So now we are mysteriously falling short of Democratic votes for filibuster reform.

[woo me with science]

And we find Obama considering Kerry for DOD, a move which would weaken our progressive majority in the Senate, just as Obama chose to do with his appointments in 2008.

Could it be that, even after a landslide vote, the administration still really isn't all that into having progressive majorities? We have seen this DLC/Third Way/Corporate game before from our party.



Let's review:

http://www.salon.com/2010/02/23/democrats_34/

Tuesday, Feb 23, 2010 11:24 AM UTC
The Democratic Party’s deceitful game
They are willing to bravely support any progressive bill as long as there's no chance it can pass
By Glenn Greenwald

Democrats perpetrate the same scam over and over on their own supporters, and this illustrates perfectly how it’s played:

.... Rockefeller was willing to be a righteous champion for the public option as long as it had no chance of passing...But now that Democrats are strongly considering the reconciliation process — which will allow passage with only 50 rather than 60 votes and thus enable them to enact a public option — Rockefeller is suddenly “inclined to oppose it” because he doesn’t “think the timing of it is very good” and it’s “too partisan.” What strange excuses for someone to make with regard to a provision that he claimed, a mere five months ago (when he knew it couldn’t pass), was such a moral and policy imperative that he “would not relent” in ensuring its enactment.

The Obama White House did the same thing. As I wrote back in August, the evidence was clear that while the President was publicly claiming that he supported the public option, the White House, in private, was doing everything possible to ensure its exclusion from the final bill (in order not to alienate the health insurance industry by providing competition for it). Yesterday, Obama — while having his aides signal that they would use reconciliation if necessary — finally unveiled his first-ever health care plan as President, and guess what it did not include? The public option, which he spent all year insisting that he favored oh-so-much but sadly could not get enacted: Gosh, I really want the public option, but we just don’t have 60 votes for it; what can I do?. As I documented in my contribution to the NYT forum yesterday, now that there’s a 50-vote mechanism to pass it, his own proposed bill suddenly excludes it.

This is what the Democratic Party does...They’re willing to feign support for anything their voters want just as long as there’s no chance that they can pass it. They won control of Congress in the 2006 midterm elections by pretending they wanted to compel an end to the Iraq War and Bush surveillance and interrogation abuses because they knew they would not actually do so; and indeed, once they were given the majority, the Democratic-controlled Congress continued to fund the war without conditions, to legalize Bush’s eavesdropping program, and to do nothing to stop Bush’s habeas and interrogation abuses (“Gosh, what can we do? We just don’t have 60 votes).

The primary tactic in this game is Villain Rotation. They always have a handful of Democratic Senators announce that they will be the ones to deviate this time from the ostensible party position and impede success, but the designated Villain constantly shifts, so the Party itself can claim it supports these measures while an always-changing handful of their members invariably prevent it. One minute, it’s Jay Rockefeller as the Prime Villain leading the way in protecting Bush surveillance programs and demanding telecom immunity; the next minute, it’s Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer joining hands and “breaking with their party” to ensure Michael Mukasey’s confirmation as Attorney General; then it’s Big Bad Joe Lieberman single-handedly blocking Medicare expansion; then it’s Blanche Lincoln and Jim Webb joining with Lindsey Graham to support the de-funding of civilian trials for Terrorists; and now that they can’t blame Lieberman or Ben Nelson any longer on health care (since they don’t need 60 votes), Jay Rockefeller voluntarily returns to the Villain Role, stepping up to put an end to the pretend-movement among Senate Democrats to enact the public option via reconciliation.


We have had enough of this garbage. We created a landslide. It is time to DEMAND representation.

....

[dmallind]

1. Irony - Kerry is one of those who voted against filibuster reform. nt

[yurbud]

16. that also makes me wonder how hard he tried to win in 2004 or if that was just more

pro wrestling.

[underthematrix]

2. Hold on - slow down

it is very early in the game. Reid will have what he needs when the time comes. The MSM is trying to manipulate the public into believing the DEMS lost power by gaining seats in the senate.

[msongs]

3. LBJ's leadership sacrificed the southern majority to benefit ALL americans - a loss that won big nt

[meow2u3]

4. Reid must impose some party discipline

Now is the time for Sen. Reid to make the Dems fall in line, or face serious consequences, such as being kicked off committees.

[Autumn]

6. ^ this one right here ^ that's how it needs to be done.

Rec

[woo me with science]

7. Well said.

If we can't count on Obama to do it, Harry Reid had better dig out the Johnson treatment on his own:

[stevenleser]

11. Bullying seems cute now, but would you be happy if a big and tall future GOP Senate majority leader

physically bullied smaller Democratic and Republican senators to get his way?

Does it make you happy to imagine that too?

That is not a political process I want to be a part of, not to mention it is harassment and illegal. It's bad enough to coerce someone with threats that they wont get campaign financing from the party next time, etc., but at least that is in bounds.

Physical intimidation and threats is not part of anything with which I want to be associated.

