Well, it's pretty easy, when the news industry is filled with people making over $500,000 a year in salary. They have a vested interest in making sure the wealthy don't get taxed, and they have little interest in spending for the poor and middle class.

In general, Democrats want to govern. They want responsibility.

Your evidence of this?

Republicans suck.

Screwing over the country has been a Republican speciality for at 30 years now. Ford was the last Republican President who cared a wit about actually governing.

The problem is Democrats keep playing like Republicans care. That keep assuming their is some room to compromise. At some point they have to grow spines and just bitch slap the bastards. Make them filibuster. Make them take ownership of their obstructionism rather than allowing them to snipe with impunity from the sidelines.

Republicans are good at playing the infamous "heads I win, tails you lose" game.... why? Because if you think government is the problem, then you win in both cases:

1. Repubs in power -> if gov't is the problem, fine, make it corrupt and prove that, uh, yes, gov is the problem, duh! and of course, reward your friends and punish your enemies

2. Repubs out of power -> if gov't isn't the problem, then you do your best to cause problems for anyone who believes gov't can solve problems, i.e. sabotage, amend, hold, blame,filibuster,etc.

easy, as long as you think it's all a game, but if you don't, like you think the world should really get better then you're not going to get anywhere as a republican....

It's pretty extraordinary. What's more, it's evidence that Republicans have finally found what exactly they're good at.

They had 40 years in the wilderness to perfect their obstructionist tactics. The are pretty good manipulators and have lizard brains that can sense a weak spot in their prey a mile off. Putting important, though not stimulative projects in the bill (despit a tiny fraction of the overall cost) was like waving a juicy bug in wingnuts face. They grabbed it and ran and now Obama is trying to catch up. I'm not too surprised by this for a new presnit who promised a change in tone. If this wasn't such an important bill that the country is paying close attention to, it would be slightly amusing. Obama is going to have to learn he can't please everybody, that's never for wingnuts and also for dem congresscritters clamoring for their share of the pie. Tough lesson, but one he will learn from I think.

I don't see anything remarkable about this. The Republican Party is built on fear and hatred. They peddle garbage year after year. When they are in control, it is directed at stopping any opposition to what they want to do (hence the Dems have trouble blocking bills). When they are in opposition, they simply turn the focus on stopping any bill that the Dems want to pass.

Add to that the willingness of the press to let them say whatever they want almost without comment or analysis, and the sea of radio stations that spit out Republican propaganda.

The focus of the Republican Party is ALWAYS that Republican comes first - ragardless of how deep the slime gets and country be damn if necessary!

It's nihilism is what it is.

They're not good at governing, but they're exceptional at stopping others from governing.

It takes two to tango. The Democrats are as complicit, if not more, in their own inability to govern. I think we do ourselves a disservice laying the failure entirely at the Republican's feet.

They are who we thought they were. And we let 'em off the hook.

It is idiotic - no, way beyond idiotic - to blame the Republicans.

Democrats knew from the beginning that it is in the DNA of the GOP to behave the way they are behaving. Even then, all of the Dems, including Obama, acted as if the election of Obama has suddenly transformed the Republicans into nice guys.

Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.

All Dems' fault. They cannot now give us the excuse that they are not in power.

since we're on the same team, i appreciate your ability to put the best spin on why the Democrats couldn't (which you really describe as "wouldn't") ever be able to block a rescue bill with just a 41 seat minority.

i wish it were that noble, but i can't escape the more obvious fact that while the House R's, for example, voted absolutely together to a person, a dozen D's flaked off. And in the Senate, very few R's - even those who may ultimately vote for the bill - have spoken out of turn. On the other hand, the most visible Democrat on the bill so far has been Nelson of Nebraska, who is essentially begging for the RNC's "Most Valuable Player" award for the year.

First, we need new congressional leadership. if that doesn't solve the problem, we may just need new Dems.

Doubtful above is correct. I give some credit to the GOP for the ability to play politics.

But what's even more awe inspiring is in the inability of the Dems to perform even the simplest political task. This is really, really serious. Obama better get his act together very quickly.

