Tyranny of the Minority

I honestly have no idea why the Republicans would want to be the majority party, when they get everything they want as the minority party, and are not responsible for the fallout (“Don’t blame us, the Democrats run things!”):

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid yielded to Republican threats and agreed on Monday not to immediately seat fellow Democrat Al Franken, whose razor-close victory in Minnesota faces legal challenges.

Senate Republicans had planned to disrupt the opening of the new Congress on Tuesday by blocking Franken’s swearing-in.

And in another ugly fight, Senate Democrats vowed to block, at least for now, the seating of fellow party member Roland Burris whose appointment by embattled Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich carries a whiff of political scandal.

The 57-year old Franken, who gained fame as a writer and performer on the satiric Saturday Night Live television show, on Monday officially was declared the victor by a 225-vote margin by Minnesota state officials from nearly 2.9 million votes cast.

But lawyers for incumbent Republican Norm Coleman complained the recount was conducted unfairly and promised a court challenge that could take weeks to resolve.

“Shortly after Election Day, Coleman criticized Mr. Franken for wanting a recount and wasting taxpayer money. Now that it is clear he lost, Coleman should follow his own advice and not subject the people of Minnesota to a costly legal battle,” Jim Manley, spokesman for Reid of Nevada, said in a statement.

“However, there will not be an effort to seat Mr. Franken tomorrow,” Manley said.

Also, I am not sure how much of this is sensationalist press write-ups, as we learned yesterday after I inaccurately flamed Gov. Pawlenty, Franken is not officially the Senator until Pawlenty signs off on the election results, which will happen in seven days assuming there are no legal challenges. That being said, I have no idea why he is not seating Franken, as he is clearly more likely to be the next Senator than Coleman, who needs his challenges to be accepted and then to have the recount of discarded absentee ballots go his way, a very tough road. Why Reid simply does not seat Franken, and then if it turns out Coleman beats the odds and comes back, seat Coleman, is beyond me.

This really is baffling to me. I understand that Obama needs to attempt to govern in a bipartisan manner, but after the last few years of GOP congressional shenanigans, you would think that the House and Senate Democrats would have a firm policy of telling the Republicans to shut up when they start their whining. By now you would think Reid and company would realize the GOP has no intent of acting in good faith, and have only one goal- getting back in the majority. Everything I did as a Democrat in Congress would keep that in mind.

Additionally, there is political gain to be had by allowing the Republicans to stage hissy fits. Let them bring in the cameras and stomp their feet, when to the majority of the nation it looks like Franken is the winner. While the Republicans are on the Capitol Steps with their “Free Mumia Norm” signs, hold a public forum on the stimulus package. The perception from the country will be that when everything is going to shit domestically, the Republican party is… acting like spoiled children. Again. How do you think the guy who just lost his job or his health care or had his house foreclosed is going to react to news reports of Republicans protesting the seating of the winner of an election?






70 replies
  1. 1
    Reverend Dennis says:

    Why Reid simply does not seat Franken, and then if it turns out Coleman beats the odds and comes back, seat Coleman, is still Majority Leader is beyond me.

    Fixt.

  2. 2
    Original Lee says:

    I think it’s the same reason why they are opposing seating Burris. Once you’re in, it takes a 2/3rds majority vote to get you out.

  3. 3
    Punchy says:

    OT: (because I dont have my own blog)

    That noise you heard was TZ’s head exploding

    Turns out you cant just do whatever the fuck you want with your passengers.

  4. 4
    JGabriel says:

    Senate Republicans had planned to disrupt the opening of the new Congress on Tuesday by blocking Franken’s swearing-in.

    Given that these are the same people who simultaneously advocate both "guns for everyone" and "screw the poor (a major growth segment of the population over the past 8 years)", it constantly amazes me that they haven’t all been shot yet.

    .

  5. 5
    gbear says:

    John, this posting makes way too much sense to be of any relevance what-so-ever to our democratic leadership.

    I would LOVE to see what a real live non-stop republican fillibuster looks like. I mean, it HAS to be entertaining. Way more guilty jollies than watching a Vikings playoff game.

    edit: Don’t even bother thinking that the press will figure it out or get anything right.

  6. 6
    Robin G. says:

    I have a craving for a serious primary challenge to Reid in 2010.

