Dear Barbara Boxer

[Tom Rinaldo]

I like you a lot. You used to be my Representative, and later my Senator before I moved out of California. I saw what you wrote in a tweet about Bernie only being a Democrat some days, and I realize it was just a quick retort, meant as a relatively minor political jab - not some long thought out commentary. But it was also an incredibly dumb thing to say and I hope you don't choose to go there often. Do I really need to point out to you that the future of the Democratic Party (along with everything else) rests in the hands of the currently young? Those under 40 who are engaged in the current Democratic primary process overwhelmingly believe that Bernie Sanders speaks for them. Do you really want to argue the point that Bernie Sanders does not necessarily speak for the Democratic Party? Do you think our Party should cast doubt on whether Bernie speaks for us when he also speaks for them?

I use the word us because I am just as much a part of the Democratic Party as you are, officially, even though you have risen much higher in it than I have. I am the elected Chairperson of the official Democratic Party Committee in our town - a very small cog in a very large wheel admittedly, but a legitimate cog none the less. Our local committee worked hard and swept our Town elections last November in a mixed allegiance rural area. Sounds good, right? As far as that goes it is, but we almost didn't even have a Democratic Committee that could pull together a nominating caucus let alone a winning campaign. We are under strength and had to plead with people to join our committee. I remain active in it mostly out of guilt - we live in a small town and I don't want to hand it over to Republicans by default. I find that the Democratic Party rarely inspires me any longer. I am far from alone in feeling that way.

Very few people I know around here actively think of themselves as Democrats, certainly not to the point where they will work to sustain, let alone build our Party. Virtually no one below 50 does for starters. And almost to a person all the exceptions to those "rules" who I know are people supporting Bernie for President. The only enthusiasm I'm running into for the Democratic Party at all is attributable to the fact that Bernie Sanders is running for the Democratic Party nomination for President.

So go ahead - push him away to arms length or further with you tweets, and question his formal credentials while the actual voters who I know are eager to learn more about the actual positions that Sanders holds. How you think that is going to help us rebuild the Democratic Party is beyond me, not when Independents are now the largest voting block in the nation. It seems almost like you would rather Sanders had run third party instead of having agreed to back whoever wins the nomination of the Democratic Party. But that can't be what you really think, can it?

[TwilightGardener]

1. I expect the old guard to come out swinging for Hillary. That's fine.

[Tom Rinaldo]

3. Me too, and that is fine. but pushing a party identify litmus test is foolish

and ultimately self defeating.

[Snotcicles]

18. Good read. +1 nt

[Roy Rolling]

59. Hidden Factor--Membership in the "Old Guard"

Those who wish to use this political "weapon" are clueless to the fact that not representing the Democratic Party leviathan is a plus in the minds of some voters. The more they point out that Bernie does not mindlessly repeat the party line, the more some people like him.

[bkkyosemite]

2. Very good. She was mine too before I moved out of CA

She is helping Hillary win at ANY cost.

[SheenaR]

4. I dont have time to look this up at work

Has Bernie ever caucused with the Republicans during his time in Congress? Seems to me he has always aligned with the Democrats and in some cases side by side with Boxer. It is what it is. Let them throw stones. We are mobilizing on the ground to win this with votes, not smears.

[Tom Rinaldo]

7. Always with Democrats n/t

[SheenaR]

9. Thank you Tom

I thought so, but unlike some on the other side, I don't just say things if I am unsure of their validity.

[daleanime]

26. But you don't pass by....

a chance to take a shoot at people, do you.

[jillan]

5. I love her, and she has the right to support whichever candidate she chooses.

In the end it doesn't matter because she will be supporting the Dem nominee. As will I.

[Tom Rinaldo]

12. A rigged system forces all who use it to fnction alongside corruption

in order to participate in the system. That is a meaningful distinction from calling all Democrats corrupt. And no I don't think it is a fairy tale to believe Americans can have the same basic economic rights that FDR believed in and that citizens of most other advanced Democracies can take for granted

[Tom Rinaldo]

21. We differ on your basic premise that Bernie is calling all politicians corrupt

That is not what he says.

