The GOP takeover of the South is complete. While I'll likely have more on this piece in the next day or so, this quote really struck me as ... you'll see:
It’s much the same next door in Georgia, where five Democratic legislators have become Republicans since Election Day.
“Democrats have now become the party of the [Atlanta] metro area and of blacks,” said state Rep. Alan Powell, one of the party switchers and a veteran northeastern Georgia pol. “That’s not to be derogatory. It’s just what it is.”
Ah sure, it wasn't derogatory, it was just reason enough for him to take his Dixiecrat ass to the other side of the aisle, which is as pure (and white) as the driven snow. Those Dixiecrats haven't been Democrats for a long time, and their racism sullied our party. Good riddance.
I get that there are those who think Obama can do no wrong, or that criticism of his more boneheaded moves are beyond the pale. But the only people applauding Obama's move to freeze federal salaries made no one happy except the Villagers. Digby:
Look, when the president's staunchest defenders are villagers like Borger and King, you know he's on the wrong track. In fact, you really don't need to know anything more than when they say something is "smart politics" to reject it out of hand and start over.
I hope the White House is not taking any comfort from this support from beltway gasbags. It's a Democratic disease to think that pleasing the wealthy celebrities who make up the political punditocracy is a good guide to successful governance. These are, after all, people who are so caught up in their useless false equivalence that they continually ask why the relations between the two parties are so hostile. Sure it's rhetorical, but the problem is that in their view it's perfectly obvious that if only the president would just pass the Republican agenda everything would be fine. And what could be wrong with that?
And leave it to Erickson to best point out what Obama really did yesterday. Asked whether Republicans reciprocate, he basically laughed:
Erickson: I think they probably demand more seeing as he folded so easy on this one. Why not?
Yeah, why not?
Had Obama ceded this action as part of a broader deal that included, say, letting the millionaire tax cuts expire, then it would be unpleasant (and bad economics), but at least you could justify it as a necessary concession in search of a deal with the GOP. But Obama negotiates against himself, time and time again, without demanding a single vote or concession from the GOP.
Defend the man all you want, but there's nothing in the world that'll support the notion that the President has an ounce of negotiating acumen in him. He just thinks, time and time again, that showing good faith will win him GOP support. All the while, they laugh in his face.
Obama supporters, be pissed off about that -- that Republicans are making a joke out of Obama, and that he's enabling that. Don't get pissed at those who point out what is painfully obvious. Us growing cadre of critics want Obama to succeed, and are screaming at him to quit this current path, because it leads to nothing but pain and suffering -- otherwise known as President Palin.
Fred Hiatt weeps for Tom DeLay, fainting over the criminalization of breaking the law while doing politics. But back in the day?
The Washington Post
February 18, 1999, Thursday, Final Edition
Mr. Clinton and Contempt
SECTION: EDITORIAL; Pg. A20
LENGTH: 470 words
JUDGE SUSAN Webber Wright is reportedly considering whether to hold President Clinton in contempt of court for his false deposition testimony in the Paula Jones suit. A contempt citation, if she chooses to issue one, would be an appropriate coda to the Senate's acquittal of the president last week.
One has to admire the manner in which Judge Wright has conducted herself throughout the past year. Unlike Kenneth Starr, the judge before whom Mr. Clinton's lies were told has not injected herself into the impeachment process. As long as the House of Representatives was considering impeachment and as long as the Senate trial was underway, she did not actively consider the contempt issue. Even now her consideration seems preliminary. But this restraint on her part does not now preclude her from exercising the inherent authority of a judge to supervise her own courtroom. And Mr. Clinton, having sworn to tell the truth in a deposition before her and then having violated that oath, properly remains subject to her disciplinary authority.
You see? Judges have TO ACT when Democrats break the law! When Republicans do so, why pass the fainting salts! It's nothing more than criminalizing politics!