  7. 7
    Montysano says:

    John, you sort of, kind of, tie Obama to this clusterfuck, but I’m not sure that he’s the boss of Reid and Pelosi (yet?). If he was, the outcome might have been the same, but at least it would have been handled in a more artful manner. Reid continually trips on his own shoestrings. But yeah…. seat Franken, seat Burriss, then deal with whatever comes down the road.

    And let me say, yet again, that the mere sight of Mitch McConnell makes me want to stomp on butterflies and trip old ladies in the street.

  8. 8
    JGabriel says:

    Montysano:

    … the mere sight of Mitch McConnell makes me want to stomp on butterflies and trip old ladies in the street.

    We become what we behold?

    .

  9. 9
    Grumpy Code Monkey says:

    @Robin G.:

    I have a craving for serious primary challenges across the board. All those bastards deserve to be sent home.

  10. 10

    With that smirking rat-fucker Eric Cantor standing just behind Mitch McConnell during yesterday’s press conference I can see the Big Win coming. You just know that brilliant fucker Cantor is going to say something to highlight how mean Harry and Nancy are being. Lions, tigers and … OH MY! Was that a shadow?

  11. 11

    By not seating Franken, along with seating Burris, there are only 98 members of the Senate, which drops the threshold for cloture to 59 votes. If Franken is seated, and there are 99 members, the threshold remains 60 votes, and you’ll have one less member assuming Burris is not seated. So from a working standpoint, there’s at least some practical value in holding off on seating Franken, and if Franken is seated by not Burris it’s actually a net loss for the Democrats.

  12. 12
    The Other Steve says:

    Pawlenty is a master of the moderate wingnut. He tries to come off as a moderate so as not to piss off everyone, but he’s also a master at pleasing the wingnuts in the party.

  13. 13
    Don says:

    I dunno. I think they need to at least be consistent here. Reid is saying they won’t seat Burris because he’s not legally signed off on – the Illinois Sec of State won’t sign off on him. But why is that a reason to deny him but not Franken?

    I didn’t like it when the fed involved itself in how the states submit their decisions when they did it in 2000 and I don’t like it any better now.

  14. 14
    bliprob says:

    Burris: as best anyone can tell, was properly appointed.
    Franken: declared the winner by (bipartisan) state officials.

    Don’t forget:
    Lieberman: kept his chairmanship.

    If Obama is asking Reid to take these on the chin for the sake of bipartisanship, then fine, it’s a strategy, and we’ll see if it works (hint: won’t). If not, and this is just how Reid rolls, Obama’s legislation is already doomed.

  15. 15
    passerby says:

    In my view, party divisions, Dem and Rep, are just there to divide the electorate. As we can see, the Dems repeatedly demonstrate that the have no spine and usually cave to the cold-hearted Reps making the actual differences moot.

    And Harry Reid?

    Why Reid…is still Majority Leader is beyond me.
    Fixt.

    What Reverend Dennis said.

    Reid is the Alan Combs of the senate, no? He does not engender confidence as a fighter for anything he just seems to be the water carrier for someone else’s agenda.

  16. 16
    El Cid says:

    An interview on NPR last night indicated that there is a 1 week period in which the MN Sec State has to wait to see if there are any legal challenges before certifying or signing the certificate or whatever that procedure is called.

    We don’t know yet absolutely (though we can guess) whether Coleman will file a legal challenge. But it seems to me that the MC Sec State is just following the rules on that, and with this move Reid is just not trying to challenge the MN process.

    So this is not yet the Reid capitulation I’m expecting. That one’s to come.

  17. 17

    […] seriously. When is this asshole up for re-election, and who can we get to run a primary challenge against […]

  18. 18
    David Hunt says:

    How do you think the guy who just lost his job or his health care or had his house foreclosed is going to react to news reports of Republicans protesting the seating of the winner of an election?

    The thing is the Republicans don’t care what that guy thinks. He’s a prime target for their voter suppression/caging efforts.

  19. 19
    Comrade Dread says:

    I half expect to tune into CSPAN one day and find Reid being paddled by McConnell, with Reid thanking him and asking for more.

  20. 20
    Will says:

    The Democratic Party… disappointing it’s members since the 1980.

    Honestly if they ever get their stuff together & function half as effectively as their Republican counterparts I would drop dead from a heart attack

  21. 21
    Laura W says:

    Check out Dana Bash on CNN stalking Burris and the Sgt-at-arms as they walk through the halls.

  22. 22
    Morgan says:

    This really is baffling to me.

    I’m done being baffled at this point. Reid is a spineless, incompetent nincompoop. A frustratingly large portion of congressional Dems are willing to follow his example. Period. End of story.

