AP Projects James Webb Win Over George Allen in Virginia

-

reid pelosi.jpg
That’s it.
The Dems will take the Senate. They now have a one seat margin.
Long live House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Long live Majority Leader Harry Reid.
Joe Biden takes the helm at Foreign Relations. Carl Levin will Chair Armed Services.
Big changes.
Now Reid is going to have to huddle with his folks, get them on the same page, prioritize, and solve the problem of so many Senate Dems vying to head the party.
Now it will be important for Dems to work hard to disprove the thesis of many that winning both the Senate and the House will make taking the White House in ’08 a tougher challenge.
— Steve Clemons

Comments

53 comments on “AP Projects James Webb Win Over George Allen in Virginia

  1. MP says:

    POA writes: “As I recall, just a short time ago you were counseling everyone that there was no reason even to vote as the election would surely be stolen.”
    I never told anyone that there was no reason to vote. Why do some of you always have to misrepresent someone’s position in order to debate them? Is it your contention that making sure the voting process is secure and uncorrupted should not be at the very top of our list of priorities?”
    This is too f-ing funny!!! What more can one say about this? Of course, you did…many, many, many times. You also ridiculed the one person on this site (as far as I’ve read) who said he was going to put “boots on the ground” (his own) to help make sure that the process was uncorrupted in my small part of the world, at least to the degree I was able.
    You know, you have a lot of good things to say. You have an admirable sense of morality and moral outrage at what’s happening. But you really shoot yourself in the foot a lot with some incredibly stupid statements and untenable positions. Why not try saying (once in a while), “I was wrong.”

    Reply

  2. Pissed Off American says:

    “As I recall, just a short time ago you were counseling everyone that there was no reason even to vote as the election would surely be stolen.”
    I never told anyone that there was no reason to vote. Why do some of you always have to misrepresent someone’s position in order to debate them?
    Is it your contention that making sure the voting process is secure and uncorrupted should not be at the very top of our list of priorities?
    You just witnessed a landslide. It would have been damned near impossible to steal this election considering the sheer masses that wanted political change. Considering the state of our electoral process, who is to say what manipulation may have occurred should the national concensus have been more closely divided?
    Lieing this nation into war isn’t a crime? Horseshit. It is a direct violation of both Cheney’s and Bush’s oath of office. And if you don’t see the war crimes that have been committed by this Administration than you just plain ain’t paying attention.
    And just WHAT, in your ovine mind, IS an impeachable offense? A few hundred thousand dead bodies rotting in the darkness of this Administration’s deceptions aren’t enough? What, these lying bastards have to kill a couple million before you are willing to remove them from office? Well, hang in there, they’re tryin’.
    Some of you people, to be honest, DESERVE this corrupt lying treasonous batch of monsters in the White House.

    Reply

  3. benjoya says:

    steambomb, pat leahy is the senior dem on judiciary. he’ll be senate chairman. john conyers will be house judiciary chairman. and no one other than comrade rainbowflag pelosi will be speaker. tasty.

    Reply

  4. Carroll says:

    Posted by pauline at November 9, 2006 12:58 PM
    >>>>>>>>
    Thanks I will pass that site on to her sister. Interestingly, one of the things her family is doing to raise money is selling cookbooks made up of receipes from all their friends …the book also has a section on what additives to look for and avoid, and a section on organic foods.

