If your foes insist there’s an elephant in the room and it isn’t the elephant that symbolizes their party, how does it help you to keep raising the issue of the supposed elephant in the room? This was an issue big in the beltway on talk radio. Average Americans aren’t heatedly discussing it at the cooler (if those still exist) or Starbucks (if they can still find one).
You keep raising the issue at your own expense, obviously.
Also kinda silly as they are counting peple and not positions, for example they count 5 people as AIDS Czars rather than just 1 Czar for the position. Now if they had claimed 31 insead of 47 they might have a point.
BTW kudos to Russ Feingold (my favorite Progressive because he is ethically clean and did no earmarking).
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/27265…
Now if the DNC can spare time from its ad making schedule) and they and democrats in Congress would address Feingold's concerns, we might get somewhere.
For those keeping score Wiki says:
George W. Bush 2001–2009 31
Barack Obama 2009– 32
Sounds like a great DLC position “Obama! Not quite as bad as Bush!”.
Not only is this comparison ineffectual at scoring points, but doesn't anyone else sense the left/liberal/Dem offense is more and more reduced every day to tu quoque argumentation……here and elsewhere?
I think it is pretty much getting to “game over” for the Dem legislative agenda. Despite Obama playing to his best strength last week, there is zero momentum only a few days later and so how is cap and trade and immigration going to have any chance at all with out any intimidating political capital to spend on it?