]

81. Answer:

"Our leadership has been inept, for the most part, for years. If they can't stand up for something now, when it counts, what makes you so sure they are capable of standing up after November?"

I'm not, and neither are you. I don't have a crystal ball, but I think Dem leadership in one or both houses would be one helluva start to putting the brakes on this administration before the rest of the constitution goes up in smoke. Wouldn't you agree, or do you have an alternative?

:edited for spelling

[oasis]

76. "Nothing succeeds like success". After a Dem sweep of congress in Nov.

Reid'll likely remain in the top spot.

[maddezmom]

85. locking