    Reply

  5. Carroll says:

    Impeachment is pointless. Bush is not the sole person responsible for our condition.
    Congress has to be cured of it’s own corruption…that is where it all begins. They have all allowed and promoted thru legistation, the “money rules style of governing” and the politics of “special interest” for their own political benefit, not the country’s.
    I see the next two years of dem congressional control as a test of whether or not congress wants to or is capable of reforming themselves.
    Meanwhile I see a ray of hope in some corners…if we can believe this report from Laura Rosen’s site:..
    McClatchy’s Greg Gordon:
    The new chief of the FBI’s Criminal Division, which is swamped with public corruption cases, says the bureau is ramping up its ability to catch crooked politicians and might run an undercover sting on Congress.
    Assistant FBI Director James Burrus called the bureau’s public corruption program “a sleeping giant that we’ve awoken,” and predicted the nation will see continued emphasis in that area “for many, many, many years to come.”
    So much evidence of wrongdoing is surfacing in the nation’s capital that Burrus recently committed to adding a fourth 15- to 20-member public corruption squad to the FBI’s Washington field office.
    In the past year, former Republican Reps. Duke Cunningham and Bob Ney have pleaded guilty to corruption charges. FBI agents are investigating about a dozen other members of Congress, including as many as three senators. The Justice Department also is expected to begin seeking indictments soon after a massive FBI investigation of the Alaska Legislature.
    If conditions warrant, Burrus said, he wouldn’t balk at urging an undercover sting like the famed Abscam operation in the late 1970s in which a U.S. senator and six House members agreed on camera to take bribes from FBI agents posing as Arab sheikhs.
    “We look for those opportunities a lot,” Burrus said, using words rarely heard at the bureau over the last quarter century. “I would do it on Capitol Hill. I would do it in any state legislature. … If we could do an undercover operation, and it would get me better evidence, I’d do it in a second.” […]
    The FBI does appear to be stepping up its use of electronic surveillance and has conducted stings of state politicians. Bureau agents secretly taped Rep. William Jefferson, D-La., before finding $90,000 in his freezer during a raid last May. Cell phones were wiretapped for four months in an investigation of Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Pa., government sources say.
    As long as this Congress has given the White House carte blanche to tap pretty much everyone without warrants or oversight, it’s kind of delicious to think of the lawmakers squirming under the additional investigatory scrutiny, especially when so many of them apparently have reason to squirm.
    Posted by Laura at 12:33 AM
    November 05, 2006
    >>>>>>>

    Reply

  6. stefan says:

    Are the dems thinking about starting investigations about the business side of the Iraq war, i.e. the massive subcontracting done by Halliburton for the US forces, and the subsequent cash made, where that cash has gone, who made money etc? I’d love to see that..

    Reply

  7. JoMoHo says:

    Amen to healthcare reform!!!

    Reply

  8. MP says:

    Carroll writes: “One of the girls who worked in my vet’s office has been fighting cancer for a year and a half. She has maxed out her 1 million insurance cap mostly due to the cost of her drugs and bone marrow transplants and now her family and friends are out raising money and asking for donations in the community to help pay for the remaining treatment she needs. And politicans spent 30 million + on most of their campaigns in this election????…a bunch of those campaign contributions from drug companies no doubt….this is a sick, sick country children.”
    This issue is tailor-made for the Dems. It’s big. It’s important. It effects HUGE blocks of the voting public on all sides of the aisle. And the public is DEMANDING a solution. I’d start here.

    Reply

  9. MP says:

    Mlaw: “Lieing to the Americna people is probably not even a crime. Take a deep breath, its all good, really.”
    Sad to say, but if lying to the people were a crime or an impeachable offense…virtually every president would have been impeached…and every politician put in jail.
    On a slightly different theme: Jews voted 87% for the Dems this time out…only 10% for Republicans…so I overheard.

    Reply

  10. Matt says:

    Steve,
    You had posted a while back that Reid was going to offer the Senate leadership post to Hillary so that she would not run for President in 2008. Any more on that? Thanks, I love the blog!

    Reply

  11. David in NY says:

    Lots of rumors seem to be swirling about Bush’s approach to Bolton — what will it be, warfare or conciliation? This is his first test — if he tries to push Bolton through, then he’s, as usual, looking for a fight.

