As Charlie Brown falls, Lucy laughs - again

[DancingBear]

This is so simple it boggles the mind. It truly does.

If you want to achieve "A", for example, you ask for "A+10". Then, after long and "hard" negotiating, you (sweat, sweat, pant, pant) drop the "+10" under the guise of compromise.

Voila! You have "A".

What I have have just described is the Republican negotiating (and I use the term very loosely) strategy, courtesy of Captain Karl and a stack of 8th grade debate team notes. He knows, as do I and many others on this board, that we will CONTINUALLY try and kick the ball.

Anyone on this board who thinks that the Repubs will not try this again and again and again is just plain foolish, and anyone who thinks it won't work again and again and again is just plain blind.

I have often used the analogy that, when trying to eat democracy alive, it is foolish to gulp it all down at once. It is much more prudent to eat a bite at a time - that way, you are not seen as being a glutton, but you sure as hell ain't missin' any meals either.

After the Patriot Act, democracy looked down and saw she was missing a toe. After Gonzales, she couldn't find her foot. After today, she'll have one hell of a time finding her shin.

Sometime after the next meal, she'll be unable to stand. Then what?

[ClintonTyree]

1. You nailed it....

people are cheering because we supposedly "didn't lose" (didn't win either). :wtf: Since when has striving to "not lose" been the goal of Democrats? We're so damned afraid of a fight we always cave. Just once, just ONCE I'd like the Dems to stand and fight.

[KittyWampus]

2. The Democrats Had Nothing To Bargain WITH. You Forgot That Important

point in your scenario.

[wakemeupwhenitsover]

6. exactly.

The repugs held all the cards. Frickin'frist lost big time. Dobson is probably calling him on the carpet as we type.

[DancingBear]

7. Does principle count?

Or does one throw that away in the art of the deal?

The Republicans shut congress down under Gingrich - at that time, they, too, had no bargaining power. They did it, however, predicated on an (admittedly bizarre) concept of principle.

Looking back, it seems to have affected them nary a bit. They have this wonderful habit of looking long-term.

What would happen, pray tell, if we actually took a stand for something?

All that has happened tonight is that the timetable for The Ultimate Goal has been modified. Not canceled - just modified.

It's that long-term thing again.

[bettyellen]

9. thank you......

and now that it's based on trust. we can call bad faith in 24/7, can't we?

[DancingBear]

12. You implied "trust" and "Republicans" have something in common

That's a good one, that is!

We've been calling in bad faith since 2000 - ain't nobody listening...

[bettyellen]

13. no you misunderstood me.

i meant we can now call bad faith, and then actually do something about it. it's a better starting position than being an obstructionist from the git.
i think it was not a bad thing to actually get this issue on the radar before the rhetoric gets overheated. because, it really wasn't there before.

[DancingBear]

14. Understood - my apologies for mis-reading n/t

[bettyellen]

15. no problem at all, DB.

but jeeze, is it me, or is it a little hot in here? LOL!
that said I hope we work this fucking thing to our advantage.
it's going to be up to our senators to call bullshit. and they had better.

[kcwayne]

11. Sure they did

They could go to the mat on principle. If the Repukes win and throw out the filibuster, the Democratic party could make a huge issue out of the single party rule that pervades the country, and point to all the failures being totally the responsiblilty of the Repukes. The Dems could then campaign on re-instating the filibuster in 2006, when they get back a majority in the Senate, and restoring the 200 year old framework that the Repukes threw out in their lust for power.

This of course assumes the Dems have the ability to do forward thinking and the ability to execute. They have not demonstrated this ability in the last 5 years, but one could hope...

[Career Prole]

3. LOL! I smell bipartisanship!

To: kennedy

We've been snookered again. Picture Lucy whipping the football out from under Charlie Brown for about the millionth time.

8 posted on 05/23/2005 4:51:32 PM PDT by hershey
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
Beware...freeper republic link!

[DancingBear]

10. Holy s&*t

I shall now slither off into the grass of evil and die.

I feel unclean.

[in_cog_ni_to]

4. I don't see this as a win either.

How can giving them 3 judges that are as RADICAL as they come be a good thing. They WILL do this again. Not in this Congress, maybe, but in the 110th Congress they will.

The ONLY good to come of this is the repukes are mad as hell. THAT makes me happy.

[Mr_Spock]

5. Sucks being the minoroty huh?

It really sucks - we are obligated to go for the football. What are we going to do - revolution?

[BrewerJohn]

8. Force the issue.

Call their bluff. Shut down the Senate if they went through with it. What they threatened to do was unconstitutional. It needed to be pushed in their faces and a big enough stink made that they would hesitate to try it again.

Now, who knows?

[FlemingsGhost]

16. The naiveté amongst some Democrats is astounding.

Many STILL can't let go of the myths. Sigh ... Apparently, more heartache and disappointment is needed.


I think I'll start a fundraiser for the DLC.

Yeah, Team!