My disgust is only eclipsed by my contempt and cynicism.

they would prefer to continue playing a majority party on TV

dead solid perfect, Jon

Great post Jon and I think no is the answer to your last question since you limit it to the democratic world.

Thanks for the post.

Is anyone truly surprised by this?

What a bunch of flaming @$$holes. Why am I paying for these worthless jerks to “represent” me in Wash DC? What. A. Monumental. Waste.

My loathing & disgust know no bounds.

PTOUI!!!!!!!!!

“It is possible that there is another political caucus in the democratic world somewhere that is even so pathetic and cowardly ….”

That would be the democratic house majority under Pelosi, now officially the minority party they seem to prefer.

As I said earlier today, gerrymandering and the filibuster give the mandarins of the Democratic Party the cover they need for failing to get progressive legislation passed. It’s in the mandarins’ interest to keep the filibuster rule intact because they can blame the process, not their own disdain for the base, for the party’s awful record.

It is possible that there is another political caucus in the democratic world somewhere that is even so pathetic and cowardly that it would actually needlessly give up almost all of its governing power after winning an election, but I have never heard of one.

I’ve come to believe that the mandarins of the Democratic Party were horrified on Election Night, 2006, when they realized they had a majority in both houses of Congress. They now had to work much harder to avoid accomplishing anything of substance.

Ahh yess…the old cowardice con…the one they use when pretending they’re on our side.

Despite the fact that the Dems technically control the Senate, it’s the Republicans who really run things, and Reid and his fellow Dems seem perfectly OK with that.

Of course the White House could not, does not, and wouldn’t think of interfering in the rule making of the “World’s Most Deliberative Body.” I think it was Obama’s liberal speechifying on the Capitol steps that put them off to new, not necessarily better (snark), changes to “how we do things.” And besides when they did have the 60 vote majority they said they so badly needed nothing got done that would offend any bipartisan Republicans. The planet burns. Ruled by fools.

I would also venture a guess that Obama is OK with this arrangement as well, especially since it’s “bipartisan”.

Listening to Randi Rhodes, the timing of the debt limit deal and the filibuster rule suggests that there was a deal between McConnell & Reid. If this is true, then Reid got the short end of the stick getting 3 months on the debt limit for giving up 2 years of meaningful filibuster reform.

I don’t want to hear them start talking this filibuster reform in about a year, I tired of hearing this wimpy bastards talk about doing anything to help the progressive community.

Senate Democrats are so scared of being held responsible that they effectively decided they would prefer to continue playing a majority party on TV than actually be one in real life.

Absolutely wrong, unless you’re talking about being held responsible by their Masters on Wall $treet.

They’re afraid of actually doing the things they are only making believe they want to do, because actually doing those things would put them at odds with the MOTU that finance their re-election efforts.

Or IOW;

They’re doing exactly what they intend to do, which is nothing but making believe their agenda is different from the republicans, which it isn’t.

The only possible reason for this can be easily explained by an insightful book by political scientist Walter Karp: Indispensable Enemies.

I can say it no better than this reviewer:

I have to concur with the five-star reviewers. This book is absolutely essential to a solid understanding of American politics. Karp explodes the myth of the great rivalry between Democrats and Republicans by examining their deeds, not their words. Most importantly, he examines their collusion by the evidence of what they’ve done.

http://www.amazon.com/Indispensable-Enemies-Politics-Misrule-America/dp/1879957132/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1359064477&sr=1-2&keywords=karp+political+science

Epic. Cave. I’ve voted for my last national Democrat until I see one worth my vote.

But, but but we can’t do anything because of the filibuster and the obstructionist Republicans. Don’t blame us if you can’t afford healthcare or food or gas or a place to stay cuz it’s not our fault. Please vote Democratic we are the peoples party.

“In other financial news, the futures market for political gridlock made a tremendous gain today following the actions of Senate Majority Leader….”

Cowards all. Thanks for your posts on this Jon. I am one that believes your analysis on rules reform is the best, most honest on the interwebs or the tv.

Would you have proclaimed with equal determination:

Millions of voters across the country gave Republicans a majority in the Senate this past November. They gave Republicans the power to fully govern the chamber. Republians in the Senate were handed the ability to pass any bill they wanted and approve any nominee by President Reagan (or Bush) they deem qualified.

in 1981, 1983, 1985, 2003, 2005?

You would have fully supported a Chief Justice Bork and a reversal on Roe v Wade based on the absolute definitive majority Republicans got in the Senate because majorities dictate, no exceptions???