    There are a lot of things you’d expect a competent Dem senate majority leader to have figured out about dealing with Republicans, but Reid ain’t that guy.

  23. 23
    Shinobi says:

    How do you think the guy who just lost his job or his health care or had his house foreclosed is going to react to news reports of Republicans protesting the seating of the winner of an election?

    In two years they won’t care, because they’ll be too busy blaming the Dems for the failure of the stimulus package.
    Jon Henke thinks that once the Stimulus Bill becomes:

    for Republicans what the Iraq war was for Democrats – a policy they first supported, then regretted, then tripped over themselves to explain.

    Then the ones who whined the loudest and refused to help will be the victors. Further proving that republicans do not get why they lost.

  24. 24
    joe in oklahoma says:

    Harry Reid has everything bassackwards.

  25. 25
    Sam Simple says:

    Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are the most ineffectual leaders the Democrats could possibly have. What a pathetic team!

  26. 26
    Andrew says:

    I’m going to go out on a limb and say Harry Reid will take the 2009 Jackass of the Year award.

  27. 27
    The Moar You Know says:

    SURRENDERCRATS!

  28. 28
    DanF says:

    @passerby:

    Reid is the Alan Combs of the senate, no?

    Ha! Nicely put!

  29. 29
    Surly Duff says:

    The perception from the country will be that when everything is going to shit domestically, the Republican party is… acting like spoiled children. Again.

    I don’t know; back under Clinton’s term when the Republicans and Gingrich threw a tantrum and shut down the government for a while, the public responded positively. No? Well remember how the whining and stomping of the feet during the Clinton impeachment went really well with the public? It didn’t? Well, whatever. The important thing to remember is that when one party takes ridiculous and fivilous stands during times needing action, it is important to cave to such demands and treat those stands as serious.

  30. 30
    lovethebomb says:

    Reid is a mormon. He wears magic underwear. He thinks some con man a century ago saw angels and shit and wrote another bible. I.e. think gullible, easily manipulated, eager to believe bullshit, easily conned, probably masochistic, w/ symptoms of penis envy, anal infantile regression and likes being a bottom.

  31. 31

    As it appears that Minnesota law requires a week long waiting period between the canvassing board’s decision and official certification, it appears to me that Reid is simply honoring the election law in the home state. Why exactly, in the wake of the Bush era, are progressives basically demanding that Reid flout the election law of Minnesota?

  32. 32
    comrade scott's agenda of rage says:

    I half expect to tune into CSPAN one day and find Reid being paddled by McConnell, with Reid thanking him and asking for more.

    That happens every day the Senate’s in session, at least in a figurative sense.

  33. 33
    comrade scott's agenda of rage says:

    The Democratic Party… disappointing it’s members since the 1980.

    I suppose it’s a bit catchier than my previous favorite Dem Party slogan:

    “Democrats: We Like Abortion, Socialism and Free Stuff.”

  34. 34
    thomas says:

    Republican governance and Democratic leadership are both oxymorons

  35. 35
    KCinDC says:

    There’s plenty to criticize Reid about, but jumping on him for not violating Illinois state law seems a bit over the top.

  36. 36
    comrade scott's agenda of rage says:

    The Democratic Party… disappointing it’s members since the 1980.

    I suppose that’s a bit catchier than my previous fav Dem Party slogan:

    "Democrats: We Like Abortion, Socialism and Free Stuff."

  37. 37
    John Cole says:

    @KCinDC: Wrong thread. We are whinging about Minnesota right now.

  38. 38
    Face says:

    I think Reid is a very nice person.

  39. 39
    lovethebomb says:

    When a minority, Dems go along meekly with whatever batshit legislation the Repubs pass. The rationale is that they don’t want to look obstructionist with something popular, principles be damned. When a majority, Dems go along meekly with Repub threats of filibuster, quietly aquiese to all demands, surrender on all levels, fight amongst themselves and end up passing legistlation the Repubs never could have. Welfare reform, NAFTA, renaming the non-partisan airport from Washington to Reagan come to mind. Dems were big supporters of the Iraq war and wept with joy at every opportunity to approve anything or anyone Bush wanted. Methinks we are being had.

    Obama now wants the stimulus package to be half tax cuts. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

  40. 40
    KCinDC says:

    Right thread, wrong state. I meant Minnesota law.