We all know that slavery was part of our original Constitution. Inconsistencies with our ideals didn't start with FDR and they won't end with any one election.

[Vincardog]

25. "his proposals face stiff opposition among the general electorate " horse hockey his proposals have

At least 70% approval in the polls I have seen.
"The American people are going to storm the gate and grab what's theirs."
Bernie is just going to help us organize.
Every speech he says "WE can do this and WE can do that I can do nothing without a movement helping me."

[Vincardog]

29. Do you beieve Obama Appointed Rahm emanuel and a Goldman Sacks advisor to his cabinet?

[Vincardog]

32. Timothy Geithner Obama's Treasury secretary, Yes I believe it based oin his actions.

is going to be Barack Geithner, in other words, is hired to head the U.S. Treasury by an executive from Citigroup — Michael Froman — before the ink is even dry on a massive government giveaway to Citigroup that Geithner himself was instrumental in delivering. In the annals of brazen political swindles, this one has to go in the all-time Fuck-the-Optics Hall of Fame.

Wall Street loved the Citi bailout and the Geithner nomination so much that the Dow immediately posted its biggest two-day jump since 1987, rising 11.8 percent. Citi shares jumped 58 percent in a single day, and JP Morgan Chase, Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley soared more than 20 percent, as Wall Street embraced the news that the government's bailout generosity would not die with George W. Bush and Hank Paulson. "Geithner assures a smooth transition between the Bush administration and that of Obama, because he's already co-managing what's happening now," observed Stephen Leeb, president of Leeb Capital Management.

Advertisement

Left unnoticed, however, was the fact that Geithner had been hired by a sitting Citigroup executive who still had a big bonus coming despite his proximity to Obama. In January 2009, just over a month after the bailout, Citigroup paid Froman a year-end bonus of $2.25 million. But as outrageous as it was, that payoff would prove to be chump change for the banker crowd, who were about to get everything they wanted — and more — from the new president.

The irony of Bob Rubin: He's an unapologetic arch-capitalist demagogue whose very career is proof that a free-market meritocracy is a myth. Much like Alan Greenspan, a staggeringly incompetent economic forecaster who was worshipped by four decades of politicians because he once dated Barbara Walters, Rubin has been held in awe by the American political elite for nearly 20 years despite having fucked up virtually every project he ever got his hands on. He went from running Goldman Sachs (1990-1992) to the Clinton White House (1993-1999) to Citigroup (1999-2009), leaving behind a trail of historic gaffes that somehow boosted his stature every step of the way.

As Treasury secretary under Clinton, Rubin was the driving force behind two monstrous deregulatory actions that would be primary causes of last year's financial crisis: the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act (passed specifically to legalize the Citigroup megamerger) and the deregulation of the derivatives market. Having set that time bomb, Rubin left government to join Citi, which promptly expressed its gratitude by giving him $126 million in compensation over the next eight years (they don't call it bribery in this country when they give you the money post factum). After urging management to amp up its risky investments in toxic vehicles, a strategy that very nearly destroyed the company, Rubin blamed Citi's board for his screw-ups and complained that he had been underpaid to boot. "I bet there's not a single year where I couldn't have gone somewhere else and made more," he said.

Despite being perhaps more responsible for last year's crash than any other single living person — his colossally stupid decisions at both the highest levels of government and the management of a private financial superpower make him unique — Rubin was the man Barack Obama chose to build his White House around.

There are four main ways to be connected to Bob Rubin: through Goldman Sachs, the Clinton administration, Citigroup and, finally, the Hamilton Project, a think tank Rubin spearheaded under the auspices of the Brookings Institute to promote his philosophy of balanced budgets, free trade and financial deregulation. The team Obama put in place to run his economic policy after his inauguration was dominated by people who boasted connections to at least one of these four institutions — so much so that the White House now looks like a backstage party for an episode of Bob Rubin, This Is Your Life!

