We need to END republicanism, not partner with them

[bigtree]

Democratic principles need to dominate the political arena, not sidle up beside republicans looking for some reciprocal grope. Republicanism is not just an opposition party, it is a dangerous and destructive philosophy. Put into practice, it is naked corporatism, unquenchable militarism, unashamed discrimination, and anti-democratic tyranny. This republican class who is in power right now is the worst in my lifetime; nothing but a front for their corporate masters.

They are putting our nation at risk and threatening the health of the earth itself. This shouldn't be just a battle to just sit a couple of rungs above them. They need to be disenfranchised from successfully promoting and furthering their agenda.

"Reaching out" to them will be regarded by these thugs as acceptance and acquiescence. They need to be taken down, and their supporters need to understand we're not willing to subject the nation, any more, to the consequences of the republican party's elaborate con job masquerading as policy.

We shouldn't pretend that there aren't specific issues which form a dividing line. Most of these, on the Democratic side, are long standing efforts to provide basic needs and to uphold or establish basic rights which the republicans obstruct with whatever position or strategy suits the moment, often completely running over their previous philosophy, like their former objections to 'nation-building', or conservatives' former support of privacy rights.

What the President seems to be unaware of, is that many of the compromises he's seeking may well make sense in the political arena - like clearing some untidy backlog of unfinished business. Yet, most of those compromises threaten divide many in the country from the Democratic party which has pledged, and fought to support and defend these opportunistically-discarded initiatives in the past. That 'partisanship' was a NECESSARY response to republican obstructionism.

These days, our party doesn't have a progressive agenda; it has a timid and defensive one in the face of an extreme republican opposition, and I reject any implication that our Democratic politics has EVER been unnecessarily confrontational. These 'lifelong republicans' need to be CHALLENGED and discredited when they try and push their obstructionist, industry enabling agenda, not mollycoddled.


bigtree in 2008:

I can see the republicans standing with President Obama . . .

Smiling, shaking hands . . . SOMEONE in that arrangement has to lose. The issues and concerns we face break down into longstanding efforts to bring about changes which have been obstructed by a republican agenda which is designed to derail those efforts, not replace them. All of their proposals are phony, disguised as legitimate legislation, designed to derail the 'change' Obama says he wants. That's the real world. What he's selling is a fantasy.

There is no republican class in power to work with. Their agenda is a sham designed to obstruct the changes we want and need. It may sound wonderful to imagine that Obama will transcend all of that, but, if he doesn't have a Democratic majority large enough to overcome these filibusters, he'll be just as stymied as we are today. I think he's selling a scenario which doesn't exist."

. . . granted, I was just supporting another insider pol (Clinton) at the time, against Barack Obama, but, she had pledged to fight republicans, if she became president. Who knows if that would have been the better political choice?

Who cares? Here we are. This President is still pledging to keep on 'reaching out' to this oblivious republican opposition; still insisting that the worst of them is, somehow, 'concerned about all people in America.'

related:

Obama promised to continue his charm offensive aimed at Republicans
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/obama-bush-loves-this-country-loves-its-people

[bigtree]

1. .

[bigtree]

8. .

[kentuck]

2. You should not ally yourself with these people...

You should defeat them. There may be a time for bi-partisanship but this is not it. (Proverbial "you&quot

[forestpath]

3. Obama's one of them.

[ohiosmith]

5. This post was alerted on. The jury voted 5/1 to let it stand.

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

At Thu Apr 25, 2013, 07:13 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Obama's one of them.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2752449

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

Calling Obama a Republican is not okay.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Apr 25, 2013, 07:17 AM, and the Jury voted 1-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Sticks and stones ...
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT and said: Yeah, this is over the top and not okay
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: This is the poster's opinion. Leave it.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Silly alerter! Leave the post!

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[forestpath]

6. ROFL, thanks.

[ohiosmith]

7. Not a problem!

[Recursion]

4. I wish I were taller (nt)

[bigtree]

9. .

[bigtree]

10. .

[grantcart]

11. Well then we need to get people registered and get them to the voting booth.

If Texas and Arizona Hispanics were registered and voted at the same percent as Whites then Texas and Arizona would be voting blue and the Republican Party would collapse.

It requires people engaging other real people and getting involved in a mass movement out in their neighborhoods.

Nothing else is going to work.

[bigtree]

12. no question

'Nothing else is going to work.'

Voting is key. The stuff in the middle is a consequence of the elections.