[sabrina 1]

13. So long as it is for the correct reasons. Are you happy to see them always back off

from the bullies on the Right when the people's needs are at stake, just to appear 'cooperative'? This is politics, it's not for cowards. And if you are on the right side of the issues, you should most definitely do what LBJ with the power entrusted in you by the voters.

Sick of the excuses. Truly, absolutely sick of them.

[stevenleser]

25. Hopefully, you will think about this some more and realize how messed up what you just wrote is.

I particularly expect more from someone who supports Occupy. Physical intimidation and threats and bullying is no way to achieve political objectives.

[sabrina 1]

35. Politics is tough. If people don't have the stomach to fight for what is right, they should

stay out of politics. I do not consider what LBJ did to be bullying, He fought for what was right and he used the power given to him by the people to do so.

And bullying is the hallmark of the Republican party which is why they have made such progress tearing away at the fabric of this country and the only way to stop them was with people like LBJ, who did not back off.

There is a difference between not backing down, not compromising on people's rights which no one should ever do, and bullying. If you can't see the difference, I don't know what to say. To defeat Republicans we need fighters. Grayson is an example of a fighter. I don't call his handling of Republicans 'bullying'. I call it 'calling them on their lies'.

[stevenleser]

43. Physical intimidation is bullying. Justify it however you want. That is what you are supporting. nt

[woo me with science]

46. I suggest you start lobbying for a formal resolution.

It should condemn LBJ retroactively for his egregious abuse of politicians, and it should affirm that intensive counseling should have been provided for all the trembling, traumatized congressmen he left in his wake.

[sabrina 1]

83. Decisiveness is a requirement in politics. LBJ was decisive and if he had not been

we would still be fighting the battle for Civil Rights for all Americans. Depriving anyone of equal rights is the worst form of bullying, and bullies need to be confronted and totally not tolerated and that is what LBJ did.

People are sick to death of the mealy mouthed excuses we hear from our party no matter how many times we get them elected. What utter nonsense to suggest that Dems should act like Miss Manners. We do not want or need leaders who are afraid to stand up and fight for the people they represent.


The people are sick of excuses, they have heard them all. They want to hear no talk of compromising on SS, Medicare, Medicaid or any talk of connecting SS to the Deficit which is a lie and which most people know by now.

Or any hint no matter how cleverly they think they are phrasing it, of any kind of policy that is even a baby step towards the privatization of SS. We are not stupid, we know the language. The only statements acceptable at this point, are the ones made by Bernie Sanders. He has no problem being clear on these issues. Democrats should have no problems either.

[Raksha]

75. Very well said, sabrina 1.

Re "There is a difference between not backing down, not compromising on people's rights which no one should ever do, and bullying. "

[bvar22]

37. stevenleser, good people are losing their homes, livelihoods, jobs, and even their lives....

...every single day while Well-to-Do politicians in Congress are playing games.
If it takes a little pushing & shoving to turn that around,
[font size=3]then Let ME be First in Line.[/font]
Fuck Them.
Even the biblical figure know as Jesus finally had to pick up a whip and teach these assholes a lesson.

How much are YOU willing to sacrifice in the name of decorum?

[stevenleser]

44. You just justified virtually every bad policy of the last 50 years. Iraq, Vietnam, etc.

Still want to be first in line?

[bvar22]

91. stevenleser, now you are just flinging bullshit .

And YES.
I WILL be first in line to use the political tactics of LBJ and every other strong President & Political Party in our history
to protect the lives and livelihoods of Americans.
THAT is how politics WORKS!

Would you accuse the NY Giants of "bullying" the NE Patriots in last year's Superbowl?
That is HOW the game is played.


You are WAAAAAAAAAAAY out of line in this thread, stevenleser.

If you want to climb out of a hole,
first you have to stop digging.



Neville Chamberlain returning from Munich with his agreement where he pledged that being nice to the NAZIs would bring "Peace for our Time."



[font color=firebrick size=3][center]"If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for,
at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."
--- Paul Wellstone[/font][/center]
[center][/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]

[font size=5 color=firebrick]Solidarity![/font]

[stevenleser]

92. I'm not the one who is saying violence and bullying is ok if if achieves MY objectives, but its not

ok for the other guy to use it to achieve THEIR objectives.

Once you went there, you justified virtually every bad policy by not only the US, but various countries over the past 50 years or so.

[bvar22]

95. stevenleser, that post is embarrassing, even for DU3.

It is a wild leap to discredit those here who are advocating for Tough Politics
by equating them to violent bullies responsible for bad policy.

But I'm curious, why did you limit your bogus claim to just the last 50 years?
Since you have descended to making spurious and unsupportable claims in your failed attempt to save face, why not the last 100 years?
Or even better...insist that those here advocating for Tough Politics are responsible for "every bad policy not only the US, but various countries" in the history of THE WORLD because I said SO!!! So THERE!!!

When you were cobbling together this fantasy, did you instinctively feel that limiting it to just every bad policy in the last 50 years would somehow make it more believable?

It would be laughable if it wasn't so pathetic.

It IS a tough world out there, stevenleser.
REAL Working Class People are losing their homes, livelihoods, and lives every day due to our current political situation.
I am prepared to play hardball politics (and more) to change this.