THe repubes don't really care for the good of the country. They only care about enriching their friends and providing exploitive opportunities for the rich to get richer. The dems have helped them do this in the last eight years without any unified opposition. Now that we have the power, the repubes still seem to be setting the agenda and we're still trying to play nice. They will never negotiate in good faith. I'm really surprised anyone expects them to. Hopefully there will be some sort of media blitz on this from our side because if not, the media is putting conservative pundits on tv, trash talking the stimulus package at a rate of 2 repubes to every one dem. I think that's the reason support for this thing has gone down some. It's a steep climb because of the media, imho.

It's not a level playing field, so the Dems can't use the same strategy. 1) The Reps are merely employees of a shadow corporation. Their ideas come from think tanks and are crafted by people like Rove and Luntz so that everyone says the same thing. Dems couldn't do this if they wanted. 2) Reps own the media. It's no coincidence that the word "obstructionist" was used to the point of nausea in 2004/05, but not now. 3) It's a lot easier to sell a program of less government, less taxes, and less collective responsibility than it is to sell the idea that we're all in this together.

Watching Barney Frank on ABC This Week giving Jim DeMint a policy wonk beat down was the only satisfaction I've witness in this Stimulus debate. It is very obvious that the MSM tact here is to give voice only to the opposition (and distortions) only to stir up controversy and ratings.

The corporate media doesn't have to be 'convinced' of anything by the repiglicans because the corporate media are repiglicans .. the 'journalists' that they own are simply doing the bidding of the corporations that have hired them to do so ..and thus we have 'journalists' that set their and commit purposeful fraud, criminal fraud, against the american people ... they sit their with their million dollar suits and dresses looking at ya thru the tv screen and purposefully lie .. purposefully deceive .. all with a smile on their face ... the repiglicans don't create the schedules on all these tv stations ..THE POLICTICAL DIRECTORS DO ...THE STATIONS THEMSELVES DO .. they determine what the american people here ... and so of course the corporations paid these dancing monkeys big bucks ..like brian williams making 10 million a year, wolf 'my depends are full' blizter makes 25 million a year, greg 'swollen lips' gregory makes 2 million, and so on ... and exactly for what ? what do they do that justifies that kinda pay day ? meanwhile the teachers of our kids make about 30,000 a year ?

"When Republicans were running the show in DC...."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Were?

You and Josh hit the nail on the head. But why are the Democrats stuck with trying to govern instead of opposing government while the Republicans refuse to govern and oppose?

The members of Congress in both parties are very accurately reflecting the demands of their voting constituencies. They are each doing exactly what their voters sent them to Congress to do.

you are all wrong: it is a desert topping and a floor wax.

No seriously: it is all about the media, not the Republicans. The corporate institutions that OWN the media cannot "afford" to have a successful government that requires taxes for services. They cannot "afford" a democratic party that might look at defense spending as bloated and/or misspent. Look at who owns the media and you will see who is really calling the shots by choosing what to accent and highlight.

DeMint is an idiot. By that i mean he is an idiot, not merely that i disagree with his ideology. No self-respecting commentator could see anything else. (I know, i know, the same was true of Bush.) But, to call out the repiblicans is to empower the dems and policies regarding unions, insurance, defense, etc.

They would rather risk a depression than allow unions to regain a stronghold to re-arm Glass-Stegall, to re-vive medicare, to restore sane defense spending. It is a calculated risk.

So, they hire people that share their beliefs and they choose (read:filter) the news people see and select the range of aceptable ideas.

Obama cannot change this. I am personally surprised that the media is being so cavelier about economic facts. I assumed that "capital" would be afraid of a depression, but I guess not.

Don't agree with this at all. DR nailed it straight out of the barrel, and Danp followed up. It's not that the Reps are good at it, they're not particularly good at anything, it's that the media is presenting them as responsible players and reinforcing it with seemingly endless interviews, while whining about the Dems' weakness and vulnerability. That, and the fact that the Dem Congress did come up with a pretty mediocre-to-inexcusable stimulus bill, nearly as bad as the one they collaborated on with the Bush administration. And Obama and Co. keep giving the Reps and the media ammunition....