You need to check your desire for revenge or sticking Republican heads in a toilet and look at the bigger picture.

If the nation needed to be run by simple majority rule, then there would be just one election, for President, and the President would write and sign and execute all the laws single handedly based on simple majority rule. If a more complex majority rule, then there would be only the House and no Senate, and there would be no need for elections, but instead a grand lottery to pick representatives of the people randomly from the people.

Harry Reid has led a debate on the Senate rules and won consent to modify the rules to ensure progress on issues with a clear determined majority. Yep, that means that a go-along-to-get-along majority will not overcome a minority objection, but if the majority is not committed to something, why should it pass?

Frankly I’m scared by hotheads who think instand majority rule is the idea whether on the left or the right.

I noticed this right after 2008. They had a commanding majority yet refused to act like Democrats, and often just curiously refused to act – despite the urgency of the moment. I had donated to several Democratic Senate candidates, and some of them turned out to be decent, and one of them, Jeff Merkley, turned out to be excellent. The Party as a whole though, in the Senate and the White House, seemed determined to act as though nothing was really wrong with America, despite the Great Financial Meltdown and Bailout and that nothing really needed changing. They had been handed an historic duty, and a clear mandate – a once in a lifetime opportunity in fact – to change the direction of the country. Yet they didn’t seem to want it – any of it. It made sense to me at last that they just preferred to let Republicans run things and continue with the permanent Reagan Revolution. That’s when I figured out that I didn’t need to bother voting for them or donating to them anymore. I could just let them let the Republicans run things for free.

If I were charged with shoplifting, I wouldn’t want a Senate Democrat to represent me. He or she might plead me guilty to capital murder.

What a bunch of flaming @$$holes. Why am I paying for these worthless jerks to “represent” me in Wash DC? What. A. Monumental. Waste.

Are you a conservative talking about the Republicans failing to end Social Security, make Bolton Sec of State to get the war with Iran started, and pack the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v Wade in 2005??

Or are you a conservative disappointed that Democrats have failed to give a future Republican president with 50 Republican Senators that power to override Democrats in everything in the next decade?

It is not Democrat vs. Republican; it is Rich vs. everyone else and all our Senators are millionaires or better and that is whose side they are on.

It is possible that there is another political caucus in the democratic world somewhere that is even so pathetic and cowardly that it would actually needlessly give up almost all of its governing power after winning an election, but I have never heard of one.

Uh, what about Britain’s Lib Dems? Clegg is enjoying being a junior partner so muchas to most likely destroy the Lib Dems’ meaning and viability.

Of course, he couldn’t do without the rank and file Lib Dems supporting him in doing so, and thus in aiding their own loss of power and relevance.

Looks pretty similar to our US Dems to me. But, with a different demographics, maybe the D party will survive. The middle classes may not and will sink into genteel poverty as the wealh destribution continues ever upward to the On Percenters.

Also, when does Harry Reid ever stand firm unless it’s against some Dem from the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party?

Did anyone think he’d drop his usual Lucy role of taking the football away just as we think he might actually mean his brave word…this time?

Hahgahappen.

Water is wet. Harry Reid is as rigid as tepid oatmeal.

Democrats are the enablers that the dysfunctional system requires in order to continue operating at the highest level of dysfunction.

reform would not have resulted in bills being passed because of the republican control of the house. Reform was needed in 08 when we had both houses and a dem(presumtive) prez. reid likes corruption more than cleaning up corruption. the 1% now controls thru the democratic party which has become the republican party, the republican party has become the john birch society. show me one person in the dem leadership that is not a sellout. why do you think pelosi passed all those bills that would never ever see the light of day in the senate? Reid is a traitor to the american dream. the chinese must be laughing their asses off………………

Senate Democrats took the power the voters gave them then quickly and decisively threw it away.

I’m sure that the MOTU think that Senate Democrats are doing a great job.

So, FORWARD to business as usual.
You can bet there was a quiet word from Obama.

Personally, I think the party that holds the majority ought to be able to pass legislation and be judged on the results.

Quaint, I know.

Your point would be taken if the democrats EVER filibustered ANYTHING a republican president wanted to pass….They sure didn’t under Bushhead

Instead of truly reforming the Senate rules, the Democrats decided to adopt only a temporary bipartisan package of minor rules changes that are so inconsequential they are not even worth describing in detail.

But it was a perfect solution! Now, whenever even piecemeal, piddling reforms die in the Senate, Dems can say, “What can we do? We’re stuck with the filibuster rules!”

