More Questions

Today's my birthday, and I was going to refrain from writing anything on my blog today in recognition of that personal landmark, but I have some serious questions to ask regarding the aftermath of Tuesday's elections. Here they are:

Why is Nancy Pelosi being scapegoated for the Democrats's loss of the House? Nancy Pelosi, who has announced that she will run for the position of House Democratic leader in the new Congress, is being blamed for the fix the Democrats in Washington find themselves in, and many moderate House Democrats - what few there are left - are pressuring her to take herself out of contention for a leadership position. Last time I checked, the Democrats were punished at the polls based on the perception that nothing got done. Outgoing Speaker Pelosi passed in the House over four hundred bills that would have improved the lives of many people (if not for the fact that they couldn't get through the Senate). She was more instrumental than Harry Reid in passing health care reform legislation, which Reid could only pass without some of Pelosi's reforms once it became apparent that Massachusetts would replace Ted Kennedy with a Republican. This bill actually will improve the lives of many people - ask Andy Griffith. Yet Reid will still be the Senate majority leader, so why does Pelosi have to be the sacrifical lamb? Because she's a woman? Because she's from San Francisco, a place even blue-collar liberals hate? Because there are certain parts of this country where they look down on anyone with a vowel at the end of his or her name? Actually, it's probably all of the above.

Why is Mitch McConnell acting like the Senate Majority Leader? Democrats had a bright spot in the midterm elections - they kept the Senate. And, they lost fewer seats than they were expected to. Joe Sestak in Pennsylvania and Alexi Giannoulias in Illinois came close to winning their respective Senate races and minimizing the party's losses even further. And, Senate Democratic incumbents Michael Bennet and Patty Murray have just been declared the winners in their respective elections in Colorado and Washington State. And Senate Democrats add a strong, tough player to their ranks in the form of Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, known for his effectiveness as a fighter for ordinary people in his role as Connecticut Attorney General. But listening to Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, you'd think he's the new boss of the Senate. He certainly thinks so. But how can he control a chamber in which his side is outnumbered? Also, how can he control a Republican Senate caucus with rambunctious Tea Party stalwarts such as Florida's Marco Rubio and Tea Party godfather Jim DeMint of South Carolina? McConnell can't even control Rand Paul!

Why are the successes of Democratic gubernatorial candidates being ignored? It is true that the Democrats lost governorships in states where it's crucial to preserve Democratic advantages in redistricting for the 2012 elections. But they won back the governorship of California and held the governorship of New York. And in President Obama's home state of Illinois, Democratic Governor Pat Quinn, held onto his job. California, New York and Illinois are among the most populous states in the Union. That has to count for something.

Why is the Tea Party being heralded for their "success" at the polls? Remember - 61 percent of Tea Party candidates who ran in the 2010 elections lost. Wow, some big success!

Finally, why is the White House willing to make concessions over tax cuts or the rich? The Democrats could present sound, solid arguments that tax cuts for the top 2 percent of Americans eviscerate the economy and create few jobs, as they would have solid facts to back them up. And, they could make their case in terms that anyone, even the most minimally intelligent Fox News viewer or commentator could understand. So why is the President caving on this issue in the name of compromising with a congressional Republican leadership that is in no mood to compromise? Especially when the polls show that most Americans agree that more tax cuts for the rich are just plain wrong?

These are very relevant questions (they're not moot!). But I have no answers for any of them.