Just stop and walk away with some of your dignity intact.
I believe your original intent was good, but your awareness of Political & Economic REALITY is deeply flawed,
and your "strategy" will only get more good working class people KILLED because it has ZERO chance of effecting ANY significant change in our system.
"They" are NOT going to let go without a fight.


[font color=firebrick size=3][center]"If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for,
at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."
--- Paul Wellstone[/font][/center]
[center][/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]

[font size=5 color=firebrick]Solidarity![/font]

[stevenleser]

99. I agree, your post is embarassing. Next? nt

[bvar22]

104. Ohhhhh.

stevenleser reaches deep into his bag and pulls out Tu Quoque Logical Fallacy .

Well, not really a solid, adult Tu Quoque Logical Fallacy.

"I know you are, but what am I"
is the child's version of the Tu Quoque Logical Fallacy.


http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2010/07/19/i-know-you-are-but-what-am-i-medical-voi/

Cheers!


On Edit:
Look, stevenleser.
You've been here a long time,
and have a history of rational, readable, respectful commentary at DU.
Maybe you've just had a few bad days or something.
Thats OK...happens to the best of us,
but just walk away now.
You aren't helping your credibility here, or in your "discussion" downthread.
Just walk away and have a few beers before the meltdown gets worse.
Really.
----Form one long term DUer to another.

[marasinghe]

76. you said it sabrina. this is not a game for cowards, or sportsmanship.

it's not a frikkin game at all; it's lives - one way, or another.

[HiPointDem]

22. wah wah, poor pubs. they're bullies themselves, so if they can't take their own medicine they

should resign.

[stevenleser]

27. Your solution is to become a bully and use physical intimidation then. Is that what you are saying?

It's OK if what you ultimately want to do is good?

Care to see a list of all the policies you just justified?

[HiPointDem]

68. The only policy I justified is the policy of the democratic party standing up to the republicans.

If someone gets in my face, getting in theirs rather than talking mealy-mouth 'compromise' is good, yes it is.

As for your silly list, compromise with fascists is what brings full-blown fascism -- not standing up to fascists.

[woo me with science]

39. stevenleser, why did you bring up RACIST posts in reference to me

out of the blue, in this other thread? And now you are lecturing about responsible political argument?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021695879#post302

Is that a tactic you would have recommended to LBJ, steveleser? When you don't like someone's positions, see if you can link them with the topic of ethnic slurs? Try to smear them with racism?

I hope it's clear why your opinion is probably among the very last I would seek out or take seriously when it comes to assessments of responsible political argument and behavior.

And, steveleser, I am still waiting for an apology.

[stevenleser]

42. I explained this several times in that thread. I am waiting for you to get it. nt

[woo me with science]

45. No, stevenleser, you tried to associate me with RACIST POSTS, specifically,

Last edited Wed Nov 14, 2012, 05:11 PM - Edit history (1)

and you have not explained why you mentioned that vile topic, out of the blue, in reference to me.

You are the one who brought up racism, steveleser. Let's talk about why you brought it up in reference to me.

You have lots of opinions about LBJ's tactics. Let's talk about yours.

i am still waiting for your apology.

[stevenleser]

58. I'm still waiting for you to get it. That will be my only response to you. nt

[woo me with science]

65. Stevenleser, your posts advertise that you debated on Fox News.

Last edited Wed Nov 14, 2012, 02:11 AM - Edit history (2)

Did you use this cheap, ugly tactic there? Did you learn it there?

Steven Leser, you do a lot of lecturing upthread about what tactics are appropriate in political argument. I think you owe me an explanation, Steve Leser, about why you felt it was appropriate in the other thread to bring up, out of the blue, the topic of racist posts in reference to me.

[stevenleser]

70. I already answered you on the original thread. That is the only response you will get from me. nt

[woo me with science]

71. No, stevenleser, you didn't answer why you brought up racist posting in reference to me.

Last edited Wed Nov 14, 2012, 03:44 AM - Edit history (2)

The link to the thread in which you attempted to smear me by associating me with racist posts is right above, stevenleser, and anyone can read the entire thread for him or herself.

In fact, I will post the link here again: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021695879#post227

Steve Leser, you wrote that I am a person who should receive "points" for not using an ethnic slur. Please explain to me why that comment was directed at me.

You lecture others about appropriate political argument, you link to your own political blog in all of your posts, and you have advertised in your DU posts that you debated on FOX News. These behaviors suggest that you have some investment in being perceived as a responsible political debater.

As such, I would think that you would offer me an apology. I would think that you would not want to leave the impression that you both use and defend cheap, low, smear tactics like the one you used on me.

[stevenleser]

72. Once again, I answered you in that thread. I consider what you are doing now stalking.

The next time I see you ask this, I'm putting you on ignore.

[woo me with science]

73. It was a low, despicable smear tactic you used, steveleser.

I am still waiting for you to apologize and explain how you ever thought associating my name with racist postings was an appropriate response on this board.