Don't entirely disagree, but Dems did kill Social Security Privatization when they were in the minority. Give credit where credit is due.

maybe so . . .

but i'm quite disappointed at the white house and the democrats in the senate.

after the house vote it was clear the republicans weren't going to cooperate.

the senate democrats needed to craft the best stimulus possible with no consideration to republicans worries.

bring the stimulus to vote, have the republicans filibuster and then pass it in budget reconceliation.

the economy is in too dire strait and in danger of further catastrophic deterioration not to

What do schip, ledbetter and the Jobs Bill (stimulus) have in common? The gop oppose them- they oppose healthcare for kids, basic defense against discrimination and the government attempting to give the economy a boost in creating jobs.
Also they don't want caps on corporation exec pay either.

Who does the gop care about? Corporations and the rich. Dems just need to tie this obvious thread in the public- not obama, but others. Obama can keep up his goodwill tour, it works in his favor. Dems need a full-court press on what they want to do v. The obstructionist, anti-worker gop.

Obstructionism (stepchild of "starve the beast") goes hand in clawlike hand with playing the victim, which is their most comfortable position. Once Republicans decided to forego being a conservative party all this became much, much easier.

Anyone who blames media bias here misses the point.

The American public supports fiscal stimulus, a few media types criticizing the plan isn't the problem. Dems aren't losing on the field of public opinion, they're losing in negotiations with the GOP. The leadership isn't keeping discipline. They're being tatically out-maneuvered.

You must re-calibrate when you think about the modern GOP. It is not a national governing party at all and does not behave as one. It is a protest movement and has been since the Gingrich Southern revolutionaries took over the party and congress in 1994. That is why it continued to talk like an aggrieved victim even when it was in complete control of the government. Why do you think it filled the government with loyal party members rather than people who knew what they were doing. Why do you think the GOP always converts policy disputes into political wedge issues rather than seeking ways to solve the problem. What president other than Bush ever thought of deliberately dividing the country and creating a dispirited political opposition on the eve of sending an American army into war -- ensuring that the war would be harder to fight since adjustments would look like mistakes that an embittered opposition could use against you. Better to "stay the course," however disasterous that course may have been for our brave troops.

The only ones left in the GOP are the hard right wingers, and they are not interested in governing. They want to "change the culture," they want "regime change," they'd rather rant and rave about "socialism" and the "far left" than work seriously on our problems. They are only interested in the "permanent campaign" as Scott McClellen calls it. They are not conservatives and never have been. They are reactionaries, revolutionaries -- radicals as bad as the 60s variety they loath.

They showed that with their frat-boy, animal house behavior, with its high-fives after stiffing the President 0 to 173, and then for good measure inviting Joe the Plumber to provide his unique insights for the gathered members. I'm sorry, but in the midst of a crisis that has Americans scared, these kind of sophomoric antics are unforgiveable. These guys remind me of a bunch of College Republicans who are proud of themselves for scandalizing campus sensibilities by inviting David Duke to be a guest speaker.

Republicans are giddy because they think they've won and have Big Mo is on their side. But why do I keep thinking that for House Republicans this will go down as their own "Mission Accomplished" moment.

I'm starting to think along the lines of letting the economy tank. Bring on another depression. Then and only then will these corporate rapists feel the pain. Let those motherfuckers start feeling the pinch.

Sometimes you have to hit ROCK BOTTOM before you can bounce back up.

I'd go one step further Ted Frier:

The GOP has been a protest movement since the election of FDR in 1932.

All of their arguments against the stimulus today could be hand-picked out of headlines from that bygone era.

And for the last 60 years, the GOP's platform has been based on dismantling the New Deal one way or another.

Never mind the fact that the New Deal changed our country from being a largely rural, backwards country to the economic powerhouse it was until the 70's. Hell over half of this country didn't even have electricity until the rural electrification program, which I believe was part of the TVA.

This is nothing new for the republicans...since they own the MSM outright it's fairly easy to promote their agenda...the agenda of millionaires...they are the People's Obstructionist Party (POP)...it's all they've ever been in the modern era. Milionaires feel protected if the economy collapses. Republicans loose nothing (they think) by a mass atack or economic failure since all they want government for is to protect their holdings and the business of multinational corporations, using Jesus to justify their wealth.

