Joan Harman: Let's inform you, Cabbage Boy, while you and others are ranting about the "spinelessness" of the Democrats. A reality check. The GOP found themselves facing some real live scandals in 2006 and way too close to election time for people to forget. Scandal city may have done a lot to change the vote. CNN discussed much about the Democrats and how they had yet to have a "message that worked" when it came to the American voters. For the American INDEPENDENT voter to vote for more Democrats instead of the GOP in 2006, undoubtedly had as much to do with the wallet as finally seeing that GW's Pollyanna approach to Iraq wasn't going over very well. However, the Democrats do not have solid (veto proof) majorities whereby they could simply discard the GOP minorities and ram through their own agendas. Seems all of you guys had greater expectations for these razor thin Democratic majorities than in reality is possible. Now, were there promises such as earmark reform that the Democrats could have kept? Yes. You can harp on that and I'll agree with you.

DFO: I'd hate to see either side gain a veto-proof majority. Idaho Republicans have grown arrogant since they gained theirs. (Think: closed primaries) States with veto-proof Dem supermajorities are just as bad. Viva our balance of powers, divided government, and razor-thin majorities.

---

---