    Reply

  12. pauline says:

    Carroll wrote:
    “One of the girls who worked in my vet’s office has been fighting cancer for a year and a half. She has maxed out her 1 million insurance cap mostly due to the cost of her drugs and bone marrow transplants and now her family and friends are out raising money and asking for donations in the community to help pay for the remaining treatment she needs. And politicans spent 30 million + on most of their campaigns in this election????…a bunch of those campaign contributions from drug companies no doubt….this is a sick, sick country children.”
    Big Pharma is really more interested in selling treatments rather than finding cures.
    For your friend, I would heartily suggest checking out Bill Sardi’s site at —
    http://www.knowledgeofhealth.com/
    I personally know three people who used the knowledge from his article, “The Overlooked Cancer Cure From Japan” to completely cure themselves of cancer and today remain cancer free.
    It’s clearly worth a serious inspection.
    One must also rid all the chemicals and additives from the diet — which these days isn’t easy. She should eat simple organic foods and as much as possible. Above all, don’t let her drink or eat any foods with aspartame in it.
    If you google “rumsfeld” and “aspartame”, you’ll know what I mean!

    Reply

  13. DFell says:

    Impeachment is easy. Only requires a simple majority of the House. And then what, does W. pack up and leave? No. you have a “trial” in the Senate, presided over by John Roberts, the CJ of the SCOTUS. After that it requires a 2/3rds vote of the senate to remove the president. Democrats have little more than a simple majority in the Senate, at best.
    It would be impossible to actually remove the President. Therefore impeachment would be little more than political theater. No one is going for it, not because of lack of resolve, but because it would only embitter folks with no real advantage gained.
    It’s fun to argue about, and to dream about- but the math doesnt support the idea, and really it would just make things worse; much, much worse.

    Reply

  14. pkoso says:

    Steve:
    What are some of the “issues that might undermine Reid” and what’s your thought on why a Dem-held House and Senate are more of an obstacle for ’08 than an aid?
    Thanks,
    pkoso

    Reply

  15. Carroll says:

    All I can say is I hope the dems have taken this election as a “lesson”, not just a victory. This wasn’t a vote for them, it was a vote against Iraq and Washington’s own corruption.
    Will people be satisfied with a few domestic goodies like minimum wage raises? Or are we all too informed now to settle for anything less than total overhaul of campaign finance and the lobbying machine..two things that would put an end to a lot of the other problems.
    One of the girls who worked in my vet’s office has been fighting cancer for a year and a half. She has maxed out her 1 million insurance cap mostly due to the cost of her drugs and bone marrow transplants and now her family and friends are out raising money and asking for donations in the community to help pay for the remaining treatment she needs. And politicans spent 30 million + on most of their campaigns in this election????…a bunch of those campaign contributions from drug companies no doubt….this is a sick, sick country children.
    I will give the dems until Feb 1st to start pushing their programs, holding hearings and etc….I will give them slack on Iraq because only God or Allah has an answer to that one, but if campaign reform and lobbying aren’t front and center on their agenda, they are dog meat in 2008 as far as I am concerned.

    Reply

  16. sdemetri says:

    From a letter to my senator Susan Collins who voted for the Military Commissions Act. I would hope the new Congress will re-visit this legislation.
    Thank you for your letter of Oct 27, 2006 regarding the passage of the Military Commissions Act. With regard to the Act I have been considering a speech given in early Oct by Scott Horton, a lawyer and chair of the International Law Center of the New York City Bar at a conference commemorating the Nuremberg trials. He asked the question: “What has this legislation done to the legacy of Nuremberg? Has it granted impunity to persons who committed war crimes? Is that impunity effective, and might it have unintended consequences?”
    This speech is very instructive to me as it plainly lays out the opinion of the US prosecutors at Nuremberg that the lawyers responsible for formulating policy that contradicted the Hague and Geneva Conventions were culpable for their opinions. Some lawyers received prison sentences up to ten years, while Field Marshal Keitel was issued a death sentence. This sentence was arrived at with the aggravating evidence found in his scrawled notes on a memo by lawyer Helmut von Moltke deploring the course the German Justice Dept was taking. Keitel’s scrawled notes said that the Geneva Conventions were “quaint” and “obsolete,” and “they reflected the ‘outmoded notions of chivalric warfare.’” Compare this statement to our own Attorney General’s notion, found in a memo justifying torture, that the Geneva Conventions are “quaint” and “obsolete,” and did not apply to a “new kind of warfare.” US prosecutors found Keitel’s disregard for the Hague and Geneva Conventions grounds for war crimes. How might those same prosecutors view Attorney General Gonzales’s, John Yu’s, or David Addington’s opinions?
    Horton states that the Supreme Court presents in the decision in Hamdan v Rumsfeld, “a straight-forward interpretation of the Geneva Conventions…” And, “the most striking aspect of the Court’s opinion was its forceful and repeated references to the War Crimes Act of 1996. There is little doubt that the Court was concerned that the Administration’s policies were not just inconsistent with Geneva, but in fact potentially criminal under American law.”
    War criminals at the highest levels of government? Let sleeping dogs lie?

