The issue is whether Congress will demand a restoration of its powers and prerogatives or whether, instead, we will have a continuation of the state of affairs where we live under a virtually omnipotent presidency which exercises all sorts of powers the Constitution does not assign to it.

That is certainly the big question. I've fretted over this one for some time, the temptation to keep the Imperial Presidency in place and hope for a good Emperor-President is no way to ensure a safe future for our country. The supine Congressional leadership needs to be replaced by actual Congressional leaders with a clear understanding of separation of powers -- a lot of what Bush/Cheney inflicted on our country came from the rubber-stamp GOP Congress and prostrate "third way" Democratic minority. Time for a proper restoration of our country's institutions, before it's too late. But do voluntarily step away from such great and unaccountable power will require incredible fortitude -- if Obama does this, in no uncertain terms, and helps rein in the Executive Branch, helps bring rule of law back on the table, he'll already have performed statesmanship far beyond any of his peers.

Palin's like the anti-Adlai Stevenson -- where he was the liberal, male, Democratic, gracious, intellectual also-ran, Palin's the reactionary, female, Republican, graceless, ignorant also-ran. Let's hope the GOP dutifully trots her out for a couple of elections, to ensure a Democratic White House for a generation or so.

To quote from THE NATION, which justifiably gives props to Howard Dean (a nice change from the journalistic fellatio thrown Rahm Emanuel's way for "leading the Democrats to victory in 2006")

"The Democratic Party will not win elections or build a lasting majority solely by changing its rhetoric, nor will we win by adopting the other side's positions," the former governor of Vermont said when he announced his candidacy for the party job. "We must say what we mean -- and mean real change when we say it."

That is something the Democrats desperately need to take to heart, even in the midst of celebrating victory. Real change means real results. The Republican beast will spring back to life if the Democrats aren't willing or able to deliver change and improvement to people's daily lives. The remaining Republican rearguard will work hard to try to keep change from coming, but Democrats will need to fight through. An election was won, but the victory's not there if results aren't delivered.

Howard Dean gets that. I sure hope Obama does, too. I don't think the DLC and the Blue Dogs ever will.

One of the GOP's worst flaws is that it's only about seizing power, not about governing. To the GOP, everything is designed to help it win elections. Good governance and administration are incidental to them, when contrasted with the overweening need to win power. Most movement reactionaries scoff at governing and administration -- I mean, actually having to serve the people you're ruling? How gauche is that? They like the part of rulership where they win power, where they get to tell people what to do and how to live, but they don't like the part where they have to actually do stuff -- the noblesse without the oblige, basically.

And in an environment where Americans come to expect actual good results and outcomes from their politicians, the GOP are in a real jam. That's why their strategy from 2006 onward was to work strenuously to keep the Democrats from getting anything done -- because so long as the government's wheels spin ineffectually, it levels the playing field for the opportunistic and power-hungry GOP ("See? Government's the problem! And if it's not, we'll MAKE it the problem!")

Progress raises people's hopes and expectations -- if they hope for more, want more out of their government, that is a stake in the heart to the Republican partisan mode of operation, which wants a kind of "tyranny of hopelessness" to settle upon the majority as a way of keeping a place for it at the table. If Americans hope for better, insist on results from their government, the Republicans are simply lost -- empty slogans, callow ideology, ruthless partisanship, shameless corruption -- these things don't bring good results in government and administration, but instead yield only disaster. Let's hope enough Americans have learned this to ensure the GOP is in the wilderness for good.

"The liberal wing of the GOP has caused the collapse of the Republican Party." Richard Viguerie said, "Republicans will make a comeback only after they return to their conservative roots."

The above is simply wrong. The GOP has successfully eroded its liberal wing into oblivion -- the Democrats now occupy the ideological space once held by so-called "liberal Republicans." Both parties sacrificed their left wings after the 60s -- the Democrats in an abrupt separation from them, the Republicans by forcing their moderates to march with the movement reactionaries, or else undermining and eliminating them.

I hope the GOP does fade into oblivion, but not if it means the Democrats ceasing to be actual Democrats. My concern is more whether we'll get honest progressivism back in the Democratic Party, or whether they'll simply crouch in the center and center-right and call that "change" and expect the majority of us to buy into that. The most liberal of our political leadership are virtually right-wingers when compared with actual liberals in other First World countries. We need bold ideas and steps forward, and that will require opening a lot of minds as to what is possible and desirable for our country's future, rather than everybody cramming into the ideological shoebox the Right has made for "acceptable" ideas, branding and demonizing everything else as beyond the pale.

Let's hope for Palin '12 and watch the GOP crucify itself, or else go to war against the rest of the country (not a sanguine prospect for a party packed with chickenhawks).