Tom Toles for February 28, 2010

I wish this were funny.

To fall back on an old joke from when there was a feminist movement women would say “You know if there really was a third sex men would be out of a job and die off, but there isn’t so we have to make the best of a bad situation.”

If there was a third party the DEMS & GOP would be out a job, there isn’t and won’t be (our newest “citizens” the corporations will take care of that) so we have to make the best of a bad situation. The GOP had their shot, and we can see what that have left us, so lets stay with the DEMS, because it is making the best of a bad situation.

Someone in DC finally figured out to keep the Senate out of our pocketbooks.

Bravo!!!

Now they need to start on muzzling the spending habits of the House.

For those of you don’t know: The House is where ALL spending and appropriation bills begin.

Sounds like California, where it takes 2/3 to pass a budget, and it ain’t working!

Everybody has a “fix-the-government” scheme that won’t work. Hey, it been a few days and nobody has said: “FLAT TAX”. That should do it for this week. Cheers!

There are PLENTY of parties ready to be No. 3, but none of them are viable.

Split each of the two major parties into extremist and moderate factions, and combine the moderates into one Centrist Party. Nobody would be allowed to use the name Republican or Democrat any more. The Centrist Party would need to gain the support of at least ONE of the Wing parties to get anything done, but presumably their greater numbers would allow them to set the agenda.

fritzoid – Historically, it has taken a major issue to split off a new group (e.g., slavery and the original Republican party [as opposed to the current one]), which often kills one of the original parties, while the other becomes the “against the issue” party. Minor issues get divided among the two without needing to split the parties. So we keep a two-party approach. So sayeth the historians, anyway. I admit it is more interesting in Europe, say, where there are a wider range of parties that can stay viable, in part because they are usually in a smaller population. (My personal favorite: the Raving Monster Looney Party in the UK - http://www.omrlp.com/.)

Fritz, I wonder how many of the extremists identify themselves as extremists?

^ Anthony, an extremely small number.

If we could reverse the entrenched gerrymandering that creates “safe” districts, we’d go back to having liberal Republicans and conservative Democrats and some good work might be accomplished with reasonable people across the political spectrum.

“Extremist” wasn’t a good choice of word, but I couldn’t think of a better one at the time. I used “Wing parties” later to compensate.

It’s the single-issue splitting that motivemagus mentioned that I was trying to avoid. As much as I expect (and eagerly anticipate) that the Tea Party movement will cause division amongst the GOP, I think they’ll consolidate again once this wave of adrenaline wears off.

As it stands, neither party can afford to alienate its more polarized supporters, so the posturing that leads to gridlock doesn’t really reflect the Center-Left and Center-Right opinions that leave so many people “Undecided” as we get close to elections. Every election cycle, the fight is over the middle.

The Greens in Germany succeeded because, there, Environmental Protection is seen as removed from the usual Left-Right continuum; the business interests and ‘heritagists’ (for want of another good word) were as concerned with the loss of the Black Forest as the social liberals. (I think Germany previously had six major parties, holding different spaces from the far-Right Nationalists to the far-Left Socialists.) Here, of course, Environmentalism is considered “Liberal rubbish” by the Right, and the Greens were seen as a Leftist splinter (I still hold Nader largely responsible for BushCheney).

Multiple-party systems require coalitions, and coalition arrangements have their own dangers; that’s how Hitler wound up Chancellor.

Personally I’m pretty far Left on MOST things, but I’ve got certain issues where I line up Center or (not often) Center-Right.

Everyone’s griping about how we only have two parties, but our system is set up to keep it that way. In Europe, the reason other parties gain traction is because they have systems that allocate legislative seats proportionately according to how many parties got how many votes, etc. It’s our “winner-take-all” elections that keeps us tied to two lame parties.

The “nuclear option” so savaged by Democrats in 2005 is practically identical to “reconciliation.” The point of arguing against the so-called nuclear option in 2005 is the exact same thesis which those opponents are now ENDORSING, which is that it is a means of getting around a filibuster and passing something without a 60-vote majority. Shumer called it a constitutional crisis! That was just to get judges seated, mind you….this new creature, who can even begin to tell you what it encompasses?

It is a pathetic power move to fundamentally change America!

Joe Biden, circa 2005 - “I pray God when the Democrats take back control we don’t make the kind of naked power grab you are doing.”

Jean, I heartily agree with you, but it should also be applied to presidential elections. Instead of allowing state legislatures the power to determine how their electoral votes are awarded, I’d prefer to see them required to allocated their votes proportionally, based on a popular vote.

First, it would make the presidential elections more based on a popular vote…as it is now, there’s no such requirement. Second, it would allow third-party candidates to actually get electoral votes.

Buck, is it a constitutional crisis if there’s nothing about it in the Constitution?

And perhaps if the Republicans weren’t using the filibuster (actually, just the threat of the filibuster) more frequently than ever before, reconciliation wouldn’t be an issue.

Maybe I’m just deluded, but doesn’t VP Biden actually have the 101st vote? Cheney used it plenty of times in order to cast the tie-breaking vote for tax cuts and other nefarious schemes.

I’m stunned that a long-time political cartoonist like the excellent Toles wouldn’t know this, or even the fact that Biden would also be the one who could undo this, just like he’s the one that could actually allow a vote to remove the filibuster.

In the cartoon, it wouldn’t be a tie, so Biden couldn’t case a tie-breaking vote.

The Nuclear Option is NOT reconciliation. It has nothing to do with reconciliation. It was about ending the filibuster, and the Republicans were all for it five years ago. It is a testament to how out of ideas the Republicans really are that they brought back such an obviously incorrect term, AND THE EXPECT PEOPLE WON’T REMEMBER WHAT IT ORIGINALLY MEANT.

Fair enough Anthony 2816, but if anyone ever asks you how many votes there are in the Senate, you can honestly say 101.

hanaberabuck, Reconciliation has been used 22 times, mostly by Republicans. It has been used for:

Reagan’s tax and spending cuts (Reps)

Bush tax cuts (Reps)

Children’s Health Initiative (Dems)

Medicare prescription/Medicare Advantage (Reps)

Welfare reform (Reps)

And for what it’s worth, the total funds assigned to the Medicare Modernization Act by Bush (prescription drugs and private medicare) at $8 trillion is far larger than the dollar amounts for the proposed Dems healthcare bills.

Source: Fox News

Maybe if Obama launched an unprovoked attack on, say, Venezuela, and overthrew their government, putting us in another quagmire, then Ow-chi-wow-wow would be less likely to call libs “poosies”.

Fair enough back atcha, Kiweagle.

You have a real reading comprehension problem, Ow. Want to try again?

All I said was that perhaps you wouldn’t think of libs as “possies” if Obama launched an unprovoked attack.

It was your leap to apply that thought to Iraq and Bush…and I’m sure you don’t think Bush and company were “poosies”.

^ puppy? another one?

“I like leaping”

Of course you do. It’s far easier than honesty.

Alert to everyone:

To all: Puppy is now posting under the following IDs:

modusMajestic SmellChecker Ow..wow..whatever ThePupWithoutFear Unhand me…You Beast! …and several others.