This is not behavior I take lightly, Steve Leser. It disgusts me to see it on DU, whether it is directed at me or someone else. You attempted to smear me and associate me with racism, simply because you disagreed with a recommendation I gave another post.

You owe me an apology, steveleser.

[stevenleser]

84. *Plonk* - Welcome to my ignore list. You were warned.

[woo me with science]

88. Steven Leser, you attempted to smear me as a racist

and now you are running away and hiding from what you did.

Your behavior is an embarrassment to DU.

[bvar22]

97. LOL.

"*Plonk* - Welcome to my ignore list. You were warned."--stevenleser

Do you somehow believe you have hurt woo me with science?
Now EVERYBODY except YOU can see the response from woo me with science.

Please put ME on your "Ignore List" too!!!

You should really just apologize and walk away.
Your continued intransigence on this issue is just damaging YOUR credibility.

[sabrina 1]

81. Why not just respond to the question? I was in that thread and saw those

exchanges and it was a vile attempt to smear someone unless you had some reason for what you did there. You have offered no reason and no apology. The decent thing to do would be to apologize. Running from the responsibility is not the way to act. It's possible you confused WMWS with someone else. Why not simply say that if that if that is the case?

[stevenleser]

85. I explained my remark in that thread quite clearly. I'm not going to explain it dozens of times.

That person is now on ignore.

[Occulus]

102. If we all put you on ignore we will have a greater chance to win.

Infinitestimally so, but greater nonetheless.

You want us to lose in the same way the friends of a schoolyard bully want others to never stand up to him. You want us to lose in the same way the zero-tolerance schoolmarm wants the bullied kid expelled for fighting when he finally stands up to the bully.

I know and hate your mindset and have ever since I lost to bullies, from the time I was little kid in elementary school all the way through high school. And it was the people like you, stevenleser, people with exactly your "violence is NEVER an option" mindset, who caused me to lose, over and over, until I stopped listening to them.

So, welcome and enjoy the living fuck out of my ignore list, but know I'm not putting you on it because I don't want to hear your words.

I'm putting you on it for being a traitor to the cause.

[stevenleser]

103. That may be the biggest load of crap I have ever seen on DU.

Please tell me which GOP house or senate members are physically bullying our members of the House and Senate. I'll be happy to engage in a campaign against them.

I'm sure the response will be crickets because it isnt happening. It would be big news.

[datasuspect]

101. what will happen to him if he doesn't?

[hifiguy]

5. I don't think Harry R. is going to fold on this.

There was an interesting editorial in today's Times encouraging him not to do so.

[woo me with science]

8. And now Chuck Schumer on TV talking about extending the payroll tax holiday.

[a kennedy]

10. Got no time for schumer after seeing about him on this show last night.....ugh.

http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/park-avenue/ Watch this and Mr. schumer should be our list of someone to get rid of.... Read about it here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021808930

[sabrina 1]

14. He's always been on my list of Senators to replace with a real progressive. Never liked him, once

in a while he says the right thing, but he was my Senator and as with most Democrats he had no interest in those who elected him and never responded to them. One of the least accessible elected officials in the Dem Party.

I met him once right before he became a Senator, and was arrogant, self absorbed, and did not impress anyone working for the Party that day. But, he was the candidate so as always we supported him, can't say he returned the favor.

[MineralMan]

54. Do you live in his state?

If you do, then he is a Senator in your state and you can get involved in replacing him. DU has no Senators.

[sabrina 1]

59. Are you serious? We can't vote for a Senator on DU?

If only we had known!

I lived in NY and helped get him elected, and will be back in NY before the New Year and will be working hard to beat him together with all the other Dems I have worked with in the past, during the primaries.

[MineralMan]

62. So you will be a New York resident and voter again.

Good. You can work to elect the best possible candidate. I must say that it may be difficult to unseat a long-time Democrat, though.

[sabrina 1]

64. It depends on who challenges him. He is not very popular with NY Dems

who would prefer someone more in touch with the people and less willing to compromise on certain issues.

[marmar]

32. No suprise there. Chuck whores hard for his corporate masters.

nt

[Autumn]

53. That's just fucking stupid

what do these people not get.

[kentuck]

9. Not pleasant to think about...

...Why are you messing with our beautiful minds??

[WilliamPitt]

12. This is the sixth or seventh OH SHIT IT'S ALL OVER WE'RE FUCKED thread I've seen today.

It has been a fucking WEEK since the election.

Whaaargarble.

[Comrade_McKenzie]

15. Yeah. They had to keep quiet for too long... now it's like an enema bomb going off. nt

[sabrina 1]

21. Who had to keep quiet? No one was quiet, because Democrats care about issues. Are you seriously

criticizing people for standing up for Democratic Principles? Fyi, maybe here on DU a few tried to silence people on important issues, but I can assure no one was silent, all of us were constantly letting those we were supporting know exactly why they were getting that support.

What is this with trying to shut people up not just before elections now, but after also? Do you believe that people should be quiet and just trust politicians? How odd!

A Government FOR the people, BY the people, and OF the people. Unbelievable what you see here lately. Just who is 'they' btw?

