I hope this isn't true, but it wouldn't surprise me a bit.
If true, it demonstrates a level of dysfunction within the Democratic Party that belies the notion that the watered-down healthcare reform bill "would have been perfect" had only President Obama tried to forcefully ram a specific agenda down the throat of Congress. But one hopes that, about now, Rahm Emanuel is living up to his reputation.
"Meet the new boss, . . ."
ReplyDeleteWhat, this wasn't the "change" you expected?
The problem is that what you (and I) see as dysfunction is viewed in DC as successful politics. Hey, the biggest pigs at the trough are Democrats now instead of Repubicans. How much change did you really think you were going to get?
This isn't even the best example of politics as usual - that's in your other posts on bonuses and all things TARP related. Of course with those corrupt pro-business Republicans controlling Congress and the White House you'd expect this sort of thing to happen but . . .oh wait a tick, they aren't in charge anymore . . .(I admit the bonuses are a minor irritant compared to this, but they are indicative of the situation . . . )
Still, I have to admit to being surprised by the audacity of the "Nebraska Compromise."
CWD
You know I didn't expect Congress to change. The biggest surprise to me, so far, is that Nancy Pelosi got the party to pass a healthcare bill. Joe Lieberman acted like the narcissistic, vengeful prima donna he has long appeared to be, and with the "Party of No" delivering no support for any type of reform the Senate was obviously going to be held hostage by people like him.
ReplyDeleteWhat this is, is a demonstration of how the present filibuster rule has become a disaster; but I understand that it would take 67 votes to change the rule. From this point forward, whichever party is nominally "in control", gridlock may be all we see out of the Senate.