Scott Brown sworn in as US Senator, giving the GOP a 41-59 majority
Very nice.
Dispatches from the Creation Wars
Thoughts From the Interface of Science, Religion, Law and Culture
Profile
Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of Michigan Citizens for Science and co-founder of The Panda's Thumb. He has written for such publications as The Bard, Skeptic and Reports of the National Center for Science Education, spoken in front of many organizations and conferences, and appeared on nationally syndicated radio shows and on C-SPAN. Ed is also a Fellow with the Center for Independent Media and the host of Declaring Independence, a one hour weekly political talk show on WPRR in Grand Rapids, Michigan.(static)
Search
Recent Comments
- Sesli Chat on America's Christian Colonies
- democommie@FuckAlanWestthatfuckingfucker.com on War Criminal Now a Republican Congressman
- democommie@FuckRonPaulthefuckingfucker.com on Ron Paul Rejects Evolution
- Stu on War Criminal Now a Republican Congressman
- democommie on Ron Paul Rejects Evolution
- Allison on Ron Paul Rejects Evolution
- DingoJack on America's Christian Colonies
- Robin on The Latest Attack on Planned Parenthood
- democommie on Closing Up Shop
- mote on Closing Up Shop
Recent Posts
- Closing Up Shop
- AIG and Wingnut on Wingnut Crime
- Behe and the Contingency of History
- Congratulations, Vic Hutchinson
- Big Bad Bob Enyart
- The Madness of Ron Wyatt
- Ellis Washington Projects About Projection
- Creationism on Dallas School Website
- Hovind Crony Blathers About Attenborough
- Not So Pyrrhic Victory in Texas
Blogroll
Science Blogs
- The Panda's Thumb
- Carl Zimmer
- The Austringer
- Evolution Blog
- De Rerum Natura
- Evolving Thoughts
- Preposterous Universe
- Butterflies and Wheels
- John Lynch
- Unscrewing the Inscrutable
- NCSE's Legal Blog
- Red State Rabble
- Thoughts From Kansas
- Appellate Blog
- Volokh Conspiracy
- Jack Balkin
- Legal Theory Blog
- ACS Blog
- Reason and Liberty
- Overlawyered
- Supreme Court Times
- Positive Liberty
- Reason's Hit and Run
- Andrew Sullivan
- Talking Points Memo
- Daily Kos
- Media Matters
- Patterico's Pontifications
- Classical Values
- Virginia Postrel
- Jim Anderson
- Strange Doctrines
- John Scalzi
- The Pryhills
- Temperantia
- Rev. Spork
- Electric Commentary
- Two Aarons
- Farkleberries
- Paul Phillips
- Henry Neufeld
- Talk.Origins
- Talk.Reason
- Antievolution.org
- National Center for Science Education
- Talk.Design
- Michigan Citizens for Science
Archives
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- February 2005
- January 2005
- December 2004
- November 2004
- October 2004
- September 2004
- August 2004
- July 2004
- June 2004
- May 2004
- April 2004
- March 2004
- February 2004
- January 2004
- December 2003
- November 2003
Other Information
Ed Brayton also blogs at Positive Liberty and The Panda's Thumb
Ed Brayton is a participant in the Center for Independent Media New Journalism Program. However, all of the statements, opinions, policies, and views expressed on this site are solely Ed Brayton's. This web site is not a production of the Center, and the Center does not support or endorse any of the contents on this site.
Ed's Audio and Video
Declaring Independence podcast feed
YearlyKos 2007
Video of speech on Dover and the Future of the Anti-Evolution Movement
Audio of Greg Raymer Interview
E-mail Policy
Any and all emails that I receive may be reprinted, in part or in full, on this blog with attribution. If this is not acceptable to you, do not send me e-mail - especially if you're going to end up being embarrassed when it's printed publicly for all to see.
My Ecosystem Details
« South Carolina's Brilliant Idea | Main | Submarine Officer on Lifting DADT »
FARK Headline of the Day
Posted on: February 10, 2010 9:37 AM, by Ed Brayton
Find more posts in: 
Politics
Politics
Comments
The end of the Democrat's control of Congress for decades no doubt.
Posted by: Owen | February 10, 2010 10:07 AM
If I recall what I read on Talking Points Memo correctly, 'twas the Village Voice which first wrote that headline, the day after Brown's election.
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | February 10, 2010 10:16 AM
*sigh* The Dems couldn't pass anything WITH the majority.
Posted by: soteos | February 10, 2010 10:17 AM
Jon Stewart did it.
Posted by: Brandon | February 10, 2010 10:20 AM
#3 I'm not convinced they ever had a 60-seat majority, what with Lieberman being a DINO and all the "blue dog" dems.
Posted by: chris | February 10, 2010 10:35 AM
chris, if the Democrats had a 99-1 majority, they'd still have their thumbs up their asses whining about bipartisanship and refusing to pass anything until that one Republican signed on with them. They're just useless.
Posted by: schism | February 10, 2010 10:43 AM
schism @6: You are correct when you speak thusly of the Democrats in Congress. At the grassroots level, little Democrats like me are trying hard to bring in some new blood that will do their jobs and stop play acting.