At Treasury, there is Geithner, who worked under Rubin in the Clinton years. Serving as Geithner's "counselor" — a made-up post not subject to Senate confirmation — is Lewis Alexander, the former chief economist of Citigroup, who advised Citi back in 2007 that the upcoming housing crash was nothing to worry about. Two other top Geithner "counselors" — Gene Sperling and Lael Brainard — worked under Rubin at the National Economic Council, the key group that coordinates all economic policymaking for the White House.

[Maedhros]

44. Timothy Geithner a solid Progressive?

He's been working for the Treasury Department, Council on Foreign Relations, International Monetary Fund, and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York since 1988. What happened from 1988 - 2012?

From here: http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/09/18/introducing-this-blog/



The income share of the richest 10% of Americans increased from approximately 35% in 1987 to almost 45% in 2005. In Krugman's view, this destroyed the middle class:

The great divergence: Since the late 1970s the America I knew has unraveled. We’re no longer a middle-class society, in which the benefits of economic growth are widely shared: between 1979 and 2005 the real income of the median household rose only 13 percent, but the income of the richest 0.1% of Americans rose 296 percent.

Most people assume that this rise in inequality was the result of impersonal forces, like technological change and globalization. But the great reduction of inequality that created middle-class America between 1935 and 1945 was driven by political change; I believe that politics has also played an important role in rising inequality since the 1970s. It’s important to know that no other advanced economy has seen a comparable surge in inequality – even the rising inequality of Thatcherite Britain was a faint echo of trends here.

Here's another chart that shows this from a different perspective (from http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-american-middle-class-hasnt-gotten-a-raise-in-15-years/):

?w=575

One common definition of the American dream is the belief that each generation will do better than the one before. By that measure, the dream is fading. Take the generation born in 1970. In early adulthood, these Americans outearned their parents, those born in 1950. But their gains stalled in the 2000s, when they were in their 30s. Now in their 40s, their earnings have fallen behind those of their parents at the same stage in their lives.

During Geithner's career, the share of households in the middle tier of earners decreased from approximately 49% in 1988 to 45% in 2013.

So, you're selling the idea that a man who has spent his entire professional career deeply entrenched in the institutions that implemented Reaganomics and resulted in the greatest inequality in wealth distribution in America since the Gilded Age is a solid Progressive?

[Maedhros]

49. I think you would be hard pressed to find a Progressive in America

who would applaud the actions of the Federal Reserve, CFR and IMF over the last thirty years.

Other than oxymoronic 'progressive centrists'.

[Maedhros]

53. I'll leave that to you. [n/t]

[Armstead]

33. For starters...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/02/government-sachs-goldmans_n_210561.html

[Tom Rinaldo]

39. I am in the midst of writing a new OP - that speaks to some of your issues

Probably won't be up today though as I have employment obligations - have to leave for it soon.

I forgot that your questions aren't visible when I'm in a reply window to your last post but I only have time for a short comment anyway. The fact that any Democrat can face a primary opponent if voters are unhappy with them kind of skips right over the fact that so many of our citizens are disillusioned with voting to begin with, not even for general elections when important differences are on the line. As I wrote above, we are having a lot of trouble getting people willing to keep the Democratic Party viable locally - at this point it sure isn't because people around here find it too radical for them.

Yes voters share some responsibility, but those who chose to attempt to lead our country are also tasked with helping find the reasons for high voter apathy.

[bkkyosemite]

8. I said this to Barbara

BARBARA you were my Senator for most of your years in government. You trashing Senator Sanders today in a tweet could cause you to lose 1/2 of the dems for this election. She said she was a Moderate, just told Mathews she needs to be in the Middle. I am very disgusted with the attacks from Congress on Bernie Sanders a Senator for decades and WHO IS TELLING THE TRUTH.

[JaneyVee]

10. Who is pushing who away?

[Tom Rinaldo]

15. I said pushing to "arms length"

Saying he is only a Democrat some days says he isn't on others. Why go there?

[Betty Karlson]

11. Boxer needs to go already.

Kamala Harris will be a senator for the 21st century, and I wish her a good campaign and a smashing victory!

[Le Taz Hot]

58. Nope.

Ms. Harris came out early to endorse Hillary.

[Betty Karlson]

67. Fuck! Why are there so many status quo politicians?

California has a jungle primary for senators. Maybe we can help an actual progressive to make it to the run-off?