  41. 41
    passerby says:

    @DanF:

    "Reid is the Alan Combs of the senate, no?"

    Ha! Nicely put!

    Why thank you DanF.

    (And it’s Colmes not Combs. Oops.)

  42. 42
    jcricket says:

    Democrats, afraid of their own shadows, apparently.

    I don’t want us to go all Gingrich/GOP 1994 on people, but a little consistency and bravery in a time of multiple national crises would go a long way in repairing the image of the Democratic party.

    This is our opportunity to seize (or waste). FDR prolonged the Depression by being too timid, I hope Obama and the current Dems don’t do the same (ditto for Iraq, Afghanistan, climate change/alternative energy, middle east peace).

    Again, I’m not saying the answer is bush-like demands, posturing and refusal to negotiate. But act like Obama did during the campaign (lay out clear policies, stick to them and explain them clearly, even under attack) and just follow-through a little.

    Dems should make Republicans actually filibuster (what’s the harm? blowback? we should be prepared to actually filibuster too were we ever in that position) and should not listen to concern trolls (i.e. "this is a center right country") when crafting/promoting an effective agenda.

  43. 43

    So we’re just going to ignore Minnesota law then?

  44. 44
    Screamin' Demon says:

    Why Reid is still Majority Leader is beyond me.

    I say we dig up LBJ. He’d be more effective dead than Reid is alive.

  45. 45
    Gregory says:

    Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid yielded to Republican threats

    …which is no more "news" than "the Sun rose in the East this morning…"

  46. 46
    gnomedad says:

    @jcricket:

    Again, I’m not saying the answer is bush-like demands, posturing and refusal to negotiate. But act like Obama did during the campaign (lay out clear policies, stick to them and explain them clearly, even under attack) and just follow-through a little.

    Well put. I fancy myself a moderate and have been slow on the uptake, but even I can see this behavior is spineless. One upside to Repub batshit insanity is that they go into obstructionist hysterics no matter what you do, so there’s no excuse for not just doing the right thing.

  47. 47
    Patrick says:

    By not seating Franken, along with seating Burris, there are only 98 members of the Senate, which drops the threshold for cloture to 59 votes. If Franken is seated, and there are 99 members, the threshold remains 60 votes, and you’ll have one less member assuming Burris is not seated. So from a working standpoint, there’s at least some practical value in holding off on seating Franken, and if Franken is seated by not Burris it’s actually a net loss for the Democrats.

    This only makes sense if you think Franken would not vote for cloture.

  48. 48
    Dreggas says:

    Herry Reid isn’t worth the flesh he’s printed on and Pelosi and crew in the house aren’t much better. I hope to the FSM and his noodly appendages that they get tossed.

  49. 49
    Brandon says:

    I’d argue Reid is a much less effective leader than Pelosi; Pelosi was at least behind that manipulation last year on the bailout bill that made the republicans look like schmucks.

    That being said, she’s a great fundraiser (so her peers wouldn’t vote her out of speaker), and no one in San Francisco wants to toss out the speaker of the house and have some random junior democrat representing them (precluding a serious primary challenge), so she’s likely to remain in place fo rthe forseeable future.

  50. 50
    NonyNony says:

    @Reverend Dennis:

    Why Reid is still Majority Leader is beyond me.

    Truthfully? Because Senate Democrats like having an excuse for not doing things. Because Senate Democrats like their independence and don’t like being told what to do. Because Democrats in general are not a unified party, and so leaders only get to leadership positions by employing lots and lots of carrots and a teeny-tiny amount of stick.

    Reid is an ineffectual leader because Senate Democrats don’t want an effective leader. They want someone who will do what they want him to do, and they don’t have any kind of unified vision for what they want. And they want someone who won’t make them make tough decisions that might be somewhat unpopular – or even worse to some of these folks "outside the mainstream thinking" (which means "outside the thinking of the Beltway cocktail crowd – heaven forbid I have to justify my actions to THEM"). So Reid has to bounce around turning small consensuses into larger ones until he gets something sizable to work with.

    Add to that the fact that Reid is one of the more conservative Dems in the Senate, and so only really puts his nose to the grindstone to build that consensus for things HE feels to be important, and you end up with a leader that to the outside world looks like a punk, but to the guys inside probably ranks as one of the "best they’ve ever had." Especially if he’s directing campaign contributions their way (as is traditional for Congressional leaders – moreso in the House where Pelosi, DeLay, and just about every Speaker for the last century got where they were by buying their way into their caucuses’ good graces).