[sabrina 1]

17. And it's past time for the PEOPLE to make their opinions known. The Corporate Lobbyists have

not been wasting any time. The election is over, it's time to talk about policies, in fact, we should have been doing so during the election, but then it was 'shhhh, there's an election coming up'.

Just when is a good time for the PEOPLE to have their say? Seems there's always a reason for us to be quiet, while DC is crawling with political operatives and has been throughout the entire process. We won, but defeating opponents is not winning, unless we win on the issues.

[kentuck]

19. Yes, you did good...

by not speaking your mind before the election. It was not a good time. Now that the election is over, it still is not a good time.

[WilliamPitt]

20. Oh for God's sake.

[sabrina 1]

24. Yeah exactly 'Oh for God's sake'. That is exactly my reaction to this constant demand that

Democrats just stfu and vote.

Exactly why should we remain silent now? I'd love to hear one good reason considering the old 'an election is coming up' can't be use, for a few more weeks anyhow.

[Puglover]

23. Absolutely!

Agreed. Now is the time to discuss and make our opinions known.

However posting stuff like this:

"Could it be that, even after a landslide vote, the administration still really isn't all that into having progressive majorities? We have seen this DLC/Third Way/Corporate game before from our party."

Isn't discussing policy. It's trashing our party before it's even had a chance to fuck up. Sabrina, you know I don't try to stifle discussion around here but this is not helpful.

[sabrina 1]

28. I am reacting to the constant demands for the 'left' to remain silent. There is always a reason

it seems. Either 'an election is coming up' or 'it's just a week, or two weeks' airc when we tried to talk about the PO eg, and then it was a year and we lost.

I would not have put it that way though, re the quote in your post. I would remind the leadership how important it is that we keep the advantage we fought so hard to win in the Senate.

Eg, we lost by the appointments of Dems in strategic positions after the 2008 election.

I would hate to see that happen again and then be told 'we don't have the votes' once again.

[Puglover]

30. Thank you.

Agreed. There is a big difference between insisting on being heard and just tearing at the Dems before anything actually happens.

[sabrina 1]

36. Thanks, I have the utmost respect for you, Puglover, meant to say that before.

People are concerned and unless it is guaranteed that they could replace Kerry with someone like Mike Capuano, I would worry about losing a seat in the Senate. Capuano would be great, but he lost the primary in his last attempt to run for the Senate.

[byeya]

47. The time to make your views known is before the decision[s] are made. Progressives

got the short end of the stick, for the most part, the last four years and it's not the time to be quiet.

Maybe these are trial balloons; if they are, they still have to be brought down.

[sabrina 1]

55. I do think people were making their feelings known. Why else would

both parties deliberately avoid talking about this issue? They were hearing from the voters. Remember, we were told that SS would not be discussed in this election season. An utterly arrogant statement, frankly. They want to make their deals without interference from the people. Too bad.

I just saw some polls on this and an overwhelming majority of people once again, do not want their elected officials to reduce any benefits people receive from SS, Medicare or Medicaid.

But people do need to keep calling their Reps, including Repubs if that's who you are unfortunate enough to have, to let them know we will remember their votes in the next election.

[treestar]

86. They certainly didn't wait long to start on the sky falling

And there's no certainty Kerry would not be replaced by another Democrat. Does OP even ask anyone from MA for an opinion? No.

[Puglover]

18. I enjoy some of your OPs.

But this gloom and doom crap is really tiresome BEFORE anything has actually happened. You are posting an article from 2010 along with a very weak hypothetical. Give it a rest. Please.

[woo me with science]

31. It's important to be AWARE of the game,

so as to prevent it from being used again. It's important to make the games explicit, so they can't get away with them.

I am less gloomy now than at any time in recent history, because we had a landslide at the voting booths. We have tremendous opportunity all of a sudden, within our grasp, for REAL change...not just more of the same.

But what's in the news today? Talk of "fiscal cliffs" and compromise, reducing our Senate majority through appointment, moving Michelle Rhee to education, keeping Warren off banking...And the numbers being thrown around in the news re: possible budget deals sound just like they did before this landslide. In other words, we are not getting many...perhaps any...serious signals that the game has changed.

The game should have changed as a result of this election. We hold the cards now. We have to keep letting Democrats know that we are watching them and expect better this time.

[Puglover]

34. Agree with this entirely.

"The game should have changed as a result of this election. We hold the cards now. We have to keep letting Democrats know that we are watching them and expect better this time. "

And if you had said that I would not have taken issue with the OP.

[woo me with science]

49. I just did.

[byeya]

48. Agree totally - Now is the time to exert as much pressure as we can.

Maybe, even Holder will be shitcanned.

[woo me with science]

50. Now, that's a happy thought!

[Zorra]

26. I fear that this is true. There is a great deal of evidence proving this type of behavior

among Centrist DLC/Third Way Democrats in the past.

Thank you for your post. I believe it is imperative that we pressure and petition our Democratic Senators and Independent Senate allies to do the right thing for the Democratic party. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

DLC/Third Way Democrats have been a genuine threat to social, political, and economic progress. A do nothing Blue Dog Congress led us to the slaughter of the 2010 election. We can't let them lead us to the slaughterhouse again.

