Why is it that people assume that the Dems will always cave?

I've noticed in most online "news" reporting that the assumption is that Sen. Reid will compromise with sen. frist. Why is it that it's always assumed that the "Democratic Party" will be the one that compromises?
In all honesty, we all know why. Men like Daschle, Liberman, et al. were always willing to try to find middle-ground to show bipartisanship. Then in return, we got nothing.
So far, the Democrats under Reid have shown more backbone in three months than they did under Daschle did in six years. Hopefully, this will continue.

Daschle is out, Lieberman is silent, and I've let them know there will be no more donations with this mind set. My exception was my contribution to Dr. Dean after he got the chairmanship.

is willing to give them five of seven judges. This pisses me off. I think we have to stand firm.They have no excuse for this. They have already been given twice as many and maybe more judges than Clinton ever was. They have nothing to complain about! And BTW, why was it okay to fillibuster the Clinton nominees but not these? Reid had better show that so called backbone. It sure was missing from the bankruptsy bill.

Washington thinks that means forever. Washington- lots of middleaged white men advising other middleaged white men- also thinks that the country will be like themselves and run by a 'conservative' majority forever. They all got something of a scare in 2000 and again last October.

And don't beat on Daschle so. He had to play the way he did to keep Zell Miller and Jim Jeffords and the like- e.g. that POS Breaux- on board. He did win the Clinton impeachment/removal showdown for Democrats in '98/'99. He had worse material to work with throughout, and a Party unsure whether to play to win (brutally hard) or try to return the status quo of 1990 (seemingly easy yet ugly). He lost the '02 elections, of course, by trying to play the latter line and getting a bloody nose out of it. But he did as well as could be expected in '03/'04 when he recognized that the 1864, the all-out phase of the civil war, was upon us.

The Party is changing/renewing itself. The country is shifting. Reid has inherited an instrument quite different from the one Daschle started out with- one that has shed most of its deadwood, that has learned it can fight and win, one that has Democratic grassroots support growing up again behind it again. It is starting to feel a mandate to rule, to challenge for rule, rather than be the minority party whose role is to obstruct the worst abuses. It is starting to Believe again, to start contemplating being the majority party and what to understand the mandate involved to be. I'm skeptical of this magic, supposedly intrinsic, quality being tossed about with the label "backbone". It should be called "nondysfunction" or the like.

(I know some folks hate what-ifs, but anyway...)

What if a DLCer gained the chairmanship instead of Doc Dean? Would that backbone still be there?

Anyone?

The DLC are the ones who ripped the spine out in the first place.

That is an old compromise that Stabenow & Levin have been offering since 2001. They'll let the conservative ones through if there's at least one left leaning to keep that court balanced. Those are the judges Reid is offering in the compromise. As long as that's as far as it goes, then it's a good deal. We win completely.

Right now, it looks like caving.

Could it be the "track record"?

When was the last time they didn't cave?

if not, perhaps we could take up a collection