So, Hoyer wins decisively, showing us that incumbent Congressional Democrats really didn't mean it: they don't want change; they don't want ethics reform; they don't want to repeal tax cuts for the rich, or propose "fair trade" alternatives to "free trade" agreements; and most of all they don't want to even talk about withdrawal from Iraq.

If this is true, then we're f..ked. And, the Democratic majority will not only be ineffectual, it will melt away like spring snow come 2008.

I campaigned in an area that is usually split about 60-40 Republican. Most, of both parties, that I spoke with were voting for the Democratic congressional candidate--who won handily against an "intrenched" incumbent. They were voting for change, for getting out of the "Iraq mess," and for cleaning up Washington.

I don't see these people voting reflexively for the Democratic incumbent next time round, or for a Democratic candidate for President, if Hoyer's kind of politics prevails: a mere replacement of Republicans by Democrats as major recipients of lobbying cash, and Iraq graft.

My candidate and others all across the country were elected to accomplish change, not rotation of the turnstile.

My family has been Democrat since my great-great grandfather, Nathaniel Hawthorne, was given a patronage job by President Franklin Pierce, but I'm beginning to think that the argument for a third party makes sense.

If Hoyer represents the way Democrats are going to govern, we're going to need a second party, since the Democrats will end up being only a part of one party: Republican Lite, or one party with two corporate wings.

Is there any possibility of the new Congress revisiting the leadership question? After all, none of the 28 or 29 new Democrats were allowed a vote on this, and others, who may have voted out of personal loyalty could be pressured by the netroots to change their minds before the start of the new Congress in January.

What we need are leaders who are neither of the above: neither Murtha, nor Hoyer, but real Democrats who will side with the people in their desire to get out of Iraq, side with the people in their desire for clean elections and a clean legislature, and side with the people in keeping big business at a distance from government.

Yes, Democrats also need legislative experts, who will unite the party and be good at counting votes, but Hoyer hasn't even been good in that department because he has been at odds with Pelosi; he's therefore been crucially ineffective on a number of key votes, like the one on CAFTA--he voted for.

If Democrats prove an ineffectual (conflicted, craven and corrupt) opposition majority, then nothing will happen; the Republicans will get back in power, and it's only a matter of time before we follow the Roman Empire into oblivion, as per my book (on website below). I was hoping it was going to be out of date.

Douglas C. Smyth
http://www.roman-empire-america-now.com