So where do we go from here?

"As the extent of the shift of power in Congress and state capitals around the country becomes increasingly clear, Americans want to believe that the country has turned a page, that the election's decisive verdict in favor of change will elicit a different course, not only from the victorious Democrats but also from the defeated Republicans in Congress and the White House." - Edward P. Haley in his article "Replacing Rumsfeld: an opportunity missed" published 11/012/06 in the San Francisco Chronicle

It's true. I really want to believe that, I'd really like to.

It's only been a wee 5 years since I started following contemporary politics, and yet, since I can remember, imagining a bipartisan future was equivalent to believing that communism actually worked. Nice in theory, a joke in practice. If anything, the shift in Congressional power just signals a reaffirmation of the checks-and-balances system, which has been been somewhat undermined by the Bush administration's abuse of the executive branch. I wouldn't go so far as to say that America as a whole has turned a page. When Haley says Americans want to believe that, he really means liberal Americans.

Speaking of liberal-conservative-independent...

I've always known where I stood in the lib-conserv gradient. But as a student who doesn't really have much of a hand in policy-making, that stance matters little compared to the one taken by a certain senator. Or not, since I find it hard to figure out exactly what stance that is lately. Independent-Democrat, to me, seems like an oxymoron, but then again I'm only an English major. And we all know rhetoric and labels really don't mean anything in the grand scheme of politics.

I'm hoping everyone can tell that my tongue has burst through my cheek.

It's easy to make fun of Lieberman for a lot of things, but let's take another look in relation to the new Democratic face of Congress. I'm not sure Lieberman stands as the best example of this bipartisan ideal; most of the time he seems like he's just trying to save his own neck. But in the absence of anyone else, he'll have to do. Wouldn't the embrace of bipartisanship mean trying to satisfy as many Americans as possible, so that more people are happy with legislation than ever before, and the country could be considered more unified, or at least better represented by its government domestically and internationally? If his new brand of politicking inspires his peers, and leads to more compromise between parties, then he might be on to something. In this most recent election, Connecticut, by sticking with Joe, might be championing this new approach.

Too bad it's only good in theory.