Oh, we could have shot the moon if we hadn't given in on the filibuster.

[ithinkmyliverhurts]

Hindsight 20/20, yeah, sure. But look at these poll numbers for Chimp and handlers. Miserable. We could have filibustered all day and then tomorrow. Hell, screw reading the rules of poker and pinochle; we could have read the DSM over and over. We should have had foresight.

The dems. screwed up on this one. Those here who said so were right. We've given them three right wingers on the bench. Too bad. And I say all of this with principles pushed to the side. I agree with all of you who say we shouldn't have given in based on the constitutionality part of it. The right POLITICAL thing to do was not to negotiate. Fight 'em. Can you imagine Frist right now with this Shiavo thing?

We need to kick some skulls in here. I don't think we can overplay the hand we've been dealt.

[BayouBengal07]

1. I dunno

I think the compromise on the fillibuster was a good thing. It recieved high marks by the public, meaning that when the Republicans in Congress start getting extreme again, the American people will know better. They've tasted compromise, and they like it.

[MichiganVote]

2. Bullshit, we're doing fine.

[ithinkmyliverhurts]

3. "Doing fine" meaning what?

We're doing better than before. But "better" is quite relative with today's democratic party.

I'm sad that they got these three judges confirmed. Chimp's numbers suck. Someone needs to point this out to the dems. who negotiated the filibuster deal.

And I'm happy to be wrong.

[MichiganVote]

4. Meaning we have garnered more news in the last week than

we did for the past two months and ALL of it is about action. Bush and the preppy boys and girls want to paint the Dem's as obstructionist but the policial boxing matches going on defeat that logic.

You want a better scenario with this Stalinisque Administration, Congress, Judiciary and Media, go for it.

The filibuster deal is done. Get over it.

[ithinkmyliverhurts]

5. Oh, I'm over it.

I guess I'm just playing a game of "what if." I admit it, I don't like the fact that dems. made the deal. And I think we'd be in a superb position NOW if we hadn't.

In terms of logic, I'm not sure what your response has to do with anything: "Meaning we have garnered more news in the last week than we did for the past two months and ALL of it is about action." If you can explain this non-sequitor to me, I'd very much appreciate it. I don't know what your cutting insights here have to do with my original contention--a contention, I admit, which is based on a hypothetical.

You seem to be quite agitated over a simple post looking back and wondering "what if." Perhaps a glass of Pinot Noir would help?

[MichiganVote]

6. Or maybe you have a hard time w/someone who disagrees

with your hypothetical scenario. Look, you want to stay in the mix re: the filibuster, have at it. But a debate over that deal is not indicative of the state of the Dem's or Congress as a whole and so on.
And believe me, I'm not impressed with either the republicans or the democrats on the "deal". But in politics there are hundreds and thousands of deals. Its an inescapable reality.

I think that what is different in the past few weeks is that the Dem's are on the offensive, not the defensive. The Dem's are almost always better on the offensive.

Ok, well, that's it for me. Good luck.

[ithinkmyliverhurts]

7. I think you're right here!

"I think that what is different in the past few weeks is that the Dem's are on the offensive, not the defensive."

I guess I'd just like to add to the playbook, and I think fighting the filibuster would have done so--or at least added to it at this point. That's all.

Overall, you're right: it's neither her nor there now. But, like I said, hindsight.