If you think of the American political system as a heart then the Republicans are the clogged right chamber, refusing to beat along with the rest of the nation.
The GOP is all about destruction and they are very good at it. Gleeful even. DESTROY is etched into their hearts. Jonny Rotten got nothing on these guys.

Ben Nelson. What a quivering mass of jello.

After two plus years of going down to legislative defeat, I am starting to wonder if the Democrats' failures are due to incompetence or whether it's just an act. The plan seems to be lot of hand waving without trying too hard. The end result is a plausible excuse for the masses and a happy financial base.
Reid and Pelosi -- I'm talking about you.

They've done this for YEARS in california. CA only needs 3 republicans to break rank to get something done. They won't.

I don't understand it.

The repubs may appear to have the upper hand at the moment, but the senate in a couple of hours is going to start voting on amendments and the bill will change a lot. I look for most of the 2% GOP concern troll stuff to be cut and maybe a little, not a lot of, extra tax cutting for small businesses. Then the wingers will have a decision to make. Will they obstruct and kill a bill that has been cleared of most of their whining material, and legislation billed as an economy saver? (and also will one or two dems join them) Or will one or two or five vote to pass?

I'm betting pass, which means it will then move to conference with the house for further changes. No prediction for that, except for lots of fireworks and a hope that Obama big foots efforts to readorn it with non germaine party favors.

Democrats in Congress and the White House remind me of a bunch of kids who come to a fist fight and just want to "get along" with their enemies. Maybe invite a few to their side of the line the the sand and expect them to be nice. You can guess the outcome for the kids; what do you think the outcome will be for our misguided leaders?

I'm afraid that our President is a man who has never had to fight for anything in his whole life and doesn't have the ability anywhere in his character to do so. And the Democrats in Congress......well, I'll spare you but the Stimulus Package seems to be toast.

As Rachel Maddow is fond of saying "Please talk me down and help me see some hope for our side".

but they're exceptional at stopping others from governing.

Yeah, it's The Whiny Kid Scenario.

from,

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2177137

Remember the whiny, insecure kid in nursery school, the one who always thought everyone was out to get him, and was always running to the teacher with complaints? Chances are he grew up to be a conservative.
. . .
The whiny kids tended to grow up conservative, and turned into rigid young adults who hewed closely to traditional gender roles and were uncomfortable with ambiguity.

Republicans exist for no purpose but to destroy society. It's about revenge because they were born idiots.

Literally.

citizen_pain

I agree that the ideological irresponsibility we're seeing goes back further, but I'm not really sure that the takeover of the Republican Party by a genuine, hard-core conservative movement dates much before 1994. Reagan was a precurser to the movement -- a gateway drug -- but wasn't the geunine article. Real right wing conservatism, the kind you associate with southern reactionaries, didn't dominate the GOP until the 1990s. Their complete lack of appreciation for democracy showed itself in their single minded pursuit of Clinton -- impeachement on a party line vote that was opposed by the vast majority of the public. People ought to remember the rigid partisan mindset that gave us that nightmare when evaluating the behavior of today's largely Southern GOP.

Am I the only one who thinks this period reminds me a little of the period just before the civil war -- a nation seemingly stalemated by the extremism of a party confined to a single region that was striking out in retribution at the nation that had repudiated it in the last election, and was seeking its revenge by making the government practically unworkable. This isn't the first time we've seen the South try to destroy an institution or a nation it could not control.

I'm afraid that our President is a man who has never had to fight for anything in his whole life and doesn't have the ability anywhere in his character to do so

Concern troll nonsense!

It concerns me that the media along with a bad PR of the Recovery/Stimulus package keep confusing this with the TARP funds and the bad behavior of corporate execs.

They keep managing to weave all the anger and outrage together and little or no distinctions are made.

Robert Gibbs just gave a sorry press conference.
I don't what he's paid, but talk about a thankless job. He seemed tired and gave rather vague answers. Granted, a lot has gone down in the last few days and some of the questions he's getting are ridiculous, but he needs to focus a bit more and really step up and sell the Stimulus package more coherently and forcefully, IMO.