    Reply

  17. mlaw230 says:

    POA: My goodness, you are certainly a ray of sunshine.
    As I recall, just a short time ago you were counseling everyone that there was no reason even to vote as the election would surely be stolen. Now you are apparently well into plan “B” i.e. it doesn’t matter who won because they are all the same and all corrupt.
    In addition to the obvious problem that if you impeach Bush you get Cheney, and that if you start today you are unlikely to get a resolution for a year or more, i.e. well into the ’08 election and only a few months left in office anyway, you will split the Party. By all means, Investigate, oversee and if necessary if its as bad as you say, prosecute in ’09 but impeachment makes no sense.
    Lieing to the Americna people is probably not even a crime. Take a deep breath, its all good, really.

    Reply

  18. obsessed says:

    NewsMax says Bolton to step down. Santorum was right with his LOTR analogy — you win one battle and all the peripheral demons start going up in smoke on their own.

    Reply

  19. pauline says:

    from an interview yesterday —
    AMY GOODMAN: What about the war, this being a vote against war? And what does that mean for Democrats right now? What happens?
    RALPH NADER: Well, it means vagueness. Nancy Pelosi was very vague. She said there’s got to be a redirection, there’s got to be a change. But the Democrats don’t have the guts to really have a withdrawal plan. Internationalizing the situation there; having internationally supervised elections; having people of stature bring the three sectarian groups together, as they have in the past — the Kurds and Shiites and Sunnis in the ’50s arranged a modest autonomy within a unified Iraq — and bringing in, in an Islamic nation, peacekeepers, these things require real high-level diplomacy, and the Democrats, you know, are not in the executive branch. Bush is going to stay the course. He’s already announced that he’s going to be in Iraq until the last day of his office. So this will be a test of Hillary Clinton and others, and I don’t think they’re going to be able to meet it.
    AMY GOODMAN: What about what’s happening in the Middle East, in Israel, Palestine, Lebanon? The latest attack on Beit Hanun has killed something like eighteen people, thirteen of one family. You certainly spoke out over the Israeli bombing of Lebanon. Will this ever become a major issue in the US Congress?
    RALPH NADER: Certainly the Democrats are not going to make it a major issue. Nancy Pelosi and others have been with the pro-Israeli lobby for years. Certainly Bush and Cheney aren’t. They don’t understand that the greatest move toward national security in our country and in the so-called effort against terrorism would be to solve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The majority of both people would like a two-state solution. There are extremists in Israel that would like to continue to dominate the West Bank and harass Gaza and block an exit of the people there for traveling and for export of goods. So it’s just –it’s now a steady state, destruction every day of innocent people, as you say, thirteen in one family. The Israeli military know how to pacify Gaza. They know they could take over that town, where these primitive rockets that are wildly inadequate are fired. But it serves the interest of certain political interests in Israel to continue this kind of conflict.
    This is an eminently resolvable conflict. There’s a lot of former Israeli military and intelligence people who know how to do it, people in the Knesset who know what needs to be done. But as long as the US basically says to whoever is in charge, “You can do whatever you want over there, and we’ll still pump $3 – $4 billion and cluster bomb weapons, etc.,” there’s not going to be a resolution. As long as there’s no resolution, there’s going to be an inflammation increasing all over the Islamic world, and our national security will be compromised.
    This campaign, this election, Amy, was basically a mandate-less election for the Democrats. There was really no mandate other than against Bush and do something about Iraq. Domestically, virtually no mandate about rearranging of power, shifting it from corporations to workers, consumers, taxpayers, to communities.
    http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/11/08/1457249

