The Democratic malaise is understandable and I share it.  The Democratic Party in power has done very little for the people who voted them into office.  “Mr. Yes We Can” has turned out to be mostly “Mr. No I Won’t” on issues of considerable importance to the people who elected him.  The Democratic leadership has been about as bad, especially in the Senate.  Bipartisanship with crooks, liars, and lunatics means more to them than keeping the Party’s word to those who supported them.  Helping bankers is more important than helping main street and the people who are suffering because of bankers’ misbehavior.  

Republicans are worse, but what’s a voter to do?

The Democratic establishment in Massachusetts nominated Martha Coakley a candidate who, by all accounts I have read, has run an incompetent campaign.  However, it has been  able to obtain a lot of money from the health insurance industry.  Her combination of incompetent campaigning and being part of what is most wrong with the Democratic Party means that her losing might be good for us all.  We really do not need that kind of Democrat.

Democrat leaders are now moaning that if they lose in Massachusetts they will lose their 60 vote majority that makes them filibuster proof.

Yeah.  They have done such an inspiring job with their 60 vote majority.  

I think losing their “filibuster proof” majority might be a good thing.  They have proven too craven, corrupt, and incompetent to use it well.  Perhaps a good kick in the teeth is necessary to get rid of Harry Reid and have the survivors actually start acting like representatives of the people who voted for them.  Even decent Democratic Senators apparently put being on good terms with the losers with whom they share office ahead of serving the American people. A little pruning of parasitic growth might in the long run preserve a democratic majority. And make it worth preserving on its own merits rather than simply because there is worse out there.

As an added treat, with only 57 Democrats (and two independents who caucus with them) in office, Joe Lieberman becomes completely dispensable.  A test for a smaller Democratic Senate to see whether they learned anything from our lack of enthusiasm.  If they did Lieberman will lose his chairmanship of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.  

The problem is that the Democratic establishment is a somewhat more humane but equally corrupt wing of the military/financial oligarchy that  sets public policy in this country. So long as it dominates the party, voters have a choice between oligarchs or oligarchs and lunatics.  Obama in office has demonstrated this sad fact over and over again.  He has refused to give even symbolic gifts to those who elected him with their votes while giving enormous gifts to those who can give him and his party money.  Too many Democratic Senators are cut from the same cloth.  

The problem for them is that, votes still matter.  Were I in Massachusetts I’m not sure whether I’d go to the polls or just stay home.  I encourage Massachusetts readers in particular to chip in – I am genuinely conflicted.