Barack Obama was quoted earlier today lamenting the fact Democrats did not have enough votes for a filibuster and reflecting on what he believes needs to be done :

"There's one way to guarantee that the judges who are appointed to the Supreme Court are judges that reflect our values. And that's to win elections," Obama said.

Does this mean he is willing to work with the grassroots to rid the Democratic Party of these Republicrats?

1. Akaka (Hawaii)
2. Baucus (Montana)
3. Bingaman (New Mexico)
4. Byrd (West Virginia)
5. Cantwell (Washington)
6. Carper (Delaware)
7. Conrad (North Dakota)
8. Dorgan (North Dakota)
9. Inouye (Hawaii)
10. Johnson (South Dakota)
11. Kohl (Wisconsin)
12. Landrieu (Louisiana)
13. Lieberman (Connecticut
14. Lincoln (Arkansas)
15. Nelson (Florida)
16. Nelson (Nebraska)
17. Pryor (Arkansas)
18. Rockefeller (West Virginia)
19. Salazar (Colorado)
20. Harkin (Iowa) abstained from voting.

Considering Schumer and Clinton seemed to reluctantly get on board the filibuster effort, I wonder if the issue is not to elect more Democrats but more progressives of any kind. It's a question that needs to be examined closely, especially given how herculean is the task of running for office in a place like New York City.

At least from what I have observed, in New York City electability has nothing to do with personal values, political strategic thinking or even popularity. Getting elected in New York City is a game of ring-around-the-money : If you do are not sexy in a fundraising way, you better say goodbye to your political aspirations.

Notice though I have not said this is a malaise pertaining to Democrats. Actually, it is even more apparent in the NYGOP; with the state honchos dangling Jeaneane Pirro as Clinton-bait in an unwinnable race.

It was so obvious how the just wanted to milk PAC'ed tits a little harder and all the way to 2008. It's not working though. They have plenty of politicos that would stand up to Clinton. The problem is that none of them will make them any money.

So what eexactly is it that we need? Fundable candidates? More Democrats? Or progressive politicians with cojones?