    Reply

  20. p.lukasiak says:

    Your pick for the UN Ambassador nom, Steve? And what’s your sense of the timetable now, given reports that Bolton is set to leave his post next month?
    Steve, of course, is going to suggest some only moderately toxic GOP factotum for the post — when what is truly needed is a complete change in direction. Joe Wilson would be a great choice — and get Jesse Jackson to replace Khalizad in Iraq. Those nominations would make it clear that the US is serious about a change in policy….

    Reply

  21. JoMoHo says:

    Is there a stealth way of getting justice?
    Perhaps, the backroom is where those most guilty will meet just arbitration.
    The Dems will need to “keep” the angry redsters (angry at Republicans) who voted for Dems by default (i.e. un-voters). Therefore, obvious “in your face” attempts at frying these guilty bastards won’t probably fly.
    There is the “we are above” revenge appearance that may help in 2008. If this is performed artfully it just might work. On the one hand the “criminals” must be “revealed” and the revealers must appear merciful. Hence, “where we are” hearings might be helpful.

    Reply

  22. oofda says:

    Don’t the Democrats have 51 seats now to 49 for the Republicans -giving them a two-seat majority?

    Reply

  23. semper fubar says:

    I hope I’m not being naive about Pelosi’s impeachment statement, but for the moment, I think this is the smart thing to do (and trust me, NOBODY wants to see Bush and Cheney swing from a rope more than me.)
    Let the investigations and oversight hearings begin, and let them lead where they may. I think we all know that if Conyers and Waxman and others are let loose on this, the end result will HAVE to be impeachment, or worse. Pelosi just doesn’t have to make an issue of it at this point in time.
    That time will come when EVERYONE agrees that these criminals have broken the law and must be prosecuted for it. Let the evidence be revealed to America first. Then conviction and judgement.
    Oh man oh man, I sure HOPE I’m not being naive about this. We can NOT allow lawlessness at the highest levels of government to go unchecked and unpunished again in this country.

    Reply

  24. ahem says:

    As for the impeachment issue: ‘show, don’t tell.’ The Republicans wanted Clinton impeached, and trolled until they found something — anything — to use against him.
    There’s a backlog of oversight needs doing. There’s a tremendous amount of smart foreign-policy thinking that needs to come in from the cold. Changing the tone doesn’t mean that the Republicans get a free pass — because there are some influences on policy that truly need to be driven out — but it does mean restoring high seriousness to the halls of Congress.
    And frankly, that might mean questioning Biden’s abilities to chair ForRel, given his apparent signal-noise ratio.

    Reply

  25. ahem says:

    Your pick for the UN Ambassador nom, Steve? And what’s your sense of the timetable now, given reports that Bolton is set to leave his post next month?

    Reply

  26. Easy E says:

    Though Pelosi stated that “impeachment is off the table”, is this final?
    Hopefully the Conyers and Waxman position on this issue overrule. Justice must prevail with these criminals. Anything less make Pelosi & Co. nothing more than accomplices to crimes against humanity.

    Reply

  27. Pissed Off American says:

    When I break the law, and am arrested, indicted, prosecuted, and punished, it is called “justice”. When Pelosi or Bush break the law, and are indicted, prosecuted, convicted and punished it is called “getting even”?
    Screw Pelosi. These people hold themselves above the law. She has NO RIGHT to arbitrate the dispensation of the law. Bush and Cheney MUST be held accountable for thier act of taking this nation to war with lies, or we ARE NOT a country whose laws apply to everyone. If Pelosi refuses to pursue this, than she is not only IGNORING the law, she also complicit in BREAKING the law.

