VetoFilibuster-Proof Majority: Why?

According to this report, Democrats “are pouring millions of dollars as we speak in Georgia to win this special election and elect the liberal Democratic candidate Jim Martin.” The Atlanta Journal Constitution reports that

Obama is keeping 25 of his Georgia field offices open for Martin, leaving most of his in-state paid staff on the ground here and importing about 100 field operatives from Southern states to help Martin, according to Matt Canter, a spokesman for Martin’s campaign.

The New York Times reports this weekend that

Republicans are approaching the [Georgia race] with a new sense of urgency given that they are on the brink of losing their ability to use Senate procedure to thwart Democrats or force them into negotiations.

But I have a question: if President Obama really wants to be inclusive, to be a healer, to move beyond bitter partisanship, why is he trying so hard to achieve a vetofilibuster-proof Senate majority?

Say What? (3)

  1. Blode032222 November 23, 2008 at 8:44 pm | | Reply

    I think you mean “filibuster-proof” (three fifths) rather than “veto proof” (two thirds). We’re talking about the 60th Democrat, not the 67th….

  2. Al Fin November 25, 2008 at 1:42 pm | | Reply

    “Veto proof would also be nice”, muses Barack to himself. “Very nice indeed!”

  3. Blode032222 November 29, 2008 at 3:02 am | | Reply

    Yeah … a President could hardly ask for better than 60-66 Senators to belong to his party. Obama has an unusually large amount of power.

Say What?