I think Obama et al. really need to educate and clarify that the Stimulus is NOT the TARP!

Ted, good, valid point. I didn't consider the actual demographics of the right when I spoke up their 60 + year campaign to destroy all facets of the New Deal. I do have to agree that the GOP since the 90's has been taken over by the right wing, ultra conservative, southern wing; what real conservatives used to consider the lunatic right.

As for the parallels to the pre-civil war era, very insightful. Coming from the south, I can tell you that the civil war is still very much alive in many southerner's minds. it's absolutely flabbergasting that we are still hampered by a war that was fought over 140 years ago.

As for me, if we have to have another civil war to finally bury the hatchet once and for all, so be it. I'm ready.

In general, Democrats want to govern. They want responsibility. They want to consider the evidence and shape policy accordingly.

I just vomited in my mouth a little.

Give me a #$%-ing break. Some do, some don't, some are greedy self-interested bastards, some are incompetent loons, some are heroes. At all levels of gubmint from local to national. They can't all be equals of your goddess Rachel Maddow. Welcome to humanity. The sooner you recognize this, the less your heart will be broken.

On the equitable principle that it takes one to know one, since our right wing Republicans love talking about Democratic socialism, I thought I would offer this portion of an article by Boston College professor Alan Wolfe describing the inherent fascist tendencies in our Southern-style conservatism. It maps some of the things said here earlier:

"The most important lesson Schmitt teaches is that the differences between liberals and conservatives are not just over the policies they advocate but also over the meaning of politics itself. Schmitt's German version of conservatism, which shared so much with Nazism, has no direct links with American thought. Yet residues of his ideas can nonetheless be detected in the ways in which conservatives today fight for their objectives.

Liberals think of politics as a means; conservatives as an end. Politics, for liberals, stops at the water's edge; for conservatives, politics never stops. Liberals think of conservatives as potential future allies; conservatives treat liberals as unworthy of recognition. Liberals believe that policies ought to be judged against an independent ideal such as human welfare or the greatest good for the greatest number; conservatives evaluate policies by whether they advance their conservative causes. Liberals instinctively want to dampen passions; conservatives are bent on inflaming them. Liberals think there is a third way between liberalism and conservatism; conservatives believe that anyone who is not a conservative is a liberal. Liberals want to put boundaries on the political by claiming that individuals have certain rights that no government can take away; conservatives argue that in cases of emergency -- conservatives always find cases of emergency -- the reach and capacity of the state cannot be challenged.

There are, of course, no party lines when it comes to conservatives and liberals in the United States. Many conservatives, especially those of a libertarian bent, are upset with President Bush's deficits and unenthusiastic about his call for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. And, on the other side of the fence, there are liberals and leftists who want to fight back against conservatives as ruthlessly as conservatives fight against them.

Still, if Schmitt is right, conservatives win nearly all of their political battles with liberals because they are the only force in America that is truly political. From the 2000 presidential election to Congressional redistricting in Texas to the methods used to pass Medicare reform, conservatives like Tom DeLay and Karl Rove have indeed triumphed because they have left the impression that nothing will stop them. Liberals cannot do that. There is, for liberals, always something as important, if not more important, than victory, whether it be procedural integrity, historical precedent, or consequences for future generations."

I can not help but go to the most basic and potentially elementary place when thinking about the difference between Dems and Repubs. Perhaps it is likely that there are plenty of caring, sympathetic, emotionally balanced, and practical Republicans out there that I would respect if I met them. The thing is, I've never met one. NEVER. I can only assume that there's a certain type of person - small minded, exclusionary, judgmental, inconsiderate, and inconsistent - that is attracted to that party. Going from there, it becomes fairly easy to predict what the House will do: they'll be consistent with their natures, and resort to the most self-serving and self-aggrandizing stance in every instance, with their heads held high, as if they're better humans than the rest of us. They are proud of their bigotry.

To try to understand why would be a waste of time, in my opinion. If the best indicator of future behavior is past behavior, then we already have a model we can count on. The only thing holding Senate Republicans from their true natures (again, IMO) is the constant threat of having a slim minority, in a similar way to released sex offenders not re-offending only because of the constant, in-person supervisory threat of going back to prison.