Actually they did, the Bush tax cuts were passed in the Senate by a 51 to 50 vote with V.P Cheney casting the deciding vote. Filibuster rules do not apply when rich people have a bill that needs passing.

The mistake the writer makes is to think that the knaves in the Senate, who have been bought and paid for by the corporate dollar, actually feel any facility to do anything except what they’re told when it comes to voting about anything that affect the vested interests of the 1%. Half of the Democrats there are as Republican as that uber-republican good old Joe Leiberman.

Thank you, Jon, for this post, it revives some of that earlier post of yours which missed being front-paged.

Margaret, @ 16, has, I consider, laid out what must be reasonably understood: If the Senate Democrats cannot find the courage to deal, honestly and responsibly with the filibuster, which, in that “missing” post, you, very properly and precisely, identified as the “The Most Important Vote of the Congressional Term”, then how, in good conscience may we even think of voting for ANY of them ever again?

How might anyone, given what your last several posts have made clear, dare insist that we should, despite the cowardice and featherbedding, the unwillingness to do a very important job, perhaps one of the very most important, in a democracy, that is, representing the people … that the Senate Democrats have displayed, continue to vote FOR them when they refuse to do their jobs and refuse to accept responsibility for NOT doing their jobs?

In what other critical job category might that be tolerated?

If airplane pilots, if bus drivers, if just about anyone doing just about any job, refused to do the job, one for which they were well-paid and provided exceptional benefits, then what would happen to such people?

They would be fired.

Even though each and every one of these Senators IS a public SERVANT, they cannot be fired, our system does not permit that.

Yet, how in the name of anything approaching reason or rational understanding, do these individuals expect to be hired, once again, to continue in their cowardly and spendthrift ways?

Who, here, would dare suggest that they are “better” or “lesser evils”, given the behavior they have demonstrated, not just today, but again and again, for years, for decades, in some cases.

Will it be said, “Oh, they are all bad, EXCEPT for MY Senator, he/she had no choice, she/he was forced, by circumstance and the mean old Republicans, to do this … so I forgive them, and will support them with my dying breath.” Who, at FDL, now, today will stand up and say, “Well, bad as they are, than the Republicans they are still better by far” … who has the utter temerity, the shameless chutzpah to make such an absurd claim?

Might it not be time, if folks like Margaret will not vote for a “… national Democrat until I see one worth my vote”, for us all to seriously consider what alternatives, we might actually have?

Might you, Jon, someday consider that neither of the legacy parties REALLY want to govern, honestly, sincerely, and responsibly and that therefore, it could well be time to ponder some “horses” not saddled with legacy, with “more of the same” … might not the “race” be made more useful, even more democratic were other parties and other candidates “covered” as worthy of consideration, of office, of a chance to try something different?

As I say, Jon, I thank you, very much, for your stellar analysis of the foolishness around the filibuster, and I hope that you might offer some considered perspectives regarding what might actually be done to improve, if that is possible, a very pathetic political class, which, of course, includes a media loathe to share the truth and insights which we, here at FDL, have come to expect from your posts, each and every single day.

DW

how many of those here who dislike reid’s betrayal are willing to boycott the washington post or the sunday talk show sponsers who provide cover for reid’s betrayal in particular or corporate corruption in general?. it is the cover provided by the media that allows this corruption to go on and on, decade in decade out
money like rust never sleeps. it consolidates power 24/7/365

I personally don’t mind the R’s having the filibuster to use for blocking bills. The problem is that they don’t have to waste their time day and night reading from the phone book in order to do it. Make them freaking work for a filibuster. It shouldn’t be just some dull administrative task that can be done 100 times a year.

Or are you a conservative disappointed that Democrats have failed to give a future Republican president with 50 Republican Senators that power to override Democrats in everything in the next decade?

Are you a Canadian who doesn’t realize that when the Republicans are in a position to change the rules, they will do it without thinking twice.

The only reason they didn’t bother to change them when they controlled the Senate is that Senate Democrats didn’t do anything to necessitate changing the rules.

Geez, Their actions speak so loud I can’t hear any lies they’re selling. Like ending the wars for starters.

Well damn, me old brain still functions, even if it takes a few minutes for the nickle to drop … (see, that dates me, right there).

It should be “loath” not “loathe”, in that last paragraph.

However, my fingers go into business for themselves, sometimes, and the old brain and the old eyeballs are a tad bit blurry around the edges … that’s my excuse and I’m stickin’ to it.