We should have the 51 votes to reform Senate filibuster rules. If Third Way Democrats do vote with their republican allies to block this reform, or take any type of action to prevent this coming to a vote, it will be very telling. But not unexpected.

Now, woo, you need to STFU and get with the program.

Just kidding ~

[woo me with science]

57. Zorra!

I will shut up and get with the program...

right after you do.

[dionysus]

29. lol, douchewald. n/t

[OldDem2012]

33. Hmmm. You're basing your post on a writer's opinion? Really?? nt.

Last edited Tue Nov 13, 2012, 09:46 PM - Edit history (1)

[bvar22]

98. Isn't that what we ALL do at DU?

Don't we all base our opinions on what someone else writes?
Even the Talking Heads on TV are reading what someone else writes.
Even our politicians speaking at the podiums of our government are mostly reading what someone else writes.

The very best posters at DU base their opinions on a synthesis of a collection of other writers' opinions.
The very worst posters at DU just make stuff up on their own.

[one_voice]

38. Do you realize you posted...

an article from 2010?

[Barack_America]

51. Having read the entire OP, the article from 2010 makes perfect sense.

[sabrina 1]

67. Yes, I am sure the OP does realize that. It is very appropriate for what is

happening right now, which is why, I am assuming, the OP used it.

[FSogol]

40. LOL. How did I know this was a Greenwald hit piece? Because its from 2010!

All the news that's fit to bash.

[FrenchieCat]

41. Perhaps instead of us whining on the Internet as was done by some for three whole years.....,

we should be sending letters and faxes and whatever else to our Blue Senators letting them know what we want, no?

I mean....I think that this could be up to us. Organizing some way to get this done could do it......for the change.

See, demanding is genius.......but I don't think
that we need to demonize anyone just yet.

[Autumn]

56. Good to see you posting again. Some of us have spent a lot of time

sending letters and faxes to our Blue Senators letting them know what we want, It's an ongoing process and I think these threads are important so that we know what we have to do.

[sabrina 1]

60. I agree. And fortunately a huge coalition of Unions and Progressive groups

has already been formed and they have already met with elected officials to let them know they expect the Social Safety Net to be vigorously defended.

I can provide a link if you are not familiar with them, I believe.

[woo me with science]

66. Speaking out is as important as writing, calling, and going to Washington.

We can and must be doing both.

Speaking out, wherever you can, is how you get even MORE people to write, call, and go to Washington.

[joshcryer]

74. Not when you don't advocate action, but foster complacency.

Why would act if they feel as if "the administration still really isn't all that into having progressive majorities"?

Check yourself, dude. I canvased for marijuana for weeks here. It passed handedly. Had I been disillusioned that it couldn't be passed or that the Democrats didn't care about it it simply wouldn't have happened (Tom Udall and John Hickenlooper are decidedly center-right candidates contrasted to my own politics).

Your words do not support your comment here that you are speaking out to get people to write, call, and go to Washington. In fact, I interpret the exact opposite.

[woo me with science]

78. Oh, Josh, just stop it.

Don't play these accusatory games. I am so weary of seeing this type of crap here, and you should be ashamed to be shoveling it.

Really, how dare you accuse me of "the opposite." You know my posting history, so you know that I constantly exhort people to write and call and even go to Washington; good grief, I made a bunch of posts like that just today. And you saw the thread from two days ago, in which I spoke of the tremendous power and opportunity we possess after this landslide, if we keep the pressure on our representatives to work for us.

I am sick and tired of being sold out. We have a gravely serious, systemic problem of corporate money driving policy in Washington, and, yes, Democrats are complicit. Let me repeat that: Republicans are worse, but Democrats are absolutely complicit. At a certain point we need to be honest about what the problem really is, or we will never solve it.

I absolutely do think there is reluctance on the part of the President and many Democrats in Congress to have a very strong, "untinkerable" progressive majority, for all the reasons that Greenwald outlines and more. I think Democrats need to be clear-eyed about the problem, and that a large part of the reason we are not seeing the level of outcry we desperately need in order to force real change is that people are constantly fed the fantasy that it ISN'T a problem.

The repeated, serious betrayals we have experienced - on austerity/tax cuts for the rich, on political appointments, on the public option, on the police/surveillance state and civil rights - are not a series of flukes, nor are they symptoms of some sort of pathological timidity that has infected only the Democratic side of Washington, and only when they need to push against Bush-style corporate economic, war, or police state policies. No, we have a SYSTEMIC problem of billions of dollars in corporate money flooding our government and making our representatives, including our President, reluctant to represent us on these issues. We need to recognize that serious, serious problem, and we need to deal with it.

Josh, Republicans have been working predictably on behalf of corporate America for a very long time. For decades the Democratic Party was the ONLY thing standing between Americans and vicious, predatory corporate policies. We are seeing frightening changes in our country now, precisely because the infiltration of corporate money into our party is pressuring too many Democrats to abdicate that role. I care desperately about the health of our party, because our country NEEDS our party, and I'm going to keep posting about it as honestly as I can, so that we can FIX it.

