But, hey - these were the same people who ignored the economic benefit of a single-payer health system, the same people who can't bring themselves to really rein in the financial industry, who don't understand that you don't tap a bad economy on the shoulder to get it to move, you kick it in the a$$, who think too many people are enjoying their unemployment checks, so I guess it should be no surprise that they would rather dither around about "the rules" and their own inherent helplessness than focus on good policy.

You'll notice that the group that's being scapegoated for much of the "sacrifice" is the one that isn't represented by stinking rich lobbyists and corporations - and the reason we're not represented by lobbyists and corporations is because we have this wild idea that the blasted people elected to the Congress - and the WH - are the people who are supposed to represent us and look out for our interests.  How crazy are we?  

They're doing, by the way, a really bad job of that, I think, so whether we have or don't have the filibuster, or reconciliation, or suspension of the rules, or whatever parliamentary or other rules there are, it isn't going to matter unless and until the Congress decides to represent the interests of the millions of people who, for all intents and purposes, do not have a voice without them.

We squandered the biggest opportunity we had to do some great things for the people and the country, in no small part by failing to remember and live by the phrase, "elections have consequences."  For those who say the ambitious agenda a lot of us wanted could never have been done, my response is that nothing ever happens if you don't try.  The Republicans have lousy ideas about how to "fix" things, and Democrats seem blind to the fact that if you believe in your policy, making it happen means there often isn't any common ground to find, and forcing it just sacrifices good policy that only works for the people who will profit from it.

In the past: Civil Rights, Medicare