Going back to a post from yesterday (?), it seems as if they only way to counteract that is for Dem shills to to weasel their way into every news show on every channel, and argue with logic, every time, every day. It may require a cabinet-level position to ensure this is done properly. Heh.

Give me a #$%-ing break. Some do, some don't, some are greedy self-interested bastards, some are incompetent loons, some are heroes. At all levels of gubmint from local to national.

AMEN!

Several years ago when Repubs held the Senate majority they were talking about getting rid of the 60 vote supermajority rule to close out a filibuster. Referred to as the "nuclear" option, they wanted to stop the Dem minority from effectively having any say at all on legislation to which it was adamantly opposed. What the wise heads of both parties finally did was to agree that the filibuster would continue, but there would be a kind of gentlemen's agreement that it would not be used except on matters of the highest importance.

Since the Repubs fell to minority status in the November 2006 mid-term elections, the gentelmen's agreement has apparently been ignored by the Repubs, and in the Congress that ended in December, 2008, they set some kind of record for killing legislation by threatening filibuster. Despite the vagaries and non-specificity of a gentlemen's agreement type of rule, it is now time for the Dems to bring this matter up once more. The shoe is now on the other foot, and it is time for Harry Reid and the Dem leadership to assert their majority power the same way Senate Repubs did. The Repubs need to be told to give up using the filibuster every time a controversial piece of legislation comes up, or the nuclear option will be used to end the filibuster completely.

It would be a dangerous thing to get rid of the filibuster--there will come a time when the Repubs will once again be in the majority. But the stimulus bill is too important. Too many Repubs want Obama's plan to fail solely for political reasons. So the Dems have reached an historical inflection point and they cannot let the rump minority party bring down the country. There really is no other choice.

citizen-pain

I grew up in the South as well and worked for the now extinct Republican Party in New England, so I think I have a pretty good feel for what's happening in the GOP today. I could be wrong but I don't see how the party can recover. Conservatives have threatened to walk out on the Republican party many times in the past unless they got their way (Dobson did just this year if McCain became the nominee). So now I think they got their wish. Conservatives own the GOP -- all to themselves.

But the biggest problems is that the GOP's problems are not political, but cultural.

Samuel Hungtington in his famous "clash of civilizations" thesis says that all post Cold War conflicts will be based on cultural and identity-related issues, not ideological, political or economic ones. The neo-conservatives have used many of these ideas to justify a global war on terror against an ephemeral radical Islamism that is hard to distinguish from Islamic civilization as a whole.

My thought when I read Huntington is that perhaps we have our own clash of civilizations here in the US. The GOP will not be able grow itself beyond its conservative Southern base because for its own core base politics is not about a list of policy issues over which compromise is possible. Politics for today's GOP is cultural and civilizational. For the GOP base, the party defines their identity which is why Kevin Phillips may be right that today's GOP is the first consciously religious party in US history. We already know that the South is the most distinctive of our regions, often thinking of itself as a separate nation and culture -- and sometimes even acting as one, as in the civil war. Southerners think of themselves as southerners in a way that Yankees do not. "Southern nationalism" is a real thing in a way that "New England nationalism" would be absurd. The House Republicans act as if they're unconnected and unconcerned with what's happening in the rest of the country, and maybe they are.

I also loved the typical reaction from red state mike. No matter where they are conservatives always seem to "vomit just a little in their mouth" whenever anyone talks about the common good or the larger public interest. Conservatives think that politics is war by other means. They don't think bi-partisanship and compromise and working together on consensus are virtues worthy of praise -- Tom DeLay said so himself in his sneering Farewell Address to Congress where he belittled the "preening, self-styled statesmen" who have elevated compromise to a matter of first principle. So, conservatives are uncomprehending of anyone who thinks they are.

No matter where they are conservatives always seem to "vomit just a little in their mouth" whenever anyone talks about the common good or the larger public interest.
Posted by: Ted Frier

Would you like me to list examples of Democrats who failed to meet your standard of acting in the common good and larger public interest, thereby disproving Steve's blanket statement?

