It’s about time we started to see realistic stories about the Democrats agenda. It’s not going to be as easy as they make it seem (as Pelosi realized when Murtha was defeated — her people aren’t under her thumb and now everyone knows it and there is blood in the water and she’s surrounded by sharks). They have to deal with the Republicans, especially in the Senate and McConnell doesn’t sound like he’s in the mood to deal.

After retrieving control of Congress for the first time in a dozen years, Democrats will set out to redefine the domestic agenda through policies they say would address the economic needs of middle- and working-class Americans.
Striving for a few quick legislative victories in January and longer-term goals whose details — and viability — are not yet certain [yes, admit it, they can only point out problems, they have no solution], Democratic lawmakers want to shift the dialogue on Capitol Hill to workers’ pay, college tuition, health-care costs, retirees’ income and other issues that touch ordinary families.
Their success is not assured. Democrats will hold a tenuous 51 to 49 majority in the Senate, where Republicans and the Bush administration will be well-positioned to thwart their legislation, and Democrats in the House already are showing signs of division. Democrats will face a conflict, too, between the cost of some of their policies and their pledge to tighten federal spending rules.
Still, key Democrats interviewed in recent days portrayed their strategy as an attempt to do several things at once: distinguish themselves from the outgoing Republican majority, heed voters’ messages from the midterm elections and lay groundwork for the 2008 presidential campaign, in which they predict the widening income gap in the United States will be a prominent theme.

See, this is the bottom line, how do they do the expensive things they want to do without deficient spending or raising taxes?
And if they really want to address the issue that the voters cared about then they better rethink spending:

By a Margin of Nearly 3-to-1, Americans Vote for Small Government, Even if it Means Fewer Services. When given the choice between a “larger federal government that provided more services and charged higher taxes” and a “smaller federal government that provided fewer services and charged lower taxes,” Americans indicated a clear desire to downsize. In fact, 62% of voters preferred the smaller government ” and with intensity as 41% would definitely pick a leaner administration. By comparison, just 22% opted for the more expansive government.

Sorry guys, if you wanted smaller government and less taxes, you shouldn’t have elected Democrats. They said they want less spending but their nature will manifest itself. They are like the scorpion who says to the frog, “Carry me across the pond” and the frog says “No, you will sting me.” But the scorpion says, “If I do, then I would die as well.” So the frog carries the scorpion on his back and as they are crossing the pond the scorpion stings the frog and the frog says, “Why did you do that?” The scorpion replies, “I couldn’t help myself, it’s my nature.”
Tax and spend is the nature of Democrats.