My Depths! Relying on the Great Equivocator, Sen. John F. Kerry, for Validation!

Before I get to the punchline of today's post, I really need to re-publish my post from June 19, 2009 - my prescience really is extraordinary!

(Begin Re-production)

Filibuster-Proof Senate; Republicans Can Only Hope!

I'm not researching it but I think very shortly some court in Minnesota is going to require the governor of that state to certify liberal extremist Al Franken as the next senator from that great state.

Sen. Norman Coleman would then have to decide if he wanted to further contest the fact that absentee ballots that went AWOL during the recount miraculously reappeared and provided the margin of victory for Franken.

Fast-forward to Franken being sworn-in. This would give the Democrats the magical 60 votes needed to ram through any legislation they wanted in the Senate as Republicans could no longer filibuster, or threaten to filibuster.

The sooner this happens (read: Coleman, don't appeal!) the better FOR REPUBLICANS.

You will know I'm ZACKlyRight with this call becasue almost immediately after Franken is seated, if not sooner, the Obama-Biden administration will be dismissing the monumental legislative advantage. And, about 10 minutes after the Obama-Biden administration dismisses the event, listen for the liberal extremists who control the media to immediately parrot the dismissal.

Or, maybe the secret is out earlier if the thoughts in this post get a wide distribution.

First, ponder the embarrassment if the Emperor cannot pass any meaningful legislation with a filibuster-proof Senate. Well, the thing is, he won't. There are enough responsible Democrats, three or four, who will be the Republics firewall. The Obama-Biden administration knows this so in advance of being embarrassed, it has to lower expections.

Second, and I'm not being morbid just a realist, the former Ku Klux Klan member, Robert C. Byrd, is very frail. A majority cannot nastily strong-arm a minority and then not expect the maximum reaction when the advantage is lost, so just maybe, the majority shouldn't press the advantage too aggressively. Franken is picked by his state's Supreme Court to be the next Senator from Minnesota. Sen. Reid, over-joyed with his filibuster-proof Senate, jams through a bill authorizing the release of DOD photos showing terrorists being treated roughly. Sen. Byrd dies. Oops! No more filibuster-proof Senate until the next Senator from West Virginia is chosen. Well, in West Virginia, the governor appoints vacant Senate seats. The governor of West Virginia is a Democrat, so, yes, another Democrat will get appointed. However, until that person is selected and seated, the business of the Senate will continue. Even if the vacancy is only a month, Republicans can make things extremely difficult for a Democrats who abused their majority.

This scenario repeats itself with Sen. Kennedy of Massachusetts. The state of Massachusetts does not permit gubernatorial appointments. So, if Senator Kennedy were to pass, his seat would remain open until a special election could be conducted. The Kennedy scenario is interesting as his illness could keep him from the Senate floor thus preventing him from voting to end a Republican filibuster. His presence in the Senate actually hurts his Party if he routinely cannot make it to the floor.

As so many Democrats and liberals quietly celebrated US military deaths in Iraq so that they could demagogue the deaths leading up to the Novermber 2006 and 2008 elections, I wonder if the same Democrats are praying as hard for Kennedy as I am especially in this period prior to Franken being sworn in.

So, do not look for the Democrats to abuse the filibuster-proof majority if they get it and look for the Obama-Biden administration to dismiss the advantage as soon as it's gained.

Look for the Republicans to highlight how ineffectual the Democrats have been with the White House, the House, and a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, if they ever get it.

(End Re-production)

So, two days ago, licking his wounds from yet another states repudiation of President Barack Obama, arguably the most stupid US Senator in the history of the United States, Sen. John F. Kerry, said that the Democrats losing in Massachusetts was a "blessing in disguise" and, "I'd rather have the Republicans have to be responsible - either they are going to be part of the discussion or they are not."

I know I'm open to an inconsistency here but Sen. Kerry does validate my June 19, 2009 post.

Now, to a much more powerful takeaway from Sen. Kerry's quote:

Does this mean the Democrats have some responsibility for the United States' 'illegal war' in Iraq given that so many, including Sen. Kerry, voted for war?

Does this mean the Democrats have some responsibility for the USA PATRIOT ACT of 2001?

For NCLB?

For the Prescription Drug Act?

For military tribunals?

For the Bush tax cuts?

For FISA extension (Obama voted "yes" in 2008)?

(The list is endless given President Bush never had a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.)

N0? Not according to the demagogues who write the Democrats talking points? Thought so.