Dem activists working for a fillibuster-proof Republican majority... [View All]

[Padraig18]

I've long since ceased to be even mildly surprised by the numerous 'outrage of the day' Democratic activists's postings here at DU, yet I am always left to wonder if any of them ever stop to consider the logical consequences of their 'defeat Sen. X--- (s)he's a DINO because (s)he voted for Bill Y' messages? Let us consider a few facts, shall we?

There are currently 44 Democrats, 55 Republicans and 1 Independent senators in the US Senate. Fortunately for us, the Independent, Sen. Jeffords, caucuses with us. Under the current Senate rules, it takes 60 votes to invoke cloture and terminate a fillibuster. The fillibster is the most powerful tool the minority party--- that would be us--- has for opposing bad legislation and bad appointments, especially judicial appointments; nonetheless, there are many here who would seemingly see our party stripped of this powerful weapon for the sake of some vague and ill-defined idea regarding progressive values.

What, you say, I've seen no one advocating that? Actually, you have, although not in those precise words. When one sees posts here advocating the defeat of incumbent Sen. X without mentioning by name a viable, well-funded Democratic replacement, that is EXACTLY what the poster is advocating. If, on the basis of certain non-party-line votes, a poster advocates defeat of a dependable party-line Senator, the are essentially advocating placing that seat in grave jeopardy.

It is long past time to see things as they REALLY are, and to discuss the real-world consequences of such posts, should what the poster advocates come to pass. 2006 is perilously close, and the very last thing we as a party should be doing is cutting off our collective nose to spite our face.

Thank you.