As a writer at another blog pointed out, it’s a total absence of empathy on the part of Republicans. Things only matter when they have a direct, personal impact on them. They don’t simply fail to try to imagine themselves in another person’s shoes–they sneer at the concept.

Breitbart is gone, but his spirit lives on.

I imagine that this will work out like New Jersey, and that when it becomes clear that the challenge is really going to take place, Baucus will withdraw rather than be humiliated.

Installment number 647 since 1992 in the never-ending series “Vote for the Democrat, he’s the lesser of two evils.”

Insanity yada yadda same thing yadda different results.

It’s not Iowa that’s stupid–it’s Iowa Republicans. In fact, Iowans are so not-stupid that since 1982 they have not elected a single Republican to major statewide office for the first time. Grassley and Harkin have won every Senate race starting in 1980, and Terry Branstad, first elected governor in 1982, is the only other Republican since then to win a senate or governor race in Iowa.

This will be the first open race for a Senate seat in Iowa in 40 years. Both Harkin and Grassley earned their seats by defeating incumbents.

I sure hope we can do better than Tom Vilsack. Trading an ineffective progressive like Harkin for a corporate New Democrat would be a step in the wrong direction, and Iowa senators tend to serve for a long time.

Instead of a bum. Which is what he is.

Well, Levin’s up for reelection next year, when he’ll turn 80. Are progressives in Michigan going to do anything about it? The Michigan Democratic Party has been badly screwed up for a very long time.

It’s THE JIMI HENDRIX EXPERIENCE. Why is this so difficult? Would you say here’s Dave Clark doing “Glad All Over”? It was a band, named after, but with a name different from, its leader.

Compromise is a good thing. It is an emollient that allows some action even when people disagree on what needs to be done. It is only when it becomes an end in itself, only when it undermines democracy rather than facilitating it, that it becomes contemptible.

Elected officials are supposed to represent the people who elect them. If their constituents oppose cuts to Medicare and Social Security, and elect them on that basis, it is a betrayal of that trust, and the opposite of democracy, for a lawmaker to support such cuts. A “democracy” in which popular opinion is flouted by insider politicians for the sake of hanging on to power can only end in corruption and decay.

Looks like in the Democratic Party we are all Broderites now.

Exactly. The course of Obama’s administration makes a lot more sense if one assumes that he’s trying to hurt the Democratic Party than it does if one assumes that he’s trying to help it. The pattern over and over again is to pick fights that unite the Republicans and divide the Democrats. The latest one–gun control–is a twist, as he seems to be siding with the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party, but the result will be to push more rural voters out of any remaining sympathy with the Democrats, costing seats from North Carolina to Nevada, and likely resulting in Republican control of the Presidency and both Houses of Congress when his term, mercifully, comes to an end.

Worst. Reality. Show. Ever.

Instant runoff would be a much better system. You can still vote third-party, but, if you want to, you can back that up with a vote for one of the two top finishers. If you think it’s better to have a Democrat than a Republican, you would rank Larsen as your second choice, and if you think it’s better to get rid of DINOs like Larsen, you could make the Republican your second choice.

Why does it say “Read More” when there’s nothing more to read?

A thought in response to your post:

Blow it out your ass.

If Justice Ginsberg were going to retire ASAP, she would have already done so while the Democrats control the Presidency and the Senate. She has a lifetime appointment, and I think she’s going to serve out her term.