That you would accuse me of trying to stifle action is beyond outrageous. The vast majority of my posts on these boards do nothing but CRY OUT for action, and I and others who call for this action are continually lectured by the usual group that we should sit down, shut up, and just be patient.

I am finished with this subthread, Josh. I'm tired, and I really am not interested in hearing why I am wrong and why I am really an evil Republican in disguise.

You have a good night.

[joshcryer]

80. Your posting history is what made my make that comment. Indeed, you feel "sold out."

Your words, not mine. Am I "sold out" because Udall and Hickenlooper are not progressives? Fuck no! We passed marijuana legalization! The first time in the history of the entire human planetary civilization!

I have never seen a post by you advocating contacting the "Third Way" democrats to get progressive legislation passed. Indeed, if I were to make an OP about "Do you think Third Wayers or Republicans will pass liberal policies" I guarantee you that 1) you wouldn't respond and say "yes" nor would you respond and say that it was worth contacting them to try to get those policies passed!

Indeed, you've formed a defeatist position with regards to not only the Obama administration but to Democrats in general (even though, objectively, factually, 1/3rd of them are 100% progressive, and another 1/3rd are moderate and willing to accept progressivism).

Obama is not a leftist, he is a moderate. The only "selling out" he's done is in your mind as far as the right wing has manipulated you and others into believing he's adopted their policies. I've seen enough bullshit right wing fascist lying talking points about how Obama "stole" 600 million from Medicare to fund "Obamacare" to know how their doublespeaking minds work. They don't care about truth and you're being manipulated by their untruths.

How have you been "sold out"? It's simple, you haven't. Indeed, everything Obama has done is consistent with his pre-election rhetoric. Everything with perhaps the exception of foreign policy (though one can make the argument that his foreign policy was interpolatable and falls in line perfectly with polls of the US population).

So please, spare me the outrage, Obama is the most consistent President in US history, he ran a campaign, followed his proposals to the tee (where he had the power to control the outcome) and indeed, totally destroyed anyones rose colored glassed perceptions of him.

You are wrong. You may not be a Republican in disguise (I never said that, btw). But you are certainly, 100%, someone who drives the Republican narrative. You are, inexplicably, and unintentionally, working for them.

Your posts help them more than they hurt them and they 100% do not help drive activists to act against the Republicans.

It's simple. It's really fucking simple. Do you agree or disagree, yes or fucking no, that the Third Way or the Republicans would be open to progressive policies?

If you say yes you're a fucking liar.

[bvar22]

96. joshcryer, you are entitled to your opinion,

but your personal attack on woo me with science is unfounded, unwarranted, and untrue,
and well below the minimum standard that should be acceptable on DU.

"But you are certainly, 100%, someone who drives the Republican narrative. You are, inexplicably, and unintentionally, working for them."

Absurd, twisted Nonsense, joshcryer.

Through your tireless efforts to marginalize those those on DU who advocate for the Traditional Democratic Party Values of FDR/LBJ, YOU are doing MUCH MORE to advance the conservative agenda of The Republicans.
YOU are helping The Republicans by moving the Democratic Party To The Political Right.
woo me with science, bu standing for Liberal Values, is working to limit the damage done by you and yours.

I alerted on your post, my 2nd alert ever on DU.

"If you say yes you're a fucking liar."--- joshcryer

Though you employed a rhetorical device, you called woo me with science "a a fucking liar",
and that should not be tolerated, even on DU3.
woo me with science can take some solace in that she has reduced you to this level of bitter and deceptive rhetoric in you failed attempt to save face.

Cheers!

[joshcryer]

106. I post facts.

It is a fact that anyone who uses right wing rhetoric is driving the right wing narrative. FOSTERING COMPLACENCY is their primary goal and it was what lead to the rise of conservatism in this country.

It is also a fact that if one says that the Third Way or that Republicans will pass progressive legislation they are fucking lying. It's not true. They won't work with us. Fact.

The "trifecta" of the usual suspects who continually post downright untruths about the administration, fear monger has been dwindling quite rapidly. It's only a matter of time before they have their blowout and show their true colors as so many trolls who were banned have done.

And I am not going to sit back and let the bullies run rough shot over me. I have no desire to "play nice" with those who drive the right wing narrative.

[bvar22]

107. Oh. I see what your problem is.

You are very confused.
You say you state "facts", but you don't.
You post "opinions".
You insist that somebody is "FOSTERING COMPLACENCY" by question our elected officials and holding them accountable. If you are posting "facts",
then you can easily provide us with links to the scientific studies that support your "opinion".




and What-the-hell-country did you grow up in?
THAT is as democratic and as American and as Democratic Party as it gets.
It is the Republican Party that fosters the type of Lock step allegiance you crave.
You know, the Party YOU aid every day on DU.
(Now watch this. Since YOU have lowered the bar, I can do it too)
And THATS a FACT because I ONLY post FACTS!!!


Here is another one of your problems:

You believe that:
*Fighting for NO CUTS to Social Security or Medicare is Right Wing rhetoric.

