Rachel Maddow's first segment tonight on"compromise" is a must see for every Dem!

[RiverStone]

It's simple: The Republican's primary agenda is to destroy the presidency of Barack Obama!

The Republicans will not compromise for the better good, and yet some Dems still believe they will! Our party leaders need to get a fucking clue!!!

Click on "Republicans show no interest in working..."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/#39901818

I can't imagine a more relevant segment to cut and paste on DU's front page. If Dems did get it (asks Rachel), how would they be running their campaigns differently?

And I ask: If Dem voters get it, how dare anyone sit this election out?

[msongs]

1. to this very day a certain high placed democratic politician is still calling for bipartisanship. n

[RiverStone]

2. Make that a couple of high placed Dems...

I'm afraid you can't ever compromise with a bully. Taking such action (Harry Reid) only leads to getting your ass kicked! I know, even our President....

[Kurovski]

5. He can vote along with Mitch for his own impeachment?

That'll be something.

[auntsue]

3. I saw the show

and dems trying to compromise with reps is like - I'm playing chess and you're playing hockey - i'm gonna get my ass kicked. They don't have the slightest concept of the word compromise. We have to take as many seats as possible and not give an inch. Then use every legal means possible to bring to the light of day the illegal, treasonous activities of the Bush administration and prosecute the criminals !

[bigtree]

4. I think she stretched it a bit

These legislators know just how little they're going to get from republicans. The only reason the talk of compromise is coming from our party and President is a direct response to the republicans' promises of obstruction. It makes no sense, as Rachael suggested it did, that Democrats actually believe they'll get any further than they already have with the republicans they've been dealing with all year. The idea is to provide a contrast to voters.

What's the alternative? To emulate the republicans? What's that going to get us?

It's a political posture to highlight the republicans as the obstructionists they are. If Democratic legislators didn't make these declarations, the voting public would be inclined to blame the republican intransigence and obstruction on both parties.

[yurbud]

7. it would be fine to talk a bipartisan game if they worked around GOP procedural roadblocks more

but they act like they really expect GOP cooperation, and pre-compromise to get it.

[bigtree]

8. there was talk today from Reid and Kerry about challenging/changing Senate rules

. . . to deal with the filibuster.

[yurbud]

10. they need to just do it. Can't they changes rules the first day with a simple majority?

[bigtree]

11. indeed they can

That move, when upheld by a voice vote, would nullify the present filibuster system. I do read, though, where they're looking to change the rule, not just eliminate it.

[yurbud]

12. will they ever learn that pre-compromise gets them neither support from the public or GOP votes?

they need to keep it simple: Republicans abused it, so it's GONE, period.

[Life Long Dem]

6. The Republicans are saying

they will be doing what they have been doing for the last two years. And that's nothing. Nothing but blocking on anything moving forward. There will be no compromising on anything.

So when you vote for a Republican, your voting against what you would like to see passed.

[the redcoat]

9. The same thought keeps popping up in my head lately...

This would be hilarious if it wasn't so disconcerting.