Cheat Sheet

hard to say how these things will work out. however one party in effective complete control over the last 50 years has delivered us the vietnam war, stagflation of the late 70's and our ongoing iraq/afghan situations. i know there are extenuating circumstances for all of it but isn't it odd that those are the three biggest negatives other than the recent downturn which almost fits the formula also except 07-08. all in the last 50 years. further look at california, which except for the governator (lots of people would take exception to my exception) has been dominated by one party for years and she is sinking fast. friends when it's one party rule it's time to head for the hills.

I don't like supermajorities in general. But after the last 8 years... seeing the Republicans suffer is like a hug from Jesus.

This magic "60" wont be that easy.
Franken will play ball.
(But, in my opinon, Obama has now maybe his only chance to make affordable health care possible - a plan for the public, not just these private companies profits.) Thats a priority.
But I digress.
I dont think there'll be any "absolute power", but hopefully legislation that will level the playing field in the country.

Who cares ? It means nothing. Theirs lots of whimps in the democrat congress that will not be re-lected in there home district in 2010 if they vote yes on any tax for those that make less than a quarter million. It's just wish full Obama gift by the government/main stream media . We know the drill..

this is a potentially interesting conversation. so stirring the pot a bit more - the hyper partisanship that has fully bloomed in the last 16 years has it's roots in the vietnam war and the nixon presidency. (one party control under johnson was a lot to do with the coincidence of the kennedy assassination and the push for civil rights but that was an anomaly - yes i know the repubs were key to the passage, chill already.)
nixon got caught spying on the opposition, imagine that pol types spying on each other! but he covered up, a grave error. years later clinton got caught forcing his affections on an unwilling target. imagine pol types sexually forcing themselves on others! but he lied under oath, a grave error.
ignoring ford, sorry nice man but he didn't count, waves of political reverbs followed nixon/clinton.
the time lines on this analysis are weak because party control switched after nixon but during clinton. also arguably the genesis of this is johnson since nixon did have a landslide victory.
nevertheless things feel like there is a hypersensitivity leading to one party control and bush certainly didn't break the mold.
so here we go again!

I just hope they get out of the way when the train comes thru cause there going too get run over..........!

eliminate political parties, power to the people and not to those who can contribute the most for their economic interest.

Why is the press corps all flipped up with this "super majority" hoax.
Just because there are 60 senators in the Democratic caucus doesn't mean they have 60 guarantied votes. Just look at the piece on the Blue Dogs on this website.
Being the majority party is interesting because you control the schedule, from then on you still have to convince each individual senator. For that matter moderate Republicans such as Olympia Snow are more favorable to this administration's agenda than most conservative Democrats.

There is no super majority. The Democrats are, and IMO always have been, too disorganized and easily frightened to pull this off, even with the people giving them the numbers.

One party control is very dangerous, which is why the founding fathers tried to make it "super difficult".

The track record for one party control, is that things pass quickly, but not smartly.

Social Security is a pyramid scheme that would never pass the law today. It was used by the originators to pay down the war debt because the average death age at the time was 63, so they never expected to have much to pay out. One President later, the average age increased to 67 and we have had a routine problem paying for it sense. I would love to debate this program with anyone, it is a criminal failure.

Medicare is a inefficient bullying program that is not "efficient" but strong arms Doctors and the medical establishment and makes its participants feel good because we become dependent on it.

Vietnam was a disaster all around. We got involved for the wrong reasons, then jumped in with both feet with Johnson, who refused to do what it took to either win or get out and it cost him his Presidency, and then we pressured Nixon to get out, and once we did MILLIONS of people were slaughtered in the aftermath. Not a very good handling in any manner.

Banking issues were mismanaged which created the Savings and Loan chaos. Those decisions, like an ocean liner, take a while to turn, but the policies implimented there came back to haunt us with the Savings and Loan failures, and those same philosophies were used to help dismantle the banking industry.

Welfare has a long record of poor management.

FEMA has a long record of poor results.

The list goes on.

If you truly investigate history, there are a lot of folks Thomas Jefferson would label traitors who have entered political life and made it their careers, siphoning off your hard earned money for their own purposes. One party in control guarantees that is going to happen again.

Do you think the Ford Motor Company employees feel good about their tax dollars being used to bail out their competitor?

Do you think that Wells Fargo employees feel good about their tax dollars being used to help Chase buy WAMU and not take any of the "toxic" assets then pay back the loan without interest using the newfound revenue they got from the acquisition?

Now, ask yourself, do you really think that Healthcare is going to be more efficient, fairer, and self sustaining if one party gets their way?

Whatever your answer to the above question, now ask yourself if you would feel the same way if it was the other party in power.

We need our government to be reined in, pulled back, easier to manage. The only way that will happen is if we give them less power, not more.

The American people are the ones with the answers, not government. Ask those who brought us the computer, software, light bulb, television, baseball, M & M's, and corn flakes, and compare that to the folks who brought us bridges to nowhere and Washington Public Power Supply (nicknamed Whoops - google it and you'll see another disgrace).

Wake up America, it is time not to rely on one party, it is time to rely on ourselves.

Probably the most dubious Dem (Arlen aside) is Ben Nelson.

An interesting question, not very effectively raised here or in most accounts, is whether party discipline might be demanded on cloture votes to allow voting on the merits of the final bills, even if some of the more conservative Dems vote against the biils on their substance.

The Constitution nowhere demands Senate majorities of 60 to enact every piece of legislation. For most of American history, filibusters were rare, and confined to matters of conscience and the highest gravity (unfortunately, too often used to block progress on civil rights legislation). Recent practice of effectively requiring 60 votes on virtually every bill of substance is a perversion (admittedly practiced by both parties, depending on the circumstances). Enacting legislation is difficult enough under our Constitutional structure, without this unprincipled and anti-democratic additional obstacle.

The Democratic leadership should require those opposed to votes on substance to actually engage in filibusters before the camera, and let the public assess responsibility accordingly.

--The Wise Bard

While I am happy Al Franken has finally been declared the winner in Minnesota, I question if he is truly ready to be seated in congress. Al Franken , being a democrat must first undergo the requisite vaginal implant operation. Then and only then will he be ready to be seated and lead.

Their fear is engendered by their memories of how they treat minorities in the congress and in the nation.

http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/2009/07/when-accountability-is-plague.html

I recently received an email, the first on political issues since the election, from a relative in Dallas who is a social conservative of the first order. He was practically foaming at the mouth over the Obama administration and Congress now that the Democrats have what can only be described as a mandate from the electorate. I advised the message sender to take some blood pressure medication and to get used to living under a Federal government he detests for, likely, the next eight years. I also replied that I hoped that they now had some understanding of how I've felt for the past eight years. I think the operative saying is: "What goes around comes around".

If we can learn anything from recent administrations, it's that the country runs best from the middle. We seem to get in trouble whenever one party has majority rule. We need checks and balances.

Specter and Lieberman are Republicans at heart. The others named, plus still others are Democrats only because it helps their election chances but their opinions lean to the right. There are great many lukewarm Dems who vote with the lobbyists who support them as often or more often than they vote for the benefit of their constituents.

We have a government of, by and for the rich and Big Business.