[Le Taz Hot]

68. Because the California Democratic Party

is as Establishment as they come. Never shall be heard a discouraging word that they want Hills at all costs, very much like the DNC.

[beam me up scottie]

13. Well said, Tom, thank you.

[VulgarPoet]

14. If they're not here yet

The delegation from Camp Weathervane will be here within the next twelve hours assuming this is the "bus we're throwing her under".

[Tom Rinaldo]

17. I still like Barbara Boxer

I would call this a civil disagreement on a specific point. I have no problem with Barbara having endorsed Hillary, but this raised some points I thought were worth looking at.

[VulgarPoet]

19. Aye, I feel the same way. As it is, if memory serves, she's retired, so

what bus is she supposed to be put under again? Oh right, there isn't one.

[rosesaylavee]

41. I do too.

She's family with Secy. Clinton. I am sure this played into her response.

[unc70]

16. Boxer's daughter was married to Clinton's brother

They are now divorced. Boxer's grandson is Hillary's nephew.

[appalachiablue]

23. Wonderful, thank you. It's the important truth about growing numbers of young people

who rightly care about their uncertain futures and believe supporting Bernie Sanders will improve their lives and the nation. How can the Democratic Party and leaders like Sen. Boxer not embrace this and fight to preserve and expand the party which has lost many members in the last 20 years along with the large increase in independent voters as you say.

The dysfunctional two party system, declining middle class and deterioration of the US cannot continue. The sooner the mainstream Dems. recognize it, move away from the 90s and all that that era brought, the better off we'll all be. I truly hope they don't blow the opportunity for real change in 2016 because there won't be another for many years unfortunately.

[appalachiablue]

37. >'IS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY SHRINKING?' Jan. 11, 2016, Yahoo News

The number of Americans who identify as Democrats has reached a historic low, while remaining higher than Republicans, according to a Gallup poll published Monday.

The latest Gallup poll on party identification, published Monday, found that the number of respondents who identify as Democrats reached a historical low of 29 percent in the past year.

At the same time, 26 percent of respondents identified as Republicans, and 42 percent as independents – down one point from 2014, a record high year. Conducted annually since 1988, the Gallup poll sampled 12,137 adults, ages 18 and older, across all 50 states.

The share of Republican-leaning voters has barely recovered from its lowest point in 2013, when 25 percent of Americans identified as Republican.

The Democrats’ current membership is the lowest it’s ever been in the 27-year history of the poll, but earlier data points to the conclusion that the current 29 percent is also the all-time-low since 1951.

More, http://news.yahoo.com/democratic-party-shrinking-191658860.html

[Dems to Win]

24. Boxer said "Hillary is a progressive every day"

That's more offensive to me than saying Bernie is a Democrat some days -- which is true.

Boxer's gotten a lot of pushback on Twitter -- Hillary was a progressive on the day she voted for the Iraq War?

In 1992, I was president of the local Democratic club and arranged for Barbara to speak to our event when she was running for Senate for her first term. I'm a multi-decade Boxer supporter. In 2010 I made the biggest political contribution of my entire life to the Boxer campaign.

Of course I still luv Barbara, but this tweet was a disappointment.

[Punkingal]

27. Great OP!

[ErisDiscordia]

31. I expect Boxer has gone past the point of redemption, Tom

Just like Feinstein and Pelosi. Probably due to the corruption of power. Get comfortable in a position of power, and any attempt to make a change becomes a personal threat.

I was in California under Boxer for a couple years, too, when she first was elected, and I thought at the time that she was a great improvement over the run of the mill legislator. I was thrilled to vote for TWO women for Senate!

But time has not been kind to her brand, it seems. Time for retirement, before she really embarrasses herself.

[Omaha Steve]

34. Hillary raised $ for Boxer in 98 no press allowed Bill did too

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/e98/ca/ca002.htm

LOS ANGELES - Try saying it fast: California Democrat Barbara Boxer is the mother of the sister-in-law of President Clinton's wife.

