Can someone please tell me in basic terms why we have to Compromise when Democrats control the house

[SweetieD]

senate and white house?

Am I not understanding something? I admit I haven't followed the news on this extremely thoroughly. But aren't we in a lame duck session? Why do Democrats have to compromise at all on the party position.

[jwirr]

1. The 60 vote rule.

[daa]

2. Right and Bush had HOW MANY????????????? Not 60 nt

[DearAbby]

8. Bush knew how to Bluster

America loves a tough guy, all swagger and not much else.

[HughBeaumont]

14. He had lots of Ds who were really Rs, that's how.

It's why no progressive agenda ever sees the light of day. They not only bought the media, they bought the "opposition" party.

[RandomThoughts]

3. They don't

That is something people have to learn.

Then ask,

why do they?

[howaboutme]

4. Forget the politcians they are bought and paid for

It's because the super rich have billions of dollars that is taxed at less than 15% which gives them enough to buy off enough politicians (both D&R) so that the agenda is always working in their favor.

We all need to regularly listen to George Carlin's rant and how he says "Forget the politicians"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q

[xiamiam]

5. bingo..nt

[ieoeja]

6. What do you mean, "we"?

Democrats have full control of the House. And a majority of House representatives are Conservative.

Democrats have partial control of the Senate. And a majority of the Senators are Conservative. Plus, you need 60 votes to end debate before a vote may be taken on a bill. Even if all Democrats and Independants, both Liberal and Conservative, voted to end debate, we would still need, I think, 3 Republicans at the moment to get the 60 votes necessary to end the debate.

[The Backlash Cometh]

7. Because we don't really have a two party system?

[ClassWarrior]

10. Yeah we do. David Sirota calls the parties the Money Party and the People Party...

...I believe. And there are plenty of the former among the Dems, but none of the latter are Rape-Publicans.

NGU.

[mmonk]

9. Because Democrats have ideological allies with Republicans

in it's party and the Republicans don't have ideological allies with Democrats in it's party.

[Still a Democrat]

11. You need 60 votes to close a Republican fillibuster

and they often peel away a few Democrats.

[groundloop]

12. My list starts (and ends) with the senate

IMHO Harry Reid hasn't done a good job of getting things done in the past 2 years. I strongly suspect that if Reid had played tough with the repukes at the start of this session (force them to actually filibuster rather than cave in at the mere threat) that we'd have accomplished much much more and not be where we are right now.

It's a screwed up system where a sizeable majority of senators is ham-strung by a few. I hear talk of Reid making changes to the filibuster rules for the next session, unfortunately I don't believe that would be a good time to do it. Nothing much is going to happen anyway with a repuke controlled House, the "nuclear option" or whatever Reid wants to call his changes to the filibuster should be saved until something can actually get done.

[howaboutme]

18. Why not make them filibuster?

Regardless of Party the filibuster should be an actual filibuster instead of a virtual one. Make the Senate stay in session and talk and talk. Why do they (just one Senator) get an easy out on what should be very heavy burden. I say this even in view of Bernie Sanders threatened filibuster over the tax cuts for the rich.

[Edweird]

13. Because Obama likes RW policy better than liberal/progressive policy.

Kind of like 'accidentally on purpose', but with everyone's life in the balance.

[seabeyond]

15. and the 60 vote issue is merely fabricated? nt

[Edweird]

16. A handy excuse. N/T

[seabeyond]

17. a reality is not an excuse. it is, oh, i dont know, a fact. lol. nt