As Dave Johnson and many other liberal bloggers have noted, the Republican plan is to "block everything Congress does, then run against Democrats as ineffective." It'd be nice if the press at least reported that accurately, so that voters could make an informed decision, but that wouldn't be "fair and balanced." It really does bear mentioning that in a functioning democracy, this pitch wouldn't have a chance in hell. We screwed you over by blocking them - so vote for us! or Why bother picking the lesser of two evils? Go with the pros! As Paul Krugman points out, "The truth... is that the only problem Republicans ever had with George W. Bush was his low approval rating. They always loved his policies and his governing style — and they want them back." Some of us still remember the devastation from the last time, and it's no way to run an empire.
I'm not thrilled with the Democratic Party, and by no means should liberals cease the pressure on Dem leaders to do the right things, adopt effective policies, and uphold the rule of law. (Dark Lord Cheney, I'm looking at you.) However, "compromised" is still a helluva lot better than "nihilistic." At least the Democrats occasionally do things to benefit their average constituents, whereas the GOP wants to repeal the Estate Tax entirely, push the most conservative, regressive judiciary in living memory even further to the right, and just generally piss on America when they're not dousing it with gasoline and setting it on fire with their latest fart about how anyone who doesn't have a job is just lazy.