As President Obama and his administration work to implement a stimulus plan intended to fix eight years of neglect, mismanagement and irresponsibility in Washington, we see the “loyal opposition” in the Republican Party is mustering its forces against it.

The problem, according to GOP leaders from Mitch McConnell, John McCain and John Boehner all the way up to defacto party boss Rush Limbaugh (my apologies to Mr. Steele, but as Georgia Representative Phil Gingrey can tell you, Rush is clearly your party’s 800-pound gorilla) is that the Democrats aren’t being nearly “bi-partisan” enough. Apparently, by “bi-partisan” they mean that the majority party isn’t giving the minority party everything they want.

Limbaugh, in a recent national Op-Ed, went so far as to suggest that President Obama should allow the GOP to control 46% of the stimulus program, since that’s the popular vote percentage won by Senator McCain last November. That’s an interesting proposition, I suppose, but I wonder why Rush wasn’t advocating that the Democratic party set the nation’s agenda in early 2001, given Al Gore’s popular vote victory over President Bush. And of course, it’s completely at odds with six years of the Bush administration’s method of imposing its will, absent any compromise whatsoever, on the Democratic minority (and virtually zero compromise even during the last two years of Democratic control in Congress).

Compromises have already been made, and will continue to be made as the proposed program works its way through the legislative process. I think they should work on trimming some of the "pork" (for lack of a better description) and focus more on infrastructure and the jobs that creates. But mere compromise is not what the GOP wants. No, they want to impose their will, in its entirety, and nothing less will do. That is the definition of compromise when applied to the Democratic agenda by the Republicans: “give us everything we want.”

More alarming than the GOP’s behavior, however, which really doesn’t come as too much of a shock, is the media’s purchase – lock, stock and barrel – of the Republican party line that Obama must negotiate with the minority. In point of fact, he does not. The Democrats control a sizeable majority in the House, and fall just shy of a filibuster-proof margin in the Senate. They control these positions by virtue of elections in which most of the country just stated that they want Barack Obama – not John McCain, Sarah Palin or any other part of the GOP – calling the shots in America. George W. Bush was never right about much, but he did get one thing right: elections have consequences. The consequence of the 2008 general election is that the GOP is in no position to “insist” on anything. I agree that a threat of a filibuster is almost certainly a bluff. They cannot afford to be seen by the American people as utterly obstructionist, and I hope that the smarter members recognize that.

That said, they can vote for the package, or against it, as they wish, but the whining that the winners aren’t being fair is more than just unbecoming, it’s rank hypocrisy. And someone needs to call them on it.

All they need from the replacement is a promise to vote for cloture in the event of any filibuster. He can vote however, and with whomever he wants on any specific legislation.

Is there nobody left who understands how the Senate works?

Advertising does not create culture, it reflects it. The world can be a cruel and unfair place. People can be mean and superficial. Sigh.

Perhaps someone who hasn't watched what has long been the most significant pop cultural event in the country in more than 20 years isn't the ideal person to offer commentary on popular culture. Although, I suppose as an anthropoligical experiment, having some dolt emerge from a cave and observing their reactions to the modern world can be interesting. It worked for "Encino Man" anyway.

When even NPR's chief Washington reporter talks about needing 60 votes to pass something in the Senate (as I heard Monday evening driving home), it is clearly time for everyone to return to high-school civics class.

I will say this slowly, in all-caps, so that even the idiots can understand:

THE REQUIRED MAJORITY VOTE IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE FOR THE PASSAGE OF ANY BILL IS 51.*

*Actually, since there are currently only 99 senators, pending the seating of Al Franken, that number is 50, but I don't want to confuse the simpletons any further.

It takes 60 votes to invoke cloture, the means by which filibusters are terminated. It is permissible, under the rules of the Senate, to vote for cloture and still vote against the bill in question on the actual merits.

Allowing a filibuster to delay the economic relief this country desperately needs is political suicide for all but the very safest senators in the very reddest of states. If Harry Reid is unwilling to call the bluff of a few un-American extremists, he should be run out of the Capitol on a rail and replaced with a majority leader with a backbone and a brain.

But to my original point, if even senators and the political journalists that cover our government cannot properly recite the most basic points of our Constitution and the Rules of the Senate, we are doomed as a representative democracy.