;~DW

Reid’s capitulation on behalf of all these conservative Democrats vis a vis their “full blown” anti-filibuster process, just goes to prove that self-aggrandizement is the norm for individual Senators, and thusly, placing blame on the Democratic Party, writ large, is not going to fly in this Era of Propaganda. As such, Reid, Durbin and Schumer had McConnell over the proverbial barrel and none would sign onto “the deed.” Consequently, the Republicans now own the deed that is the Senate. Furthermore Reid, Durbin and Schumer will continue to walk around with the “shit-eatin’ grin” and firmly fixed.

Therefore, I harken back to my rant that a lack of a Progressive Caucus in the Senate, permits the camouflaged conservative Democrats to remain untethered to the rank and file of the Democratic Coalition, as well as demonstrating that the Paymasters always win, while the rank and file has to suck it’s much-maligned thumb and which will continue for the next four years.

Jaango

How about that democratic filibuster on alito and robberts. what a hoot.

Impeachment is mentioned SIX times in the constitution as a remedy , I’m still searching for the section and article outlining the filibuster

It’s all the wretch and no vomit.

Yep. Democrats were keeping their powder dry for some *real* crisis, doncha know. Laughable now–okay, it was laughable then–that D’s thought they were saving political capital in case something worse than a fabricated war or legalized torture came along.

They are not serious about governing, they are serious about staying in power. The manner in which the US Senate is elected, and operates, disqualifies the US federal government from being referred to as either ‘democratic’ or ‘representative’. It merely has primitive, proto-democratic features. It is the rottenest of boroughs.

Brilliant, angry man, great writer, highly informed, and a that is a very good book, that explains the way it works in Washington D.C.

“Senate Democrats took the power the voters gave them then quickly and decisively threw it away.”

They’ve chosen to disenfranchise their voters just as much as any Republican gerrymandering or voter ID laws.

Hard to conclude anything other than Dems want Kabuki theater over doing anything. They prove their most cynical critics from the Left correct about this. I’m infuriated and disappointed.

JC crimeanitely! Do Dems purposely cower to protect Repugs? In OTW, do they cower to protect the 2 party system that must be protected at all costs,in their dear hearts, so that we have no other relevant choices? Sure looks that way.

This has been going on since at least 2006 when Reid gave up the power won by Dems with the sellout on the filibuster to avoid hurting Repugs feelings. He started the sellout a long time ago. Neither party is interested in governing this country. Just padding their pockets with bribes, campaign cash and lobbyists favors. It’s way past time to think that we have two parties in this country as each is responsible for covering the others ass to keep the cash flowing into their respective pockets.

Exactly.

Everyone here is either too young, or has completely forgotten that the Democratic Leadership sold control of the Democratic Party to the Republicans during the Iran-Contra hearings back when Reagan was Acting President.

I clearly remember Senator Inyoue leading the Democrtas out onto the steps of the Capital building for a press conference and declaring that no matter how egregious the treason committed by the Reagan Administration, no Democrat would ever dare hold any Republican accountable to the law.

Ever since that day no Democrat has dared to oppose a Republican when it really counted. Sure the Dems throw a scrap to the base every now and then, but when it really matters, the Dems ALWAYS side with the GOP. Just look at how Reid runs the Senate: asking the minority permission before he advances any bill, and if any Republican even looks in his direction Reid instantly kills the bill.

OF COURSE the Dems were never going to pass any actual changes to the Senate Rules. OF COURSE the rules they did change BENEFIT the GOP!

The Democratic Leadership has been under the control of conservatives since the mid-1980s. We have only one-party in this nation and it has two wings: the moderate-right and the far-right.

Nancy Pelosi would never have allowed this BS.

Say it together with me and repeat until it sticks:

There is one party. It’s the Money Party. The Democrats and Republicans represent its two wings. But it’s still one party. They are in this together.

Again:

There is one party. It’s the Money Party. The Democrats and Republicans represent its two wings. But it’s still one party. They are in this together.

The mistake this diary makes is concluding that Democrats don’t want to govern or be held responsible. That’s wrong. They do want to govern…exactly the way the current system allows. It’s not that they don’t want to take responsibility. It’s that the current system is perfect for leading on the rubes who still somehow believe that the Democrats are something apart from the Republicans, and would do all sorts of wonderful things they’ve said they want to do for years if only those nasty evil Republicans would just let them.

Good cop. Bad cop. But both cops. Democratic wing. Republican wing. But one party. The Money Party.

That’s what you get for listening to a left-hand engineered Rush Limbaugh.