Snip: Boxer's crusade helped pressure Packwood into resigning. That was why many have found the normally outspoken Boxer to be conspicuously late in criticizing Clinton for his conduct with Monica Lewinsky. In the Times poll, 30% of voters said Boxer's gingerly handling of the charges against Clinton made them less likely to vote for her.

Fearful of alienating moderates and independents who don't want Clinton impeached, Fong has begun soft-pedaling the Lewinsky issue, although he does accuse Boxer of using a double standard to judge her relatives in the White House.

Boxer, meanwhile, has turned to the Clintons for help in raising the $10 million she says she needs to run nonstop TV ads about schools and guns. Hillary Clinton has flown in four times to speak at fund-raising functions, most recently a San Francisco event last week that raised $200,000. The president also appeared with Boxer last week at Los Angeles fund-raising functions - off-limits to news photographers - and will return for another this month.

FULL story at link.

[mother earth]

36. Sanders holds all of the positions our own Democratic Party should be proud of & in full support of.

The fact that they aren't celebrating him & are so dismissive, tells me all I need to know about how badly things truly are in this country. BOTH parties have become the party of big money, you see it everywhere & you feel it in every aspect of our governance, from our highest courts, MSM and the politicians that promote it all. This is oligarchy.

Even here at DU we are witnessing people adopting stances that have nothing to do with what our democratic party has always stood for, in some kind of deluded quest for a first woman in the WH, for that, seemingly, they are willing to just throw out core values & settle. It all stinks.

All the while there are devastating consequences if we don't get real change, real reform. I cannot abide this, and I've been a lifelong dem, if this is what the party now stands for, I too am at a crossroads, because I see before me incredible manipulations and flip flops, from a party I've based personal beliefs and values upon.

This is not the Democratic Party of old, this is something entirely different, starting with the DNC and all the issues that have unfolded. This is what the oligarchs want, they've spent millions upon millions buying this power.

[bbgrunt]

56. well said.

[NurseJackie]

38. GMAFB!

[Uncle Joe]

40. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Tom Rinaldo.

[WillyT]

42. HUGE K & R !!! - THANK YOU !!!

[Geronimoe]

43. Bernie is the true and real Democrat

that Roosevelt, Kennedy, Johnson, and Carter would/can be proud of.

[rbrnmw]

50. Jimmy Carter endorsed Bernie??????

[SoapBox]

46. She's another disappointment.

Although she's not running a gain, Harris has already jumped onto the Hill Bus, moths ago.

Pelosi and War Hawk DiFi need to be gone too.

We're long over due for the Political Revolution in California.

[thereismore]

48. Barbara Boxer is a solid progressive Democrat, but there's that one thing: ESTABLISHMENT politics.

[bbgrunt]

52. great post. k and r

[nxylas]

54. Oh, so you're THROWING HER UNDER THE BUS!

A good, solid progressive comes out in favour of Hillary, and you socialists show your intolerance by, um, writing an open letter to DU about your reasons for disagreeing with her. This place gets more and more like North Korea every day

[Tom Rinaldo]

61. Throwing her under the bus? LOL

Do you define not agreeing with someone 100% about everything as throwing them under the bus? That's sure not how I define it.

[nxylas]

62. I guess you missed the little sarcasm thingy

I was thinking of signing myself "Third Way Nick" in honour of a certain former DUer, but I thought the emoticon would be more explicit. Oh well.

[Tom Rinaldo]

63. God, Yes I Did!

Silly me. Don't worry, that emoticon is pretty explicit. Failing to catch that is kind of like driving through a stop sign you just didn't see. Not that I would know about that mind you

[nxylas]

64. No worries

[Plucketeer]

55. Term limits should be

right there behind campaign finance reform. Barbara? Nancy, Dianne???

[bkkyosemite]

65. Yes agree! Or else it becomes a serious click of elites.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

57. Boxer is a real champion. a brave pacifist. and we will miss her.

Especially if Loretta Sanchez is elected to replace her.

[Bluenorthwest]

60. I believe I have voted for Barbara Boxer more times than any other politician and I also did not

care for her wee comment.

[dana_b]

66. she's my senator

whom I have voted for before. I think I'll write her a little note.