[grantcart]

16. I think that the big under reported story of American politics is how the President's people

have transformed retail active politics. I have signed up for Mayors' against Guns, OFA and a couple of other related groups.

I get calls and emails on a weekly basis to join in public actions around my zip code.

Its under the radar but this is how real change is going to happen.

Posting on DU is good therapy for political/policy junkies but they seldom amount to much in the real world, except yours of course <snarky grin>, that I always click on and mostly agree with.

If we want to diminish Republican influence that is our job not the President's. He has to deal with the institutions as they are constituted today.

[bigtree]

20. legislatively, it's a bust. That's his focus, isn't it?

If it's a legislative tactic, I think that's played itself out as far as anything meaningfully progressive passing is concerned.

Is 'reaching out' a political gesture to demonstrate to the American people that our two parties can still work together? That's been a busted experiment, imo. Folks are starting to notice, I think. Maybe that's his strategy; to bring out as much of the bad republican as he's able to convince voters away from supporting them.

[grantcart]

22. Couldn't disagree more.

The President has a wider view and is patient and persistent.


For 60 years no politician has run a national campaign on raising taxes and increasing federal revenue. Not since Mondale has any Democratic politician even attempted it.

He did it and won.

For 60 years no politician has run a national campaign on the basic liberal premise of significantly expanding the role of the federal government, as he did in the banking and health care sectors.

He did it and won.

He has destroyed the meme that "the government is the problem and not the solution".

No national politician has, in the last many decades, challenged the idea that you could pass legislation that was contrary to the wishes of the NRA.

He has just begun.

He has absolutely changed the dynamics of the discussion. Are we satisfied with the level of federal revenues? No, but the President hasn't compromised on the issue and continues to press the Republicans with the Sequester.

Have we got the Public Option and Single Payer? No but we have a legislated mandated role and a Supreme Court confirmation that it is legal. It is almost certain that if we had gotten the bill that DU wanted that the Supreme Court would have found that bill unconstitutional.

So far from being a busted experiment the President is running the table, just a lot slower than we would like.

What is the next big achievement? Immigration reform. The President has set into motion all of the dynamics that will make bipartisan agreement possible. He is letting Rubio and Flake and others get the credit, but he is going to get the bill.

And like most of the great legislative achievements of the President it will not be exactly what we want but it will provide immediate relief to millions of people who live on a precarious ledge (like my future son in law) and it will bring a major long term adjustment to the US system, making it more just. And Rush Limbaugh is absolutely correct that when it passes it will add millions of more Democrats.

If progressives want more progressive legislation to get to the President's desk then we need a more progressive Congress. I cannot see how the "addition by subtraction" that is frequently advocated at DU (and classically done by Grayson in a call to primary 145 House Democrats). Max Baucus decision not to run for re election in Montana is the kind of blow that weakens us because the next Senator will likely be a Cruz type. We need to be united. We need to expand our numbers and we need to engage those that we disagree with. There is no other path to success.

[TimberValley]

13. One-party rule, historically, doesn't work well. nt.

[bigtree]

15. maybe they can regroup

. . . but which faction do they part with? The haters? The demagogues? The racists? The bigots? The homophobes? The militarists? The corporatists? The gun lobby? The xenophobes?

We don't need to give aid and comfort to any of that. Nor is our party responsible for maintaining some sort of functioning opposition to round out our democratic system of government.

[MrScorpio]

14. AS long as these Republican mother fuckers keep getting elected, we have to deal with them

The magic, you see, is getting people to STOP electing them.

Otherwise, we have to play with the hand that the voters deal to us.

[bigtree]

17. That might involve representing them as the dangerousness that they are

. . . might hurt their feelings though. Even worse, it might add to the political divide to point out the utter inanity of their progress-blocking initiatives, and call out the cretins behind all of that.

I know how to deal with them as criminals, bigots, and racists. I'm still working out how to put all of that antipathy aside and 'reach out' to them. Hell, I just might grab something vital and squeeze the (republicanism) out of it.

[MrScorpio]

19. Fight on, Brother!

Fight ON!

[treestar]

21. THIS ^^^^^^

And whatever we do now does not work.

[Jennicut]

18. There will always be conservatives.

There may be less in the next 10 to 15 years as the Repub base gets older. But even if that party collapsed, another one would come along consisting of conservatives that want "small" government. Dems don't have to be nice to them. President Obama has bent over backwards to try and work with them.