    Reply

  28. Marcia says:

    “Democrats are not about getting even; Democrats are about getting results. I have said before and I say again, impeachment is off the table.” – Nancy Pelosi, 11/08/2006
    Justice is not about getting even either. It is about being held responsible for breaking the law, for acts, for dereliction of duty.
    The crimes of this administration are not against the Congress, they are against the people Congress represents.
    This election brings the same relief as the fall of Joe McCarthy and Nixon’s departure. Now the Dems have two years to show the country *how* congress should function.
    There is the all important question of the extension of exective power and the loss habeau corpus.

    Reply

  29. USNewsLink says:

    “Democrats are not about getting even; Democrats are about getting results. I have said before and I say again, impeachment is off the table.” – Nancy Pelosi, 11/08/2006
    MESSAGE TO NANCY PELOSI:
    Impeachment and prosecution of war criminals George Bush, Cheney, Rice, Tenent, and Powell is not off anybody’s table except yours. – Judith Haney

    Reply

  30. jf says:

    P.O.A.: I’d like to repeat one word I saw posted on another site:
    MACACCAAAAAAAAAAAA!

    Reply

  31. p.lukasiak says:

    The smart thing for the Dems to do now is pass populist legislation with the kind of “poison pill” that Bush and the GOP can’t swallow…
    For instance, a bill making the “middle class tax cuts” that are scheduled to expire in 2011 that also immediately revokes all the “fat cat” tax cuts — Make the GOP choose between the middle class and its corporate backers and they lose either way….

    Reply

  32. steambomb says:

    Who will chair the Senate Judiciary? Feingold I hope.

    Reply

  33. Alex says:

    here’s the link for “Organizing for Impeachment: Announcing a Movement”:
    http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/impeach
    Doesn’t look like html can be used in comments.

    Reply

  34. Alex says:

    “Pelosi’s statement that impeachment isn’t on the table ain’t exactly encouraging.”
    Actually it might be off the table for now, but only until the Dems need it.
    Bush is going to have to learn a whole new ballgame of getting along now because of the threat of impeachment. The Dems can use it to extract what they want from him.
    IMO, I think Bush, Cheney, and all their henchmen/associates should be impeached, prosecuted, removed from office, and imprisoned. At a minimum, Cheney should be punished.
    They’ve abused the Constitution and the Bill of Rights more than any other administration in history. If anything, they’ve commited high crimes and treason, which should carry the death penalty. And they should be used as an example for future administrations to show the consequences of their actions, otherwise the US will get something worse in the future.
    They should be held accountable and not be let off free.
    That, and I don’t want them to collect their lifelong government pensions and benefits courtesy of the public for the mess they’ve caused.
    If it was possible, I’d like them to be held financially responsible and liable (as the Enron crooks were) for their actions. They’ve left this country with massive debt and a battered reputation in the world’s eye. Add the fact that they invaded a country and destroyed it, the damages must be in the trillions. Paul Craig Thomas had a good article 1-2 weeks ago on counterpunch.org about this.
    And they should be subject to the penalties of the 1996 War Crimes Act.
    If you’re interested in the impeachment movement, here is
    Organizing for Impeachment: Announcing a Movement

    Reply

  35. Easy E says:

    “Perhaps the Democratic party has effectively been set-up as the scapegoat for the eventual pullout from Iraq and an economy that is about to tank!
    This could only help in setting up another Neocon President in ’08.”
    Two years to undo a disaster that took six years to discombobulate? Hmmm……..

    Reply

  36. Craig says:

    One of the things Democrats need to do is simply hold hearings on where we are. What is the state of our foreign policy, our economy, our military, our energy future and so on? There are good ideas to move forward on for the short term but for anything long range, the nation needs to know where we are.
    What don’t we know now that we should have known two years ago? What don’t we know now that should have known five years ago? Too many Republicans in Congress were poorly informed or too busy rubber stamping whatever Bush wanted. But even Democrats didn’t have full access to information. A co-equal branch of government needs access to information. And a full picture. I sense big changes and new issues in just the next two years alone.