Posted by: xebecs | February 10, 2010 11:22 AM
@#5
The blue dogs are in the House, in the Senate we just have the spineless ones, who seem to be afraid of their own shadows.
Posted by: tomh | February 10, 2010 11:45 AM
I'd rather look on the brighter side of life.
A Democratic-controlled Congress is not bowing down to the whims of the Democratic-controlled White House. (Hell, they didn't do it for Clinton either)
A Republican-controlled Congress literally rolled over dead for the Republican-controlled White House.
The moral of the story is left as an exercise for the reader.
Posted by: Shawn Wilkinson | February 10, 2010 11:58 AM
Well...to me it seems the party breakdown has remained absolutely the same....The War and Empire Party has kept its 97-3 majority (giving Bernie Sanders, maybe Ron Paul, and Kucinich the benefit)
http://www.smithbowen.net/linfame/2006/01/orthrus_mascot_of_the_twoparty_1.html
And, no...I am not defending Bush, but Obama is little different in real policy decisions than the W Administration. Maybe details...even important details, but the basic gist is the same...that is in fact the reole of the Democratic Party, to put a slightly kinder (and more mealy mouthed face) on American fascism.
Orthrus....and the Democratic Party as part of the ratchet system, with the Republicans pulling things hard right for 40 years, and the Democrats merely slowing the rightward trend and preventing any real movement to the left.
Posted by: Brian M | February 10, 2010 12:10 PM
My response to this is, "Yeah, and?" It seems to me that the Democrats act like the Japanese LDP did for decades - operate as a single party in name only. Factions in the LDP were the ones that tended to control policy making in a Japanese parliament that was controlled by a single party majority that was still not always able to pass its apparent agenda.
Assuming that the Dems will act as a single bloc has always been a naively simplistic POV, in my opinion (I'm waaaay too young to remember how LBJ forced through a Democratic agenda) especially considering the actions on the "other side" of the aisle is a single bloc of consistent blockage (something that Maddow covered well last night):
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/vp/35322522#35322522
In other words, a factional party can only really make policy happen on things that the entire party agrees on completely and only if the opposing party (or parties) cooperate with the majority party. Health care has shown to be not enough of a single-party issue for the Dems and definitely not something that the opposing party would vote for even if it were to include things they want.
Posted by: Umlud | February 10, 2010 12:49 PM
... and now the Congressional Republicans literally roll over dead to remain in obstinate opposition to the Democratically-controlled White House, House of Representatives, and Senate.
The GOP are really good at goose-stepping together, and the factional nature of the Dems seems to me to be a reason why they are unable to direct that goose-stepping toward the edge of a political cliff. Until the Dems can figure out how to break up the GOP or learn to goose-step together, they are even less likely to pass meaningful regulation.
Posted by: Umlud | February 10, 2010 12:53 PM
Posted by: James Hanley | February 10, 2010 1:11 PM
Paul and Kucinich are in the House.
For the Senate I'd say the antiwar ones are Feingold, Sanders, I'm not sure. But these same people that are "antiwar" vote every year for "emergency" funding and never push too hard for withdrawal.
Posted by: Juice | February 10, 2010 1:55 PM
@10: Yeah, I'm voting Sanders/Kucinich 2012. If they want to give Ron Paul a cabinet position, I wouldn't object too strenuously.
And no, I don't care that they aren't running. A boy can dream, right?
Posted by: Jagyr | February 10, 2010 6:30 PM
more like a 41 to (59 x 1) majority
Posted by: mrcreosote | February 10, 2010 7:37 PM
Or as Colbert said, they now have an unstoppable 41 seat superminority.
Posted by: Nick Tacik | February 11, 2010 12:03 AM
You know what has been simply mind-boggling for me about this? The charge that Obama, Pelosi, and Reid are "ramming" bills through the government, secreted away in back rooms under cover of dark. In what world has this Congress jammed anything through to law? We've been debating health care for almost a year; barely anything has been passed other than a stimulus bill; most of Obama's nominees can't be confirmed; now the Senate has ground to a screeching halt, because one side doesn't have a supermajority. Even with a supermajority and (initially) high approval ratings, they couldn't get legistlation passed. Yet, they're cramming unwanted legislation down the pried-open maw of the American public? What color is the sky is Conservative Partisan World? The sad fact of the matter is that 41 seats DOES make the Republicans the majority party in effect. The Democrats were held hostage by every crooked Senator in the fold (redundant, I know) who wanted to squeeze a little more blood money out of every bill that needed that one last vote. Now legislation is going to be virtually impossible, not least because Republicans have made it perfectly clear that they have no real interest in legitimate governance.
Posted by: Ryan | February 11, 2010 1:06 AM
Ryan "...not least because Republicans have made it perfectly clear that they have no real interest in legitimate governance."
So...they haven't really changed*?
*Note: Yes, I fully realize that I cut the first part of that sentence so that I could deliberately misinterpret what you wrote. Just go with it.
Posted by: Modusoperandi | February 11, 2010 6:24 AM
And, james, they believed (probably with good reason) that he'd do it if he needed to.
Posted by: dean | February 11, 2010 9:52 PM