  51. 51

    "I’d argue Reid is a much less effective leader than Pelosi;"

    Of course he is, he’s the Senate Majority Leader, not the Speaker of the House.

    I’m not a big Harry Reid fan by any stretch, but at the same time I think there’s a lot of misconception among the reflexive "Democratic leadership iz teh suk" critics as to just what exactly you’ve got the ability to do from the Senate leadership. Put simply, the Majority Leader really has no leverage whatsoever on members, even members in their own caucus. Between the various priviledges members are afforded, the relatively small number of members, and the term of office (6 years) each individual Senator has a lot of leverage themselves in a way that a member of the 435 member House who has to be re-elected every 2 years simply doesn’t. Not that that really makes me like Reid, but I’m just saying, if you’re expecting that you could remove Reid and magically install someone who was going to Lord over the Senate the way the Speaker of the House can in that chamber, then you’re setting yourself up for perpetual disappointment. The institution just doesn’t allow for that.

  52. 52
    Punchy says:

    The only way for Reid to demonstrate his leadership is to have Israel nuke Gaza.

  53. 53
    Rainy says:

    Reid needs to be replaced. He is spineless and so are his colleagues. Who gives a crap what Republicans think and who gives a shit about what they want! This is pathetic.

  54. 54
    JoeCitizen says:

    As a good and loyal Dem, I want Al seated ASAP.

    But I really can’t understand the logic of this post.
    Harry Reid cannot just seat anyone he wants to. A Senate seat goes to someone who has won an election, as certified by their respective state government. If the state of MN is effectivly saying to Reid – we havent quite finished determining who actually won, they how the hell can Reid, on his own, decide that Franken won and is entitled to the seat?

    Your argument strikes me as GOP logic, not Dem logic. Use an expansive interpretation of what your power is to force through things that are for your party’s benefit – and to hell with the rules and normal procedures of things.

    I did not vote for a Dem version of the GOP scum. I want something different.

  55. 55

    @Brien Jackson: One thing Reid could do that is within the rules is to actually force the Republicans to filibuster when they can’t get a cloture vote. He might get some respect then. Until then he’s basically a manager with no portfolio for leadership.

  56. 56
    Paul says:

    Can someone tell me how the fuck I’m supposed to teach my kids that ANY leadership should be listened to and respected? Maybe I’m lying to myself but once upon a time adults acted like adults.

  57. 57
    passerby says:

    They want someone who will do what they want him to do, and they don’t have any kind of unified vision for what they want.

    Point taken NonyNony.

    (But, in the end, Senators protect their own be they D or R. That’s how they are able to give unanimous standing O’s to those tainted by scandal. Irksome.)

  58. 58
    TenguPhule says:

    Put simply, the Majority Leader really has no leverage whatsoever on members, even members in their own caucus.

    I’d settle for the dickhead making the GOP actually fillibuster and not backstabbing his own team by not honoring their holds.

  59. 59
    demimondian says:

    @The Grand Panjandrum: I don’t think you read Brien’s comment correctly.

    Ask yourself this: who elects the Senate Majority leader? To whom is he answerable? That answer is obvious: he is elected by, and is answerable to, the majority caucus in Congress. Currently, that’s the Democrats (plus Sanders and Lieberman) — and they want a weak majority leader, which has protected them from repercussions during their continual game of Prisoners Dilemma with the White House.

    Want Reid to sprout a spine? OK, then — either primary him out, or hold *all* Dem senators responsible for their chronic invertebracy.

  60. 60

    "One thing Reid could do that is within the rules is to actually force the Republicans to filibuster when they can’t get a cloture vote. He might get some respect then. Until then he’s basically a manager with no portfolio for leadership."

    Well he could, obviously, but he’s not going to. But by the same token no one else in the chamber would do that either (even the Republicans didn’t go there), so criticizng Reid specifically for it with calls for him to be removed as majority leader for that reason seems to lack much of an endgame.

  61. 61
    Tsulagi says:

    I think the path for Franken and probably even Burris is clear. They need to trash Dems in general and Obama specifically. Then as with Holy Joe, Reid will then seat them and likely even give them top committee assignments. Go with what works.

