Why are the Dems selling out?

Today's brilliant cartoon comes from this site, which I order you to visit every day for the rest of your life. The reference goes to an NYT editorial that aroused the anger of Paul Krugman:

The Obama administration sat by last week as 12 Senate Democrats joined 39 Senate Republicans to block a vote on an amendment that would have allowed bankruptcy judges to modify troubled mortgages.

Senator Obama campaigned on the provision. And President Obama made its passage part of his antiforeclosure plan. It would have been a very useful prod to get lenders to rework bad loans rather than leaving the modification to a judge.

But when the time came to stand up to the banking lobbies and cajole yes votes from reluctant senators — the White House didn’t. When the measure failed, there wasn’t even a statement of regret.

Obama has done more caving than Batman. I'm no longer surprised by his turncoat tactics. (In fact, I'm pleasantly surprised when he does something principled.) But what the hell has happened to Congress? All of this shit was supposed to stop after the great 2006 party switchover -- yet the shit continueth. Perhaps even worseneth.

Let's look at another example.

Sibel Edmonds has an important article in the BradBlog today. She too thought that the corruption would end -- and the investigation of corruption would begin -- once the Dems attained power. Well, now they have it all: The presidency, both houses, and very soon a 60-seat majority in the Senate. Obama even has a chance to undo the damage done to the Supreme Court.

So why isn't everything all better? Not only did we not get a pony, they keep handing us horseshit.

In 2004 and 2005 I had several meetings with Rep. Henry Waxman's (D-CA) investigative and legal staff. Two of these meetings took place inside a high-security SCIF, where details and classified information pertaining to my case and those involved could be discussed.

I was told, and at the time I believed it to be the case, that the Republican majority was preventing further action - such as holding a public hearing on my whistleblower revelations. Once the Democrats took over in 2006, that barrier was removed, or so I thought.

In March 2007, I was contacted by one of Rep. Waxman's staff people who felt responsible and conscientious enough to at least let me know that there would never be a hearing into my case by their office, or for that matter, any Democratic office in the House. Based on his/her account, in February 2007 Waxman's office was preparing the necessary ingredients for their promised hearing, but in mid-March the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, called Waxman into a meeting on the case, and after Waxman came out of that twenty-minute meeting, he told his staff 'we are no longer involved in Edmonds' case.' And so they became 'uninvolved.'

Now, maybe Pelosi and/or Waxman suddenly decided that Sibel Edmonds has limited credibility. I happen to know that a few within the journalistic community have quietly grown tired of her.

But I also know that Congress has done nothing to lift the gag rule against Sibel Edmonds. That single fact tells me that Edmonds' own suspicion is closer to the truth: The Jane Harman case proves that both parties in Congress are wading knee-deep in crap. Dems can't expose Republican crap without exposing their own crap.

Thus, Congress won't determine whether former House Speaker Dennis Hastert took a pay-off from the Turkish government while in office, even though Hastert now openly lobbies for Turkey. That situation stinks of corruption, but Pelosi won't look into it, for reasons which former CIA analyst Phil Giraldi understands quite well:

How many other congressmen might have similar relationships with foreign countries and lobbying groups, providing them with golden parachutes for their retirement?

How many politicians -- Demo and Repub -- have broken the law compelling the registration of foreign agents? Not to mention the laws against simple bribery? Isn't it a form of bribery when you agree to take your big pay-off after retirement?