ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Commentary Blogs -> Discriminations

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Legal Commentary

: Discriminations

The Importance Of Scott Brown: Everyone Agrees, But ...

ADVERTISEMENTS

For once, everyone agrees: the astounding election of Scott Brown changes everything. But as usual, when everyone agrees it?s wise to wonder what everyone is missing.

What is lost among the cacophony of ?cataclysmic change!? that is coming from Left, Right, and Center, I think, is realization of the fact that reducing the number of Senate Democrats from 60 to 59 puts it right back it was shortly after Obama was elected. Actually, it puts it back to one better than when Obama was elected. There were only 58 Democrats in the Senate until Al Franken, who ultimately won 42% of the vote in Minnesota plus a fraction more than Norm Coleman, was sworn in the Democrats held only 58 seats. With Franken?s swearing in they were up to 59, and when Arlen Specter switched parties at the end of April 2009 they finally had 60.

At the time everyone thought that 58, then 59, Senators put Obama in an all but unassailably commanding position to accomplish his hope and change, center-left, change the tone, bi-partisan agenda. Silly everyone. Who knew (other than those out of touch, angry, recalcitrant, racist right wingers) that the president would assume that his election gave him a carte blanche to abandon even the pretense of bi-partisanship and push through an uncompromisingly liberal agenda.

President Obama and his administration have attempted to justify their gleeful spending spree by explaining that they had no idea how bad the recession was until they got into office. That doesn?t speak very well of their understanding, but they can hardly claim that they didn?t realize that if they truly wanted to change the tone, reduce divisiveness, and increase bi-partisanship they?d have to, you know, compromise at least a little. The Democrats like to claim that there is no point compromising because the Republicans oppose everything. In the words of that archetypical ?progressive,? Rep. Anthony Wiener (D, NY) this morning, commenting on his ?expectations for bipartisanship?:

I don't hold out any hope for my Republican colleagues. From almost the word go they've made it clear their strategy has been to stop anything from happening. That's a given.
Dropping for 60 Democratic Senators back to the post-election total of 59 is only a calamity for an administration that takes it as ?given? that there is no point in attempting to compromise with the opposition party, even on issues where polls show the public opposing its signature policy by margins that range from significant to overwhelming.

Full post as published by Discriminations on January 20, 2010 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0127 secs (new cache)