A President Obama won't have to work with the Repukes in

[cali]

anything more than a ceremonial and perfunctory manner.

Democrats are on track to pick up 5+ seats in the Senate. That will bring them to a solid 55. It is much harder for the minority party to hold together when they are significantly outnumbered. And all a President Obama has to do is use some conciliatory rhetoric and then say that regretfully the republicans are not willing to work with him and push through his agenda. It's also easier under the described circumstances to pick off a few repukes.

In the House the democrats will make gains of at least 10 seats, and probably quite a few more, and whatever you say about Pelosi, on a lot of votes she's managed to keep the dem caucus pretty damned unified. That will become easier. And there is no filibuster in the House.

A President Obama can look magnaminous by working with repubs on non-critical issues. It'll be window dressing, but so what. He'll have the larger megaphone, by far.

There is no indication whatsoever that Obama would give in to repub demands on anything. In fact, if it's not evident to you that he has a strong killer instinct, you've not been paying attention.

The faux concern that Obama is a stealth winger or weak when it comes to fighting it out, is just that- phony. Is he as progressive as I'd wish? No, but he's not repuke lite in any way and he has progressive instincts as demonstrated by elements of his record.

If elected, he stands a pretty fair chance of pushing his agenda through Congress.

[LeftCoast]

1. Republicans in the Senate will do their best to act as a boat-anchor

CA's legislature is a good example. Repubs only hold a minority, but no budget can pass w/out them so they hold everything up until they get their way. I suspect DC repubs will do the same.

[cali]

2. Well, I'm not sure comparing a state leg to the Congress

is apt, and CA has a repug Governor. History demonstrates that it's often quite hard for a real minority in the Congress to hold the line.

[LeftCoast]

3. The situation has been the same for quite some time

Even with a Dem governor they do the same. I hope you're right about the pugs in DC, but I really think they'll do the boat anchor routine.

I'm off to work now...nice chatting with you! :hi:

[RC]

7. Only if it is a Dem minority is it hard to hold the line.

A repug minority still gets their way too much of the time.

I'm wondering how many families were threatened and how many horse heads were needed so the repug can continue their criminal ways?

[dempartisan23]

4. good point

i think with the economy tanking we will gain many more seats than that. no one expected george allen to get beat in 06. i expect alot of pleasant surprises in november.

[splat]

5. Wow, that's how you unite the country! Strong killer instinct, dominate!

War. Here. No.

[cali]

6. um, that made a lot of sense.

not.

[zabet]

8. Not a 'faux concern' when he already has worked with the repugs..

"On March 2, 2007 Obama gave a speech at AIPAC, America's pro-Israeli government lobby, wherein he disavowed his previous support for the plight of the Palestinians. In what appears to be a troubling pattern, Obama told his audience what they wanted to hear. He recounted a one-sided history of the region and called for continued military support for Israel, rather than taking the opportunity to promote the various peace movements in and outside of Israel.

Why should we believe Obama has courage to bring about change? He wouldn't have his picture taken with San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom when visiting San Francisco for a fundraiser in his honor because Obama was scared voters might think he supports gay marriage (Newsom acknowledged this to Reuters on January 26, 2007 and former Mayor Willie Brown admitted to the San Francisco Chronicle on February 5, 2008 that Obama told him he wanted to avoid Newsom for that reason.)

Obama acknowledges the disproportionate impact the death penalty has on blacks, but still supports it, while other politicians are fighting to stop it. (On December 17, 2007 New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine signed a bill banning the death penalty after it was passed by the New Jersey Assembly.)

On September 29, 2006, Obama joined Republicans in voting to build 700 miles of double fencing on the Mexican border (The Secure Fence Act of 2006), abandoning 19 of his colleagues who had the courage to oppose it. But now that he's campaigning in Texas and eager to win over Mexican-American voters, he says he'd employ a different border solution.

It is shocking how frequently and consistently Obama is willing to subjugate good decision making for his personal and political benefit."

----------------------------
This article even shows how Obama talks one way on the
Iraq War but has consistently supported it in his voting--
you know, the votes he actually was qualified to vote
for, not a vote he could speculate about.
----------------------------

"First, he opposed the war in Iraq while in the Illinois state legislature. Once he was running for US Senate though, when public opinion and support for the war was at its highest, he was quoted in the July 27, 2004 Chicago Tribune as saying, "There's not that much difference between my position and George Bush's position at this stage.
The difference, in my mind, is who's in a position to execute." The Tribune went on to say that Obama, "now believes US forces must remain to stabilize the war-ravaged nation ­ a policy not dissimilar to the current approach of the Bush administration."
-----------------------
WOW!!! Obama agreed with da shrub!!!!

Read the whole article at:http://www.counterpunch.org/gonzalez02292008.html