A few more words for Peter Beinart

Peter is at it again, cleverly he tries to portray the looming Social Security overhaul as something that well can't really happen without Democratic support. He winds up stating that if Tom Delay hadn't redistricted Texas and Bush hadn't beat the Dems asses in the South, Bush may have had the Democratic support he needs to pass this Social Security.

Stating the ideal situation of a 60 vote filibuster in the Senate, and I don't know some kind of magical number in the House, to drop the smack down on the President's plan.

What he seemingly overlooked is this handy dandy article in The Hill where it is brought to our attention that:

During a floor speech, addressing the Democratic filibusters of controversial judicial nominees, Frist said: “Right now, we cannot be certain judicial filibusters will cease, so I reserve the right to propose changes to Senate Rule 22 and do not acquiesce to carrying over all the rules from the last Congress.”

Granted Sen. Frist was reffering to the nuclear option and using it for confirming judicial nominees, however, they only have to change that rule once. Once it is changed, the filibuster dies, and the Democrats are ruled by the Republicans.

I think most rational liberals know this, this is why most bloggers (myself included) have started the anti-propaganda on the crisis.

Because we know that even if the Democrats had the balls to vote completely and totally against President Bush on this one, Bill Frist and Dick Cheney can turn around and chop those balls off.

In a nanosecond.

So Beinart, just do the Math next time you start off on another Ideal America Rant. If you think the Republicans have waited 40 years to have a majority and aren't going to do something, anything, to keep that power, well...

It's a shame that liberal bloggers (like political animal) don't start calling Beinart out for what he lacks.

RELEASE THE HOUNDS!