The Wikipedia comment is in error. We never had the majority in the 1969-70 session. There were 49 Democrats, 49 Republicans and 1 Independent. The Indy refused to participate in the Speaker vote and the House deadlocked, since 50 votes is needed to elect a Speaker. Since Bill Jenkins was from East Tennessee, he talked to a Black Democrat in Knoxville, and he courageously agreed to provide the 50th vote. The difference between that and this is that we won the numerical majority this year for the first time since 1868, we had “50.” There was no majority in the ‘69 session, no side could claim majority status.
All we can do at this point is make Williams’s life a living hell. He shouldn’t be able to sleep at night for his treachery. As was pointed out what befell the two CA RINO traitors in 1995 propping up the minority Democrat power of Willie Brown, one died of a dreadful cancer shortly after and the other went to prison. C’est la vie for Judas traitors.
>> Get ready, this is a microcosm of what is to come in the Dems 1 seat shy of a filibuster proof majority. The likeness is uncanny. <<
I'm convinced the RATs have "fail safe" measures in place in most parts of the country to find ways to cling to power when a scenario results in them being narrowly defeated by the voters. The theft of Minnesota's senate seat is another fine example. Even, the Canuk version of RATs tried to overturn the election results recently. As far as RATs are concerned, once a seat or office goes RAT, they "own" it forever. From their perspective, Norm Coleman is temporarily "occupying" Paul Wellstone's Democrat seat.
Even take my state for an example. We have a 59 member senate. Only 7 years ago, my state senate was Republican. Today, the Dems have a gerrymandered "safe" legislature and thanks to even more GOP screwups, have a filibuster proof 37D-22R majority. But let's go with a Dem "doomsday" scenario. Let's say there was a special election held in Illinois and voters were so FED UP with the RATs and GOP turnout is on par with 1994 levels. As a result, the GOP won ALL the contested seats in the suburbs and downstate -- including several majority Dem districts -- and the new makeup of the state senate was 30R-29D.
Republicans take control? Possibility. But under such a scenario, Kirk Dillard certainly got re-elected, since he is the dean of the DuPage delegation (home to our state's Republican machine) and in an ultra safe GOP district. However, Kirk Dillard is also part of the Illinois combine and takes money under the table from the RATs. He is the Illinois version of Jim Jeffords, and had a pathetic 40% conservative rating from the United Republican Fund last year, our state's equivalent of the ACU. Dillard agreed to appear in campaign ads for Obama last year, where he heaped praised on Obama's work in the Illinois General Assembly (Dillard claimed this wasn't actually an endorsement on his part. Sure.) Dillard doesn't switch parties or even become independent, but let's say he decides the Senate Republican leadership is just too mean-spirited and "divisive" to be in charge, so he votes with the 29 RATs to make John Cullerton (D-Chicago) Senate President. You'd get the same result that happened in California, Texas, and Tennessee.
Believe me, the RATs have planned this stuff out, and have sleeper cells in the GOP ready to be activated.
I think some freepers simply dislike the word "democracy" because it sounds like "Democrat". But believe me, the last thing the Democrat party believes in is its namesake. The only time the Dems accept election results as legit is when they win.