The filibuster isn't in the Constitution. It's merely a hole in the Senate rules which they unwisely chose to institutionalize instead of ending. Now the filibuster is the primary reason the Senate has become a dysfunctional body. It needs serious reform. I can't believe the framers would have structured it as they did if they knew what it would become.

This story is based on anonymous sources. At first I believed it because it fit the opinion I already held that Lieberman was doing this to screw over the Democrats any way he can. However, I yell about anonymous sources when I think the sources are lying, so I'm going to be consistent and demand to know just who is saying this. Otherwise, though I'll continue to believe the thrust of the article, I will continue to acknowledge this opinion is mere suspicion.

I don't mean purging Republicans. I mean going after Democrats who seem to be doing more harm than good. Hopefully we can be more strategic and less witchhunt-like about it. Please pardon my link to something I wrote, but this is on topic: http://www.mnprogressiveproject.com/diary/4562/to-purge-or-not-to-purge

Republicans aren't just going after some incumbents who vote like Democrats, they're insisting on purity. They're going after Lindsey Graham, so who is pure enough? I'm all in favor of going after democrats who do more harm than good, but let's be a little strategic about it. If Lincoln is going to lose the general election anyway, there's no loss in picking a better Democrat. Some of these blue dogs who vote with the Republican on big issues time after time should be targeted, but let's not get after every Democrat who casts a dissenting vote. Let's look at individual situations and think strategically.

So often in his interviews with political figures, Stewart asks questions his audience asks often, but never when there's a public official who has to answer and can do something about it. I'm glad Stewart asked why Republicans could get things done with just a majority and Democrats can't, and I'm glad Biden is P.O'd too and tired of Senate excuses. More important though is someone with influence realizes the public gets it and is angry about it. Likewise with question about how the bank bailout didn't come in the form of helping people in trouble with mortgages and letting it trickle up to the banks. I didn't think Biden answered that as well as he can, but the important point is the point was made to someone who understood it and has Obama's ear.

When Norm Coleman's lead was reduced in the re-tallying after election night, Republicans started screaming out their baseless charges of fraud. I notice Democrats aren't insisting someone must be trying to rob Owens. Since there's no evidence of fraud, this would seem like dog bites man, but I can't help noticing anyway.

For those of us not form New York, how does it happen that the Assembly is so overwhelmingly Democratic, but the Senate is so close?

The opposition isn't merely being intransigent. They've increased the use of Senate filibusters exponentially. Filibusters were hardly new in Roosevelt's time, but they were rare. Basically, other than bills that might weaken segregation, a majority could push through what they wanted. Without the filibuster, I've little doubt the pace of stimulus and other needed changes would be sped up considerably. Just to put it in perspective, health care reform has already taken longer than it too to get Social Security from proposal to signed bill, and that had to be done from scratch.

Yes, I can accept there are more procedural problems now, but the technology is much faster. So I'm definitely blaming the conservatives in the Senate, and that includes both parties. Somehow, with conservatism so moribund, they've got about half of each House. Something is wrong.

Maybe studies like this will sway a few people. I suppose the good news is the results in Maine, and last year in California, show only a few people need to be swayed to change the results. Still, the majority of marriage opponents won't be swayed by facts because it's a religious issue for them. Until you can find a bible passage supporting gay marriage, they'll be against it. The trick is to find a few more people whose prejudices haven't hardened yet.

and no rumor-mongering please, everyone. My observation of the reporting on mass shootings is much of the initial information is wrong. Big aspects could be wrong. Anyone else remember the reports of Middle Eastern terrorists blowing up the Oklahoma City federal building?

So let's not speculate, divine motives, assign blame, cast suspicion, and just wait for facts.

In the opinion of one Minnesotan (me) who has been watching Pawlenty since he began his gubernatorial campaign in 2002, Pawlenty isn't dumb. He isn't crazy. Don't think he Bachmann with a statewide office. He might be the smartest likely candidate the GOP has. OK, that a low bar, and I don't know for sure he hasn't just decided to release his inner wingnut since he decided to go for president instead of a third term as governor, but he a conniver. It looks like he calculated that he would do best playing whole hog to the wacky wing of conservatism. He not only has sharp political instincts, but he's smart enough that he probably has thought a move ahead, and he's not just reacting. That would explain why he's usually a beat behind the likes of Bachmann and Palin.

I suppose I could have read the whole entry before assuming the mention of Oberstar got left out. Still getting used to the new site layout. I like the dropdown when clicking "continued".