"He's A Friggin' Stradivarius"

So ends Jane Hamsher's excellent post on how Harry Reid manages to get played by pretty much everyone.  The short of it is that John Cornyn is prepared to use Reid's arguments against seating Roland Burris in order to keep Al Franken from getting seated.

Keeping Roland Burris out of the Senate won't make Blagojevich any less corrupt than he allegedly is.  Seating Burris won't put Reid, Obama or anyone else in Blagojevich's debt.  While I agree that optics and perception are important, there are times when they need to take a back seat to pressing issues.  Note, please, that I'm not suggesting that we excuse illegal or unethical behavior.  Only that we consider some larger issues than keeping a sitting Governor from exercising his Constitutional authority.

Reid's hysterics have placed us in a situation where instead of 58 or 59 Democratic Senators, the 111th Congress will very likely start and begin its work with 57 Democratic Senators.  All Franken is a down-the-line progressive, someone we can expect to wholeheartedly support the Employee Free Choice Act, universal health care and, being from the state where I35 crashed into a river, Obama's plans to stimulate the economy by working on America's crumbling infrastructure.  We know less about Burris on these issues, but there's nothing to suggest that he would join the Senate's brand-new Bluer-than-blue Dog coalition and stand in the way of what progressives want to accomplish.

Progressives have been complaining for several years now that the media and DC politicians spend too much time distracted by game-playing.  Now is not the time for us to join them.  We need to pressure Reid to just seat Burris and Get. To. Work.

Comments

[Corvus]

I think that you and Hamsher are reading this backwards. Cornyn was going to oppose seating Franken no matter what, because depressing the number of Dem Senator's during the "honeymoon" is a gimme tactic for the Republicans. Cornyn is just using this explanation to tie Reid's hands in knots. Reid is trying to keep the Dem brand from getting tainted; it's a long-term goal, and one that is necessary. Card check, for example, probably won't be able to beat a filibuster this Congress, but might with additional Dem Senator's next term. But in order to do that, you need to not damage the brand.

That's not Reid's bad move. The bad move was calling Blago and suggesting Duckworth and Madigan and discouraging Jackson, Davis and Jones. Like I said, Fuck Bobby Rush, but that lends a lot more ammo to that viewpoint, because it's obvious what is really the issue. I mean, Jesus Christ! Duckworth hasn't even held elective office. Jackson is a Congressman, and Jones runs the fucking state Senate. And it's Illinois! I don't know if Reid is racist or retarded, but he definitely deserves some serious shit for that.

[Stephen]

It's not that either of us thinks Cornyn wasn't going to attempt to block Franken. It's that Reid shouldn't be giving him any help with it. And that's what he's doing.

And Reid's concerns about "electability" are just beyond the pale. There simply aren't any words to describe how utterly stupid he looks right now.

[Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle]

I've come to think Reid is an idiot in the same way Bush is an idiot. Meaning, they obviously have some smarts to get where they are. But they can't govern or strategize worth a damn.

[Corvus]

Yeah, I guess I just don't see any way Reid could have avoided getting backed into that corner without looking soft on corruption. But I wonder how his recommendations are going to play off of those attempts...

So, any suggestions about who would make a good majority leader? Kerry?

[Corvus]

I know everybody hates Slate, but this article I found via some Kos frontpager seems like a pretty good read of how and why not to seat Burris, and doesn't rely on the dubious argument that is being used against Franken.

Giving it further thought, Reid definitely made a mistake relying on White not certifying the appointment. White himself has said that his refusal to certify has no real value, and is merely a form of symbolic protest against the governor. Trying to base an argument on that is silly.

[Stephen]

The problem, as always, is that there are people in the Senate who are willing to use their positions and power to get what they want - and often, what their constituents want. Those people are called "Republicans."

Then we have people who restrict their actions according to David Broder's civility and bipartisanship crap and who consider it a grand achievement to act contrary to their constituents' wishes. Those people are called "Democrats."

What motivates people like Cornyn, for example, is repugnant. But within the context of his own beliefs and that of the Republicans who elected him Cornyn and the other Senate Republicans consistently act with more integrity than most Senate Democrats ever have.

I'm a Democrat because - well, because I've read the Bible. My political views are based upon justice, equality and care for the needy. I suppose that the same could have been said about most Democratic Senators at one point, but for years now they've clearly valued the Senate as an institution - and its clubby traditions - and their own positions in it far more than civil liberties, justice, helping lift people out of poverty, peace, and all the rest.

The Democrats in Washington are more of an impediment to progressive reform than the Republicans could ever be. We'll see that many times over in the years to come.

[drip]

The Democrats in Washington are more of an impediment to progressive reform than the Republicans could ever be. This falls into the category of sad but true enough. The democrats are not exactly more of an impediment, but they are pulling in the same direction as the GOP on many issues that are important to me.