If A Senator Switched Parties And No One Cared Would It Make A Difference?

I've been swamped, crushed, buried, and overwhelmed at work lately.  But I have a job, so trust me, I ain't complaining.  I'm also a bit numbed by the constant barrage of lies and stupidity of Obama's Crack (-smoking) Economic Team.  Add to that living within a couple miles of the United States' swine flu ground zero, and I'm at a bit of a loss to rev up my usual outrage & commentary. 

And then along comes the news that Arlen Spector is switching parties!  "Yea," the hopeful masses shout, "we is saved!"  Apparently the fact that the Dems -- who already have a sizable Senate majority yet have done nothing of consequence except shovel money to the world's largest banks, and send the exhausted troops from Iraq over to Afghanistan -- may now have a non-Constitutionally-significant super-majority of 60 is gonna save us from cynical leadership, cronyism, and incompetence.

Well, count me among those who couldn't give a shit.  First of all, note the word "may" above.  Unless Al Franken final wins his never-ending election battle against Norm Coleman, it'll be 59.  And that also assumes no Dem goes over to the GOP.

It also ignores the fact that because of weak leadership (looking at you, Harry), cynical party policies (looking at you, Barry), and a crew of 59 clumsy, foolish, & self-serving legislators (looking at you, Mo, Curly, & Larry), the Dems haven't been able to accomplish a damn thing.

Why the hell does anyone suddenly assume that because the Dems can defeat the GOPers threatened (but not to my knowledge, never implemented) filibusters, they will?  Because Snarlin' Arlen is suddenly on-board they're gonna grow a pair?  Now they'll fight?  Hmmm.

And most importantly, assuming this exciting super-majority leads to a spate of affirmative legislation, so what?  I repeat what I've said over-and-over:  it doesn't matter.  There's been no substantive change of policy from the last administration to this one, and no change in legislative direction since the election of 2006.  And there won't be, whether we have 59 Dem Senators, or 60 or 75 or 100.  The follow the money.  Their masters.  The real policy-makers.  And that ain;t us, folks.

Before people get their panties in a twist, let me say, yes, there are a few subtle distinctions between the parties.  Similarly, a rabid crocodile and a polar bear with a bad case of jock itch are different.  One will maul you while the other spins around and rends your flesh from your bones.  They. Are. Different.

But they're both pretty undesirable outcomes, no?  This Arlen Specter switch-a-roo means nothing.  Well . . . almost nothing.

Because Spector is up for re-election in 2010.  In a country that voted Dem in 2006, and elected a Dem prez in 2008.  In a state that went for Obama last November.  Perhaps this move does mean something. 

(Cross-posted at Mike's Neighborhood)

Comments

[Montag]

the Editors, (i still read TPMI,) points to this Huffington Post article from march which may shed some light here.

[eric]

Yes, this is all about saving Arlen's butt, and not at all about enhancing a Democrat majority in the Senate. The fact that he went out of his way to reiterate his recent non-support of EFCA should tell you everything you need to know. Yet, come election time, PA Democrats, including labor, will dutifully line up to support him as the "lesser evil" against Pat Toomey. Feh!

[Mike]

Very interesting.