"small minded, exclusionary, judgmental, inconsiderate, and inconsistent "

That's us! We all can't be genuises such as Barbara Boxer, Pelosi, Reid, Daschle, etc. You can't blame us because of our genetic inadequacies.

I have to say that this post, and the comments, are some of the most hilarious crap I have ever read here--deranged and divorced from reality--but hilarious.

red state mike

I am sure the list is long and unsavory, and being the good liberal that I am who believe in an open and transparent democratic process, I have to say: Bring it on!

The point that Steve is making is that difference between liberals and conservatives is that conservatives are committed to an ideology that already promises to possess the truth and liberals are committed to a process -- the liberal democratic process -- that can only promise to help people discover the truth.

That makes conservative and liberal politics very different. Conservatives can act much more ruthlessly and still be true to their cause, since the only measure of victory is whether their side wins or not. Liberals have a much tougher time, and we see that playing itself out now with President Obama and the House Republicans. Liberals must ensure the integrity of democratic process at the same time they try to achieve their liberal policy ends. Liberals must grant even you -- red state mike -- your freedom of speech or else give up all claims to being a liberal. You, on the other hand, can shout us down all you wish, so long as you do it in furtherance of your red state faith. That doesn't mean liberals won't behave badly (as I am sure you are about to gleefully point out). It just means that when they do they won't be acting liberally.

I have to say that this post, and the comments, are some of the most hilarious crap I have ever read here--deranged and divorced from reality--but hilarious.

Your George Bush doll needs a hug, tough guy.

But ask yourself: would Democrats in Congress, with the smallest minority in a generation, be able to pull that off?

Of course not, but leading the Dems. is far more like herding cats than leading the GOP is. There's nothing new about that, either.

"small minded, exclusionary, judgmental, inconsiderate, and inconsistent "

That's us!

Yes, it is.

"They don't have what it takes to be a functioning majority party, but they're a finely-tuned machine when it comes to working as an obstructionist opposition party, blocking good ideas, manipulating news outlets, and misleading the public."

The are not manipulating the news outlets. They own the news outlets.

In general, Democrats want to govern. They want responsibility.

Your evidence of this?

In 2001 when bush was installed by the supreme court after losing the popular vote by half a million votes, the democrats still tried to work with bush on the no child left behind bill. They didn't filibuster everything even though they controlled the senate. And then bush screwed them by not funding the bill as he had promised.

they've also convinced a lot of media figures that they're right

Like James G said, the GOP hasn't "convinced" any of the media figures of anything. They've simply bought their bosses, plain and simple.

When media whores like Hiatt, Murdoch, and Ailes are removed from their unelected positions of control, and only then, will this change.

"Anyone who blames media bias here misses the point. The American public supports fiscal stimulus, a few media types criticizing the plan isn't the problem."

A few media types?????? I haven't seen a propaganda blitz like this since bush rolled out the Iraq war.

"It takes two to tango. The Democrats are as complicit, if not more, in their own inability to govern. I think we do ourselves a disservice laying the failure entirely at the Republican's feet."

Precisely, along w/ many other comments I think Mr. Benen needs to read and before he spouts Pollyanna-esque tripe like this post (sorry, Steve - ya know I love ya). I would add, as so many have before, that the Dems show no sign of being able to, you know, FIGHT for what they are supposed to believe in. I would also venture a guess that the Dem establishment sees itself, for one reason or another, to be 'above' the kind of guerrilla tactics used by the Pugs. Sure looks that way, anyways.

"I haven't seen a propaganda blitz like this since bush rolled out the Iraq war. "

Sho' nuff. And where's the counterattack? Or perhaps better, where's the counter punch? The Pugs know this fight could easily set the tone for the next four years, and set them up nicely for 2010/2012. How's Obama's long game looking now? Is this yet another case where Dems show amazing chops against other Dems, but wilt in Puglican halitosis? It is to laugh.

Liberals must grant even you -- red state mike -- your freedom of speech or else give up all claims to being a liberal.
Posted by: Ted Frier

Heh, that's a funny one.

Did you know I'm not allowed to post here? I use a proxy server, same as Chinese dissidents use when criticizing their oppressive overlords.