'gratuitous clause'

gratuitous clause

No, no. He's talking about Gratuitous Claus, who comes down the chimney at five in the afternoon after the present opening and big early supper, and distributes lots more presents and food.

Hmm

Here's some more of Nancy Pelosi's pledges about their first 100 hours in power:

"impeachment is off the table"

"One thing, however is unchanged: America's commitment to the safety and security of the State of Israel is unwavering. America and Israel share an unbreakable bond: in peace and war; and in prosperity and in hardship." NancyP @ AIPAC...

I can't wait to see *how much* things will change.

I mean, they fired Rummy, just like Hitler fired Goring... No, wait!

I take it the back & forth with abb1 reflects that you have corrected a typo in Baker's original -- you oughtn't do that with quoted material -- just [sic] 'em instead. Thus ends my time-wasting aside.

Hmmm... so this is what the new era of Democratic control looks like in the blogosphere: seeing who can scream "sellout" fastest at the Dems, and worrying about typos. Looks like we have a little too much time on our hands after the election.

(and now maybe I understand why Karl Rove's "permanent Republican majority" didn't last; it's hard to rechannel all that anger into productive governing).

seeing who can scream "sellout" fastest at the Dems

I've poked around a bit further on this, and it may in fact be real. And if so, it's something WELL worth screaming "sellout" about. We're talking a huge amount of money.

Jonathan incorrectly assumes a track record of selling out indicates future pursuit of the same practice. Such pessimism! In fact, his criticism may perversely guarantee that the Democrats sell out (again). Only this time, to prove that they didn't intend to, they'll not only sell out, but help the wingnuts sharpen the knives with which we are to be carved.

Shame on you, Jonathan! Why, why, why this is making Karl Rove laugh.

Hey Jonathan.
I've got no problem with watching to make sure that the Dems actually act like Dems. And I'm glad you've checked into this a bit more, since one of my reactions was that it seemed unfair to start bashing on the basis of one person's account of one NPR story.

But, like J. Alva says, if we turn against the Democratic leadership so hard two months before they even take power, it'll be pretty hard for them to govern, or to take progressives seriously.

So, knowing that in the coming months there will be trial balloons, compromises, and actual disappointments, it might make sense to start thinking about how and when to respond so we don't overreact and undermine the best hope we've got for progressive change. I'd suggest trying some general principles such as: double-checking the facts of a story, and maintaining some perspective (no reacting on the basis of just one report, or one politician's statements). Give the Dems at least one chance to come back to their base before roasting them. Rather than criticize, suggest alternatives, and mobilize positive messages from supporters for this alternative. Focus on the specific issue, and avoid questioning the sincerity, integrity, etc. of the leader unless a pattern emerges.

OK, that's not a very good list, but you get the idea, and maybe we can start kicking these ideas around to stop the irrestible cynical rush to the "I knew we couldn't trust anyone" game that gets us nowhere. Can the blogosphere help move things forward, or is it just a tool for being mad?

irrestible? Dang, I miss spellcheck when I type to these comment areas. irresistable.

No impeachment, and no real change in Medicare—after such a divisive campaign season, who among us does not welcome the smooth and firm hand that Madame Speaker-to-be Pelosi has on the tiller of the ship of state?

Let the healing begin!

Whistler Blue: If you don't demand what you want, you have no one to blame but yourself when you don't get it. There is never, ever a good time to quit demanding your rights from political leaders, whether they are in full power or not.

I'll suggest a couple things "oversight" and "investigations" mean "revenge" and "impeachment".

I'm hoping they go slowly, gather the evidence and then, when the public knows its the only thing to do, they'll start impeachment proceedings.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I doubt it.

Hi Hedge,
I don't disagree; I am all in favor of pushing Pelosi and the Dems on Medicare, the bankruptcy bill, etc. And yes, the agenda for January is being set now, so it's time to raise our voice. It's more a disagreement of tactics or tone. If we start yelling "sellout" after one news report, and treating Pelosi like Delay before she finishes her first post-election lunch with the President, don't be surprised when she decides you're too fickle, ideological, cynical or impossible-to-please to bother with.

We do have an opportunity to push for real gains; it's time to be bricklayers, not brickthrowers.

I also think there is a big difference between yelling sellout and making demands. Just make the analogy in real life. . .if you knew someone who you thought had agreed to give you something and then you heard they were reconsidering, and you walked up to them shouting "sellout" instead of saying, "hey! make sure i get that thing you promised!", you have subtly but very significantly shifted the angle of the conversation, and actually removed some of the pressure behind your demands.