*You believe that questioning the War on Drugs and the For Profit Prison Industry is Right Wing rhetoric.

*You believe that protecting the Environment is Right Wing rhetoric.

*You believe that criticizing the continuation and expansion of the Extra-Constitutional Powers of the "Unitary Executive
is a Right Wing rhetoric.

*You believe that asking the President to do MORE for the Poor is Right Wing rhetoric.

*You believe that MANDATES to PURCHASE Insurance from For Profit Corporations is Left Wing rhetoric.

Your problem is CLEAR.
You obviously can't tell your Right from your Left.

I have NEVER seen woo me with science advocate FOR a "Right Wing" Position,
or try to advance the Republican agenda.
I DARE you,
to post a single link to a single post by woo me with science where he/she advocates for a Right Wing position.
[font size=5]I DARE you![/font size=5]
Put UP or Shut Up!

However, I see you every day on DU working top protect those who DO advance Republican Policy,
and shield THEM from criticism, protest, questioning, or accountability.

So WHO exactly is helping the Right Wing?

Hey josh,
weren't you that guy that came here sporting a "Che" avatar and claiming to be a "Revolutionary"?
LOL

[sabrina 1]

82. You are wasting your time there, as so many others finally realized, me too

after a long time of attempting to engage. Those kinds of tactics, old as they are, continue to be employed and are now simply boring and not worthy of any response. It's rare for me to stop engaging anyone, but I see the wisdom of no longer wasting time and energy on people who use 'tactics' rather than engage in honest debate.

You have no need to waste your time on those kinds of deceptive tactics. Seems when someone has the gall to speak the truth, they become targets of these kinds of tactics on these forums. If nothing else, it's interesting, kind of scary when it first happens to you and you have no idea why, but after years of seeing the same garbage over and over again, it's simply boring and sad and makes you wonder what the point is supposed to be since it never worked anyhow.

[woo me with science]

90. Yeah, I know.

We have been around this tree many, many times.

The irony is that I just gave a big rec to another post that was saying exactly what you just said.

[joshcryer]

105. You continually dodge hard questions.

[LanternWaste]

93. Hence the prolific amount of bumper-stickers in the U.S

"Speaking out is as important..."

Hence the prolific amount of bumper-stickers in the U.S., the credibility they get, and the prolific amount of problems they solve.

[treestar]

87. Absolutely! I have two blue Senators

and could sound them out on this point! The filibuster is so frustrating to us. Yet the Senators themselves have the experience to see the value in it, so it would be great to hear more from them on it. The M$M is so trivial these days, it hardly even covers a subject like this.

[MineralMan]

52. A 2010 article? The filibuster reform cannot happen

until the new Congress is convened. There's a lot of other stuff going on and this is not currently under discussion. It will be next year.

Copying and pasting a 2010 Glenn Greenwald screed is not pertinent at this time, especially on this subject. It has nothing to do with what is happening now, nor with anything that will happen when the new Congress is convened in 2013.

This is FUD, pure and simple.

[sabrina 1]

63. It has everything to do what is being reported right now. Which is the very reason

why that particular article was chosen. Amazing you missed the reason for it.

Greenwald appears to be one of the most respected commentators on politics in the country now. I doubt he's concerned about the pettiness of a few disgruntled right wingers who have never forgotten his opposition to Bush policies. Nor his refusal to drop that opposition.

He has many Democratic friends in Congress so I imagine they pay close attention to his writings and being that they are all Progressive Dems, they generally agree with him and appreciate his sticking to Democratic Principles. It helps them too when they find themselves up against those who are more than willing to trade those principles or who never held them to begin with.

Republicans of course would love to see him go away.

[KoKo]

61. Yes...it seems we are back to the "Fillibuster" Debate........After all these years!

Harry Reid can do this...but, he never HAS and NEVER WILL...it seems.

[Marrah_G]

69. people need to call and write to their senators and make their feelings known

People need to get their family and friends to do the same.

The only way to get this done is to pressure them to do the right thing.

[Summer Hathaway]

77. I suspect that Obama does

what Obama does for the sole purpose of pissing Glenn Greenwald off.

The beauty part is he pisses him off no matter what he does.

I guess it never occurred to Greenwald (or you) that the "we" who contributed to the landslide don't necessarily agree with either of you.

[Fumesucker]

79. Really, fuck filibuster reform

Who cares if Republicans block progressive bills in the Senate?

We have a Democrat in the presidency, that's all we need to know.

[Summer Hathaway]

100. Yeah

because that's exactly what I said.

[Puzzledtraveller]

89. Becasue they say that they need to say to get votes, we are suprised about this?

[RepublicansRZombies]

94. "We created a landslide. It is time to DEMAND representation."

And we won that landslide by using the internet, and that is exactly how we can make our demands heard.

[woo me with science]

108. And today it comes to pass, and it could not have happened any other way.

Corporate Democrats and corporate Republicans collude, again, to ensure that their biggest excuse for not passing legislation favored by the people and opposed by corporations...remains in place.

Welcome to the corporate second term.

[woo me with science]

109. Kick