lemur68 wrote:Oh, so this is how they've beat the Republicans. By being every bit as conservative.
One-party rule begins today.
One-party rule began long before today, if you buy the Nader line about the Corporate party, which I do. However, the corporate party definitely has a "conservative" faction and a "liberal" faction, and it is an exaggeration to say that the Democrats are "every bit as conservative" as the Republicans.
Look at all those conservative Democrats, and look who they'll be voting into positions of power. From the link above:
In line to assume those powers is a cadre of unapologetic liberals of an older generation. John D. Dingell (D-Mich.), first elected to the House in 1955, is poised to return to the Energy and Commerce chairmanship he held before Republicans won the House in 1994. David R. Obey (D-Wis.) would return as Appropriations chairman. Waxman is in line to be chairman of the Government Reform Committee, an important venue for investigations.
In addition, minority-group members would gain great power in a Democratic House. African Americans are in line to become chairmen of the committees on taxation (Charles B. Rangel of New York), the judiciary (John Conyers Jr. of Michigan) and intelligence (Alcee L. Hastings of Florida).
Republicans are spotlighting that lineup, portraying it as extremist. They jumped on Conyers for calling for impeachment hearings against Bush, an idea Pelosi flatly dismisses. Republicans delight in pointing out that Hastings, before becoming a House member, was impeached as a federal judge.
It is worrying to think about several years from now, when all of these Blue Dogs have some seniority, and the "liberal faction" starts to move much closer to the "conservative faction." But the Congress of the next two years, although not as liberal, sane, or honest as I might like, is going to be far more liberal, sane, and honest than the Congresses of the past 12 years.