    Reply

  37. Pissed Off American says:

    “Long live House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Long live Majority Leader Harry Reid”
    Really? Think Reid will now follow through on the stunt he pulled with that photo op Phase Two charade, or is he just gonna continue to cash in on the AIPAC trough he feeds from?
    Are we just going to get handed the same old lukewarm rhetoric that these folks have as a trademark, or are they going to take a lesson from Kucinich and Conyers and learn how to wear a proper set of gonads?
    Pelosi’s statement that impeachment isn’t on the table ain’t exactly encouraging.
    And it is certainly intrigueing that just three days after Bush declared Rummie and Dick Devil Cheney as being secure and doing a “fantastic job”, Rummie gets shown the door. Surely Bush and his gang of criminals KNEW they were not going to fare well in the election, so its hard to believe Bush would have made the “fantastic job” comment if he knew he was about to hand Rummie his walking papers. Me thinks these evil bastards are cutting backroom deals with the incoming Dems, and they will completely avoid being held accountable for the GOD DAMNED MURDER of THOUSANDS UPON THOSANDS of human beings that are dead because of the LIES AND DECEPTION that they used to take this nation to war.
    I think Steve’s comments about investigations, oaths, and accountability are way off mark, and these slimey murderous bastards are going to get a pass from the incoming Dems. And the true patriots, like Kucinch or Conyers, are going to be shoved in the same closet that the Republicans shoved them in.
    Screw Reid. That bullshit he pulled with Phase Two was an obvious sell-out, and he got the credit for action when all he did was stage a photo op. And the way he handled the Alito thing was pathetic.
    I really don’t see what all the celebration is about if we are going to just have people like Reid replacing people like Hastert. Google Reid and AIPAC, they are as thick as thieves.
    Bottom line, we are replacing one set of corrupt opportunists with another.
    Steve, you name the bet. I will wager that the investigations you optimistically foresee will never materialize.
    And, just to underscore my cynicism, I feel I must remind all of you that we may have changed the majority in the House, but our media is still enslaved by the same masters it was yesterday. We did not elect a new fourth estate.
    The Patriot Act still stands.
    We are still torturing people.
    Iraq is an irreversable clusterfuck that the Democratic majority will now get blamed for. WHATEVER action the Dems take is doomed to failure, because THERE IS NO SOLUTION to the mess in Iraq. (Saddam had the solution, but we are gonna HANG HIM for employing it.) So, no matter what the Dems do in Iraq, it will still deteriorate into all out civil war and a lot more dying. And whether we pull out or stay, the right will just nod their heads, point their fingers, and say, “See, we told you they didn’t have a plan”.
    Then, of course, now that the Dems have the House, there’s always the option of another 9/11. Now THAT’D show us how bad we needed what Bush was feeding us before them nasty Dems came in with their cowardly ways and derailed the gracious protection of his highness The Decider.
    This ain’t over yet, by a long shot. You folks, in your elation, are forgetting just how evil these bastards really are. They aren’t going away, and they won’t give up. Unless we apply the law and hold these bastards accountable, they are going to return with a vengeance. And, the odds of them being held accountable, if we are handing the reins to people like Reid or Biden, are like a snowball’s chance in hell.

    Reply

  38. gq says:

    I almost feel like placing a wager with Steve on the whole “both chambers bad for Dems” claim.

    Reply

  39. SevenOneEight says:

    All hail King Joe!