  62. 62

    Ya know, I really hate to feel like I’m defending Harry Reid, but the moreI think about it the less convinced I am that there was really anything Reid could have done to have achieved much different outcomes in the last Congress. I mean, you had a 51 seat majority, but one that included Nelson, Landrieu, Lincoln, Pryor, Tester, Baucus, and Bayh. Plus George W. Bush as President, which people have baffingly shrugged off as a veto point. I mean, Bush vetoed SCHIP, after it had passed with overwhelmingly in both houses. And when Democrats brought up overturning it, Congressional Republicans ran to back Bush. So with that sort of landscape, I’m not exactly sure what Reid could have done differently that would hav actually changed legislative outcomes.

    That said, if he can’t move bills with 59 Senators and a friendly President, then I would certainly hope Democrats could find someone to run against him in the primaries, because he’d have to go.

  63. 63
    chrome agnomen says:

    the spineless, craven ineptitude and incompetence of the democratic leaders is the only thing that has come close to rivaling or equaling the frustration of the last eight years. good FSM, what can it conceivably take for these people to have the courage of their convictions? or is the more germane question, to actually HAVE convictions?

  64. 64
    TheAssInTheHatOnMyCat(Formerly Comrade Tax Analyst) says:

    Brien Jackson says –
    That said, if he can’t move bills with 59 Senators and a friendly President, then I would certainly hope Democrats could find someone to run against him in the primaries, because he’d have to go.

    I agree with that whole comment, Brien, but particularly the last paragraph I’ve block-copied. With 51, including a couple handfuls of Blue Dogs and Dubyah poised to veto anything remotely progressive I don’t think anyone else could have done a whole lot more. However, with 59 + a Prez willing to sign I don’t think you have to be Machiavelli to get stuff passed.

    I guess we will see, though.

  65. 65
    sab says:

    Calm down everyone and read Brian Jackson’s comment at #31. The Democratic (or whatever they call the party in Minnesota) Secretary of State Mark Ritchie has said that he can’t certify Franken until the one week period has passed.

    Minnesotans are pretty orderly and law-abiding. They have a pretty good election process, unlike Florida and Ohio. They are slogging through the process, and at the end they will be pretty sure that their Senator is the person they elected, regardless of his party affiliation.

    Why on earth would Harry Reid want to slap Minnesotans in the face by ignoring their election procedures in order to seat a Democratic Senator a couple of weeks early? All that would do is to damage Franken’s legitimacy in the eyes of fellow Minnesotans.

  66. 66
    sab says:

    Brien, sorry about mis-spelling your name.

  67. 67
    passerby says:

    Paul @ 56:

    Can someone tell me how the fuck I’m supposed to teach my kids that ANY leadership should be listened to and respected? Maybe I’m lying to myself but once upon a time adults acted like adults.

    Most adults will run to sign up for the "Oh-My-God-Squad" du jour. The Corporate Media cares only about ratings and will distract us by whipping us into a frenzy over pure bullshit. It’s effective.

    Instead of being sucked into these political side shows, maybe it would be useful to teach them how to reason vs react. The Constitution and rule of law are not given adequate due in elementary curricula.

    Good luck brave Paul and all other parents out there who have to help guide our newest generation.

  68. 68
    Glocksman says:

    @Don:

    I didn’t like it when the fed involved itself in how the states submit their decisions when they did it in 2000 and I don’t like it any better now.

    The defining event that left a sour taste in my mouth for over a decade when it came to the Democratic party was their outright theft of the Indiana 8th district Congressional seat in 1984.

    It’s from Fox, but this is an accurate summary of what happened:

    In 1984, House Democrats decided to seat Rep. Frank McCloskey, D-Ind., over Republican challenger Rick McIntyre. The initial tally showed McCloskey defeating McIntyre by 72 votes. But a recount put McIntyre up by 418 votes. After Democrats seated McCloskey, the final straw for House Republicans was when Minority Leader Bob Michel, R-Ill. rising to shake his hand.

    At the time, I remember reading almost daily reports of Coelho’s committee throwing out McIntyre votes until they put McCloskey up by 4 and declared him the winner.

    Shit, even though I’m a Democrat I still think Tony Coelho should be tarred and feathered.

  69. 69
    The Raven says:

    There’s a bipartisan conservative coalition in the Senate. Krawk!

  70. 70
    Comrade Luke says:

    Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid yielded to

    Someone needs to start keeping a running tally of how many times this gets written over the next two years, when the Republicans take back the majority based on running campaigns on "Dems had control and did nothing".

    I’m sure the final tally will be over 100.

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] seriously. When is this asshole up for re-election, and who can we get to run a primary challenge against […]

Comments are closed.