    Reply

  40. Steve Clemons says:

    Ben has it absolutely right. Lieberman will caucus with the Dems. I think in the end that old relationships will bind Lieberman to many Dem votes, and given the mood of the nation, Lieberman isn’t going to swim against the current — but he will be less “corrallable” (if that’s spelled right) than when he was a solid and clear Democrat.
    So, no worries. The Dems get Chairmanships, etc….and Lieberman will probably chair a Committee in fact.
    — Steve Clemons

    Reply

  41. TLittle says:

    Winning strategy for Republicans in ’08:
    The Democrats had two years and office and look at their failures (if there aren’t any I am sure they will make som up). The people gave them power and did nothing with it.
    Democrats have been given a unique opportunity here, lets not blow it.
    By the way, Rumsfeld to leave is a great sign that DOD will take back the reins on Iraq. We need a democracy there as much as the Republicans needs a miracle in VA.

    Reply

  42. chris says:

    What are the chances that Lieberman pulls a Jeffords and uses his position to put like-minded (Dem or Republican) Senators in the important committee chairs. Is this a chance for a truly bi-partisan Senate?

    Reply

  43. Ben Rosengart says:

    “Majority” in the Senate is decided by an “organizing resolution”, voted on at the start of the session. This resolution sets down committee memberships and chairmanships, and determines who is the Majority Leader, etc.
    As long as Sanders and Lieberman vote with the Dems on that resolution, it’s a Dem Senate for the duration. As little as I trust Lieberman, I’d be very surprised if he didn’t come through on this.
    I’m sure Steve or someone else can correct me if I’ve gotten any of this wrong.

    Reply

  44. JS says:

    Hey Steve, whats the actual breakdown of the Senate in terms of Republicans and Dems if Dems have 49 and Republicans have 49 and you have two independents?
    I realize the two independents are heavily liberal and will caucus with Dems, but how does this give the Dems the Senate majority.
    I admit I am not fully briefed on the intricacies of majority/minority control issues regarding elections.
    Look forward to any info or response you can provide.
    JS

    Reply

  45. Steve Clemons says:

    otto — I think Bolton confirmation process is 100% dead — and the second recess appointment is probably very dead…but looking for more info tomorrow.
    thanks,
    steve

    Reply

  46. daCascadian says:

    otto >”What does this mean for Bolton?”
    Resume time; I`m sure his “friends” will find a safe place to park him
    “Republicans want to save face. Democrats want to save lives.” – egregious-firedoglake.com

    Reply

  47. SevenOneEight says:

    Pelosi will NOT be the Speaker in Jan ’08. She will over reach during the next 12 months and the right-thinking moderates will dump her in order not jeopardize 2008. Take it to the bank.

    Reply

  48. otto says:

    What does this mean for Bolton?

    Reply

  49. anthony says:

    steve,
    just wanted to thank you for working this so hard and informing us. you take a lot of flack from your readers but you are as level-headed and smart as they come, even when i don’t fully agree with you.
    you have my respect and appreciation for giving us so much time and what i think is among the best political analysis in the blogosphere.
    just made a modest donation to thank you.

    Reply

  50. Betsy says:

    I feel like dancing right now. I’ll let reality set in after everyone is sworn in.

    Reply

  51. Dalivision says:

    Good policy for the COUNTRY is needed as we are not looked up by the rest of the world (they can’t trust us). This perception will make it much more difficult for our business community to expand trade. Consequently we will suffer in the long term.
    This administration has made it worse of all of us by not talking to anyone (you are with us or against us) attitude. Hopefully this will change.

    Reply

  52. Steve Clemons says:

    I don’t suspect that it means any real changes in my life. I am a centrist/progressive and want to see good public policy ideas put forward. I’ll applaud the Dems when they score on such proposals and critique bad ideas. But I think that we are going to be out of Iraq sooner than later and out of the secret prisons and torture business — and those are GREAT for this country.
    I have wrangled with the leadership in both parties — but I really think that we need to make Dem control of the Senate work….and need to keep the many issues that might undermine Reid from hitting too soon.
    Thanks for your question,
    Steve Clemons

    Reply

  53. winnipeger says:

    Wow. What does this mean for you. steve? How does winning rchange your professional life? There’s a new sherrif in town…

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *