White House official: 'Organized labor just flushed $10 million down the toilet'

[robcon]

Source: Politico

White House official: 'Organized labor just flushed $10 million down the toilet'

A senior White House official just called me with a very pointed message for the administration's sometime allies in organized labor, who invested heavily in beating Blanche Lincoln, Obama's candidate, in Arkansas.

"Organized labor just flushed $10 million of their members' money down the toilet on a pointless exercise," the official said. "If even half that total had been well-targeted and applied in key House races across this country, that could have made a real difference in November."

Lincoln relied heavily both on Obama's endorsement, which she advertised relentlessly on radio and in the mail, and on the backing of former President Bill Clinton, who backed her to the hilt.

Lincoln foe Bill Halter had the unstinting support of the AFL-CIO, SEIU, AFSCME and other major unions. And labor officials Tuesday evening were already working to spin the narrow loss of their candidate, Bill Halter, as a moral victory, but the cost in money and in the goodwill of the White House may be a steep price to pay for a near miss.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0610/White_House_official_Organized_labor_just_flushed_10_million_of_their_members_money_down_the_toilet_.html?showall

---

Sounds like the Obama administration is pissed.

[Angry Dragon]

1. So, its more important that the White House gets

what they want instead of what the people want??

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dencol]

44. I am really getting tired of this Administration.

I bet this really pissed the administration off because they may be worried about a primary challenge for the next term.

[saigon68]

124. Its Rahm Farting from his mouth

[Demeter]

166. Rahm Flushed the Unions Down the Toilet

He oughten to have not done that.

[liberalmike27]

251. Down from 38 percent to 7 percent of the total jobs

I think globalization has already done that. Which jobs do people think are being moved? It isn't the local lawn service, or cashiers at Wal*Mart.

Personally, I'd just as soon a republican win, as to have someone in office that makes democrats look bad.

We are, again, like during Clinton (bit time responsible for this, since he campaigned for the biche Lincoln), we continue to lose labor, and other democratis support, as we see democrats act like corporate lackeys. And with that, we lose the great gains we've won.

It really seems pointless to vote, since there is so little difference. Of course, I'm an unfortunate person who lives in Alabama, where the republican primary is pretty much the election.

[defendandprotect]

299. The time for unions to have fought the corporatization of the Democratic Party was long ago--

almost too late now --

Same for women's groups --

From what I've seen of Alabama and Siegelman, etal --

and this election in Arkansas, what's going on with our election process is

simply criminal activity.

Unregulated capitalism is merely organized crime --

and the right wing cannot rise anywhere without political violence.

[amandabeech]

277. Don't let Obama off the hook, Demeter.

Rahm's a piece of excrement, but his master didn't restrain him.

[saigon68]

284. Please don't insult excrement

By comparing it to that sleezy little Weasel

[orbitalman]

302. So what is stinkier than excrement? Tell me and I'll agree. nt

[saigon68]

304. The post wasn't directed at you

[kenfrequed]

336. Well

There are grades of crap. Having done some farm work I would say little is as bad as chicken crap.

[Jackpine Radical]

361. Turkey shit & pig shit are both probably worse.

But chicken shit is pretty bad.

[saigon68]

364. Another brilliant RAHM IDEA

[amandabeech]

402. My apologies to excrement. n/t

[Demeter]

355. I Am Certain that Obama Is NOBODY'S Master

and that EVERYBODY knows it.

[amandabeech]

401. Maybe. Maybe not.

But if there's another master, it's not Rahm.

[davidwparker]

130. I want a primary challenger to Obama for 2012. WHOEVER runs will get it.

[MissDeeds]

144. I do too

I am so sick and tired of this crap. Every day it's another disappointment with this president and his administration.

[ooglymoogly]

259. And another me to...Dean or Grayson in any order.

[KamaAina]

268. That'd be a nice ticket, actually

ah, dare to dream...

[knixphan]

285. Dare!

[Enthusiast]

295. Me too nt

[MissDeeds]

316. That would be a dream ticket

Any order works for me.


:toast:

[emilyg]

321. I'd be happy with that. Very happy.

[liberalmike27]

279. With Eventual Compromise Inevitable

We all need to stop choosing the most centrist democrat. This causes a compromise between a center-right democrat, and a wildly right-wing republican party, which ends up with health care programs that are "hey, let's make everyone buy health care," rather than single payer, or something a bit better.

[defendandprotect]

307. Elections are being decided by $$$$$ -- corporatism....

and that's quite a bit of power -- especially with the new SC decision!!

I'm with ya, tho!!

[ooglymoogly]

330. Yes it is all about money but they are not actually winning in the traditional sense,

they are fixing elections and manipulating the outcome. Just like Arkansas (blatant democrat voter suppression) They supported and manipulated a loser to gain a senate seat and it is happening in most of the red states and red pockets of states. I believe this admin is in on the kill of all progressives candidates even if it means a repug win.

[defendandprotect]

335. Agree . . . purpose of the DLC is to move the Dem party to the right ...

to the interests of corporations --

It's quite telling that Obama/Clinton/DLC have supported Lincoln despite

liberal/progressive opposition being so clear --

Reminder of Arlen Specter and Liebermann --

they've won 2 of 3 and we have to try even harder!!

[RZM]

290. Highly unlikely on both counts

There will be no credible primary challenger and if there were, they would be thoroughly and completely trounced.

[defendandprotect]

309. .... by money and only by money . . . not by the will of the people -- !!

[readmoreoften]

327. +1

[Admiral Loinpresser]

371. For 18 years, Gore has been my choice.

Many of us tried to draft Gore for 2008, but we didn't have sufficient numbers, by far. I dismissed all other viable contenders as damaged goods, due to their infamous IWR vote, except BO. As to BO, I argued we shouldn't nominate him because he might not deliver the goods at Copenhagen, thus bringing the collapse of civilization that much closer.

BO sold us out at Copenhagen and I have the bitter cold comfort of having been right. So in retrospect, the Democratic Party, for the first time in perhaps a century, did not produce a presidential contender worth a goddamn!!!!

I'm willing to give the reins to any Democrat, but these c***suckers.

Dean, hell yeah! Or Grayson, or Jerry Brown. I want an "Oz" candidate, somebody with a heart, a brain and courage.

[sasquuatch55]

217. Never mind this Administration, be pissed at the whole Government (organized crime) and the...

..political machine,corporate dominated whores,fear, hate ,and division pushed by the limpboughs, blecks, coultergeists,ins-hannitys, etal, and their followers who think they are doing them and this country a great service. They are over paid corporate employees that are only doing the corptocracys bidding. Why are people so blind and gullible? This is what is destroying this country! The ignorance infuriates me. We are are on our own and instead of fighting back, we are fighting with each other while the above rape us and our country!



edited for sp.

[defendandprotect]

311. We're both arguing "organized crime" . . . . and there are still people here

who can't see Obama as a corporatist!!!

Unbelievable!!

Same with unions -- organized crime was set up to infiltrate and destroy them --

took quite a while, but they finally accomplished it -- down to 7% now?


What is our foreign police except organized crime?

It's just amazing what people will believe!

:)

[niceypoo]

219. I bet she loses

Her senate bid

[ooglymoogly]

263. If those who voted against her stay home or write in Halter

she is certainly done. The fixed election was fixed for that very reason....Halter would have won in the final, Lincoln cannot win and that is the game; Especially if the fix is against her in the final, as it will be. That is pretty good cheating at chess for the pug side. Lawlessness in elections is becoming rampant as any kind of democracy is destroyed.

[defendandprotect]

313. Agree with your post completely -- and the "write in" may be a good idea....

???


:)

[kenfrequed]

Yeah

A progressive winning there would encourage more primary challenges agaisnt DLC types. It could not be allowed to occur, particularly in a supposedly reddish state. If Lincoln loses they can just blame the progressives for wrecking her campaign with a primary challenge and then, after a republican wins, they can just pull up another corporate democrat crowned by Tim Kaine's DNC for the next election cycle.

I am starting to remember why I voted Green in 2000.

[lark]

267. If she loses to a Repug,

we have Obama and Clinton to thank for this since they wouldn't stand up for the real Democrat, but instead pushed another corporatist DINO on the state. With the choice between a real Repug and someone who just acts like one most of the time, I think they will choose the real deal and Blanche will become a lobbyist for Wall St.

[Enthusiast]

300. I'm done supporting Republicans

that call themselves Democrats. The Democrats I vote for in the future will be actual Democrats.

[defendandprotect]

314. +1000%

[Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel]

326. +1000%

[ooglymoogly]

334. +1000! What does it profit a party to win an election and lose its soul?

It is a pact with the devil.

[ooglymoogly]

325. And guess what? That is pretty close to what happened in

MA. When will they ever learn. It is becoming clear that the first thing they worry about is, not having a progressive win, not caring whether it is a dino or a pug who finally wins.

[Peregrine Took]

275. They are so arrogant they think they got to "home plate" by themselves? n/t

[bobbolink]

288. Very Well Said.

:applause:

[defendandprotect]

291. 2012 isn't that far away . . . but we can see that the right wing of the party

will fight any attempts at real change!!

Any new leadership -- and every day they are more embedded in party --

especially with new SC ruling re corporate $$ --- !!!



Keep in mind there used to actually be real conservation minded Repugs --

and moderate Repugs -- now it's all Limbaugh-land--!!!

[HereSince1628]

105. I can only contemplate who in the White House is so immodest in victory.

It is really a weak vessel, a person of great personal insecurity that needs to kick a vanquished opponent.
It seems its still about counting political coup for someone.

Obama, himself, is much better than that.

[Lost4words]

131. nothing has changed, we are still the good ole usa

[No Elephants]

226. He is? Who hired these people and continues to employ them?

[MissDeeds]

237. Good questions

The old axiom "you're judged by the company you keep" would seem to apply. He approves of them and their tactics, or they wouldn't be there.

[defendandprotect]

294. +1000% ,,, Obama eloped into White House with Rahm/DLC and those

who created this financial fiasco -- from Summers to Bernanke

[Enthusiast]

301. That's the big question.

This is the third term of George W Bush.

[laughingliberal]

21. That's how it looks, yes. nt

[guruoo]

58. Looks like "the people" have spoken.

[Tarheel_Dem]

59. You mean it wasn't "people" who voted for Lincoln? Interesting.....(nt)

[eridani]

72. Except for the ones that didn't get to vote because their polling places were shut down n/t

[Tarheel_Dem]

77. It happens every election cycle. There's always a reason why candidate "x" didn't win.

I'm not doubting your word, but there's always some sinister plot afoot, that caused someone's preferred candidate to lose. Sometimes a loss is just a loss.

[bahrbearian]

127. 1 hour waits , polling places closed , there was promise of early weekend voteing ...

[daleanime]

164. And your OK with that?

If we going to lose, at least let it be honestly.

[Tarheel_Dem]

169. I couldn't agree more. But if the primary results are overturned, then what?

Lincoln's folks make the same charges that Halter's folks are now making? Shouldn't you be able to prove fraud, instead of just making allegations? FWIW, I hope there's an investigation. But I'll guarantee you still won't like the results.

[daleanime]

201. As long as our national discourse...

is just catch-phrases instead of reasoned dialog, I know I not never going to like the results. Any one who willing to win this way, is some one I don't want in a position of authority.

[No Elephants]

236. The original issue was who voters wanted, not overturning the primary.

[No Elephants]

231. There were posts and threads here on closing polling places and cancelling early election and

how those things would disadvantage Halter. This is not the one I recall, but the first one I found.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8500345

And, you can seriously disadvantage a candidate without committing election fraud, especially if you are in power.

[Tarheel_Dem]

246. Like I said, it should be investigated, I'm all for it. I still don't think Halter's...

supporters will be pleased. Short of holding another runoff (which the state obviously can't afford), whaddya do? If an investigation uncovers no fraud, his supporters will claim there's a coverup. Halter was played up as some big Lib, and nothing could be further from the truth. I just hope we hold the seat.

[No Elephants]

283. Did you read Replies 250 and 255? The issue was neither actionable fraud nor a new primary.

It was simply whether the people (or a majority of them)really wanted Lincoln or Halter. See Replies 58 and 59.

[eridani]

379. Right, like Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2004 n/t

[Kermitt Gribble]

271. Misinformed people. n/t

[defendandprotect]

315. This was another rigged election -- ensuring that votes for Halter wouldn't be cast --

[hack89]

93. Looks like the people want Lincoln too. nt

[bahrbearian]

128. Only the ones allowed to vote.

[hughee99]

211. For politicians, this has always been the most important thing.

Given the choice between what the politician wants and what the people want, the politician will almost always assume they know better and the people don't really understand how things work. People look for a candidate with the same views, so that when those candidates act, it will (hopefully) coincide with what the voter wants too. I don't think anyone votes for a candidate because they thing that person is willing to throw aside his personal preferences and listen to what the voters are saying.

[fishbulb703]

362. I like your last point, there's always room for some open-minded perspective. nt

[hughee99]

369. And usually when a politician does something

that you know they're not really in favor of, but the people want, we call it "pandering" like it's a bad thing.

[elleng]

212. Sounds like rahm is 'teaching them a lesson.'

That kind of 'attutide.' Always think of such talk, vis a vis teachers/parents.

[rainy]

235. She cheated plain and simple. I heard precincts were closed

down in her opponents most supportive districts. Who knows, now that we are not really counting votes anymore.

[24601]

347. "She" cheated? And just how does a US Senator do that when

the election is run at the local level & tabulated by the state?

R-Kansas has always had problems, particularly regarding resources.

[JerseygirlCT]

352. And why do they want that?

I don't understand why the only thing that would matter is a "D" - especially if there's the chance of a better "D".

Lincoln screwed the administration happily until the very last minute. Why do they keep going to bat for people like her and Specter?

[Bluebear]

2. Classy.

[EFerrari]

26. I'm sick of these ugly people.

Can't they even be good winners?

[Divine Discontent]

3. ahhhh... I love how Rahm and the lot mock those who they will deeply need.

[saigon68]

125. Hes a little DLC Corporate servant

[liberalmike27]

260. Perhaps

We should run a labor party candidate, to muck up the works. Blanche is pretty much a republican anyway, so what to lose. That's show Rahm, and Bill C. what's up.

[NanceGreggs]

4. "An (unnamed) senior (no position given) ...

...WH official (how 'official'?) just told me ..."

Does this unnamed senior official know Some-People-Are-Saying?

[Bluebear]

6. You think Smith is lying then?

[NanceGreggs]

9. Who is Smith?

The OP referred to an unnamed senior official.

[Bluebear]

10. Smith is the reporter. Well, evidently the AFL-CIO is buying into the "lie"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8518871

[NanceGreggs]

15. Hey, I'm on the union workers' side in this fight ...

... or any fight.

That still doesn't answer the question as to who the "senior WH official" is who allegedly made the statement the OP referred to.

[EFerrari]

31. Who the hell else in the White House uses that language?

Sasha?

[NanceGreggs]

34. I don't know ...

... who uses "that language". That's why I'm asking who actually did.

So far, no takers.

[EFerrari]

38. Because it's not a real question. It's obviously a progressive's best friend

or someone doing a good imitation.

Someone needs to either introduce Rahm to honey as a rhetorical strategy or get him a minder.

[NanceGreggs]

41. All I asked was ...

... who is the person who allegedly said what.

The OP was premised on someone having said something. I don't think asking who that someone was is asking too much.

[flyarm]

46. You don't know that this is a pattern? Really?? Seriously? oh my..

be assured ..the unions know damn well who said it..

they don't care if you know or not..they know..they damn well know!

eom

[NanceGreggs]

49. If they "know" ...

... why don't they name him/her?

[flyarm]

51. because they won't slide down the same crappy slope..or perhaps they want to discuss it with their

board of members first...of how they want to approach the matter..but you know that..don't you????????

Or you should.

Good night.

[NanceGreggs]

54. Oh, I get it ...

Someone allegedly said something, and certain people "know" who that someone is. But saying so would cause them to slide down "a crappy slope".

Thanks for clearing that all up. From now on I'll just rely on "someone said something, and I won't say who, or why, or where they got their information from", 'cause that would be "tellin'".

Just trust me on this ...

I am reminded of a friend's father-in-law who once said: "I'm not saying this, and I'm not saying that - but mark my words."

Consider your words duly marked - they have imparted absolutely nothing of substance, but I'll mark them just the same.

[flyarm]

121. self delete..can't be bothered with this nonsense. eom

[bahrbearian]

132. are you getting dizzy too? My head is spinning, spinning ,spinning

[freddie mertz]

177. Dizzy? You bet! It's a "dazzling" exercise in diversionary obfuscation.

But to what end?

To discredit the source of course, and thus deny the obvious implications of the statement, which are:

Total contempt for the unions, and for the democratic process in general.

Which fits a certain pattern we all recognize.

Those who have eyes to see, and minds open to logic and reason, that is. :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :argh:

[defendandprotect]

320. Right . . . .

but the positive is that it's making clear the position of the poster.

That's what should be kept in mind!!

[freddie mertz]

377. I agree. The refusal to state an opinion on the result is very telling.

[freebrew]

205. I'm with you Nance,

baseless accusations are reminiscent of the * years. We shouldn't be condoning it.
I'm with the unions too. If they stay home in Nov., Lincoln will lose. So what. It won't change the voting dynamics in the Senate.
We have a R in the seat now for all intent, Halter would have been better, maybe. It was worth a shot.
Lincoln better get down and start placating the left a bit more if she wants her job next year.

[knixphan]

287. Agreed. x2

[msanthrope]

264. NanceGreggs!!! Why are you questioning the bona fides of an upstanding

Repuke source such as Ben Smith of Politico???

That's like questioning Drudge.....n/t

[Bluebear]

292. Or the AFL-CIO!

[Admiral Loinpresser]

374. Anonymous WH quotes are as common in DC

as lobbyists and have been for at least 40 years. Are you troubled because it once again shows ObamaCo for the asses they are?

Credibility of the reporting source can be a legitimate issue, but not the identity of the "leaker." You evidently weren't even aware of the reporter's name, so I can't take your beef seriously.

[defendandprotect]

318. Agree . . . .

[Name removed]

160. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[liberation]

234. No you ain't.

You're on Obama's side first and foremost... your posts/rants get usually on the front page, and I do like you writing style BTW. So it is not that hard to miss where you stand on things.

Nothing wrong with your position as an Obama supporter, for tastes there are colors after all. But at least be honest about it.


Cheers.

[Stellar]

240. And why do they want to be Anonymous?

An anonymous source on a GOP blog... sound like Rahm to me.

[Divine Discontent]

7. true true... but Emanuel saying that just sounds so likely. ha! hope you're having a good nite.

[Bluebear]

12. It smells EXACTLY like "liberals are retards" Emmanuel.

[Divine Discontent]

14. it's who I thought of immediately. wish Obama would flush him out of the WH...

[Enthusiast]

86. Among others. nt

[defendandprotect]

322. Sadly . . . "birds of a feather" . . .

but many here refuse to acknowledge what has been going on since day 1 --

[laughingliberal]

23. +1 nt

[kenny blankenship]

33. Was he sent down to Earth to destroy the Democratic coalition -

or what?

[No Elephants]

76. Why assume Rahm is the only arse in the administration?

[w4rma]

262. Rahm, as Chief of Staff, got to hire the other assholes in the administration. (nt)

[defendandprotect]

323. Yes ... and according to Rep. John Conyers ... "The only one Obama listens to is Rahm" ....

I'm wondering if it's Rahm who tells Obama that ...

"Oil rigs don't leak anymore" --


or the new infamous one . . . .

"The Gulf will bounce back" --


It's over folks -- at least the pretense --

long over --



:eyes:


Can't wait 'til we get to the nukes -- !!


:nuke:

[No Elephants]

349. Exactly. So, I don't assume this is Rahm.

And Obama hired Rahm and never fired him. And, while Rahm can recommend people, Obama is really the one who has to hire them.
So, I never assume Obama disagrees with Rahm and the assholes Rahm hired. However, Obama may want to distance himsel from these remarks, even if he agrees with them.

[NanceGreggs]

13. Well, if it sounds "likely" ...

... it must be accepted as indisputable fact.

I'm having an absolutely GREAT night, actually. As they say, Freedom's just another word for nothin' left to lose.

[saracat]

20. So you are celebrating Lincoln's win? Why exactly , since you are so pro-Labor and all?

No one in my pro-Labor family is happy about this at all and since the AFLCIO isn't doubting the WH statement, we take their word for it. The AFLCIO trumps the WH any day.

[NanceGreggs]

27. Please point out ...

... where I made any reference to Lincoln's win.

Oooh, that's right - I didn't. Didn't even refer to Lincoln at all.

You're not doubting the "WH statement" - even though no one has yet provided any evidence that the statement came from the WH (unless, of course, an "unnamed official at the WH" is as much "fact" as one needs).

Of course I realize that in Bizarro World a query about the source of certain information automatically equals "celebrating Lincoln's win". How could it not?

[saracat]

29. I just stated I take the word of the AFLCIO, who no doubt, know who said what.

AFL-CIO to White House: 'Labor isn't an arm of the Democratic Party'

The major labor federation AFL-CIO took sharp objection tonight to a White House official's assessment that they'd "flushed $10 million of their members' money down the toilet" in the "pointless exercise" of supporting the failed bid of Bill Halter to unseat Sen. Blanche Lincoln.

"If that's their take on this, then they severely misread how the electorate feels and how we're running our political program. When we say we're only going to support elected officials who support our issues," said AFL-CIO spokesman Eddie Vale. "When they say we should have targeted our money among some key house races among Blue Dog Democrats — that ain't happening."

"Labor isn't an arm of the Democratic Party," Vale said. "It exists to support working families. And that's what we said tonight, and that's what we're gong to keep saying."

[NanceGreggs]

37. No, actually what you stated was ...

... that I was "celebrating Lincoln's win".

I asked you to explain where I said that, or where I referred to Lincoln at all.

Apparently I didn't - and even more apparently, you can't back up that assertion - because if you could have, you would have.

But don't let the facts get in your way.

Point out where I was in any way "celebrating Lincoln's win".

That was YOUR accusation - so prove it.

[Tarheel_Dem]

48. Don't ya just love the sound of crickets? (nt)

[NanceGreggs]

50. Yeppurs ...

... and the crickets have been unusually loud tonight - on this thread, and several others.

[saracat]

57. No "crickets" here. But you never answered my question but accused me of making

"assertions"

[NanceGreggs]

65. Your post at No. 20 on this thread ...

"So you are celebrating Lincoln's win? Why exactly , since you are so pro-Labor and all?"

I didn't "accuse you" of making assertions - I plainly stated that you made them, and they're right there for all to see.

Again I ask for one scintilla of proof that I was "celebrating Lincoln's win".

Those are YOUR words, not mine.

So back 'em up.

[saracat]

70. My quote, even as you use it is a QUESTION, not an

ASSERTION. There would not be a question mark after an assertion. I assert nothing "So, are you celebrating Lincoln's win?" is a QUESTION. I know you are celebrating Lincolns win, or you are celebrating Lincoln's win would be assertions.
Not only do you still not answer the QUESTION but you refuse to understand it is one. Is that so you don't have to answer? Methinks thou doth make too much of this.

[NanceGreggs]

71. You said - your words, not mine ...

"I asked "If" you were celebrating Lincoln's win."

Where is the word "if" in your original post, saracat?

I don't see it. Do you?

[saracat]

92. I do not claim to use the word "If". I claim I am asking IF you are celebrating Lincolns win by my

question "Are you celebrating Lincoln's win". You surely must know the difference, but then again, considering some other word issues,perhaps not.

[NanceGreggs]

73. Methinks you've been backed into a corner ...

... by insisting the word "if" was there in your reply. We can all see, plain as day, that it wasn't.

And your "edit" time is up - too late to change it.

Ain't that a bitch?

[saracat]

85. "ARE you celebrating Lincoln's win" was the question. I don't need to edit anything

nor did I try. I am not backed into any corner.Guess you don't want to answer the question.

[freddie mertz]

109. "Are you celebrating?" is the proper form for a direct question.

"I am asking IF you are celebrating" is a way of describing asking that question.

Your attempt at a semantic dodge here makes no sense.

I have no idea what you think about Lincoln's victory.

But your descent into sniping over an "if" suggests that you seek to change the subject.

Meanwhile, I am pretty sure that you are attempting to discredit the reporter's assertion that he is quoting a WH official.

and you have no reason to doubt it, other than the reporter's citing of an unnamed source, which the WH couls always deny, if anyone thinks of asking.

[Bluebear]

378. Here, you can grill Gibbs now, who confirms 'somebody here' said that.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/10/06/does-obama-think-labor-wasted-money-on-lincoln/57935

[saracat]

382. Lol. Often it seems some keep protecting the WH for things they aren't ashamed of.

Like authorizing drilling and stuff. Insulting Unions is the norm. They don't deny it.

[saracat]

56. Accused you? I asked "If" you were celebrating Lincoln's win. That is the fact.

I notice you never denied it, or answered regarding that point. I can't back up an assertion i didn't make. Perhaps you aren't aware a question is not the same as an assertion, even if it is a sarcastic question it is still a question.

[Tarheel_Dem]

64. Are you mad at the WH for Halter's loss? (nt)

[NanceGreggs]

67. Your exact words ...

"So you are celebrating Lincoln's win? Why exactly , since you are so pro-Labor and all?"

Can you please point out where "IF" was mentioned?

"That is the fact." Apparently it's not "the fact" - there was no "if" involved.

Word to the wise, saracat: It is an impossibility to say you said something you obviously didn't say when your post is there, for everyone to see, sorely lacking in the word you are now insisting was there all along.

[saracat]

87. "Are you celebrating Lincoln's win" was the question. Are you going to answer?

"If"I knew you were, I wouldn't have needed to ask, or use a question mark. Are you celebrating Lincoln's win is asking "IF" you are celebrating Lincoln's win.

[freddie mertz]

110. That is, in fact, a question, and easily answered.

[Spheric]

126. Quibbling over the word "If" has a rather inglorious history. Ask Bubba.

This whole subthread has a rather surreal quality to it.

Questioning the veracity of Ben Smith because he chooses not to reveal his source in the article seems like blowing smoke to me (a smoke screen?). Reporters do that all the time for any number of reasons. Unless, of course, the White House denies it was said. You might have a case then.

[No Elephants]

241. I take your point, but, for the record, Bubba questioned the definition of "is," not "if."

[Name removed]

114. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AllentownJake]

116. Nance

Are you happy that Lincoln won?

I'll ask it. Grudging respect and admiration and all. Just curious on your take.

No hostility, curious on your take on the Arkansas Primary.

[bahrbearian]

138. You stated you where having a great night, maybe its just a box of wine!

[aquart]

198. I applaud Mr. Vale's statement.

As for the "anonymous source", well, that statement is completely consistent with the way this White House has viewed working people and the left since the election. And probably before but it was easier to chant a mindless slogan.

[olegramps]

218. What is your intention? Sorry, but my support for Obama is quickly fading.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

97. here is an interesting question tho

How hard would it be for you to write a similar 'response' that sounded like Emanuel?

Most people know how he tends to speak and act these days so writing an article that sounds like it comes from him shouldn't be to hard, heck, even the chief WH janitor(a senior position) could likely give a response that sounds like it came from him

Addendum: no clue if they have a chief janitor position but point stands :p

[rpannier]

42. A few things

1. It must obviously have been Emmanuel, because we all know the administration only has one senior official :sarcasm:

2. It has to be true because it's in the press and they never lie :sarcasm:

3. Wait til the guy who reported tells us he heard it from a guy, who heard it from a guy, who heard it from some guy's barber's second cousin's college roommate who is VERY reliable -- no sarcasm

[vaberella]

202. Always the same here...that's the first thing that came to mind too NanceGreggs. n/t

[msanthrope]

269. Nance--I always ask "Qui Bono?" when reading Politico....

Who does this article serve? Who benefits?

Why, the Repuke candidate for the seat.....

So of course, let's see how many DUers can eat their own rather than question a Repuke source....

[Greyhound]

331. One of these days you'll have a point.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8522076
:eyes:

[Admiral Loinpresser]

373. No, but he's married to

Some-Dem-Presidents-aren't-worth-a-shit, a very influential DLC consultant.

[Political Tiger]

405. Just what I was thinking.

All this anger over a rumor. I swear, some people just aren't happy unless they're mad.

[provis99]

5. the DLC and Rahm Emmanuel really hate working people, don't they?

What a bunch of Republican loving traitors the DLC are.

[Iowa]

30. You left out Obama.

[Dinger]

106. No Shit (nt)

[defendandprotect]

257. +1000%

[realisticphish]

8. So what are they saying

that now they won't cooperate with labor on anything? That they'll deliberate support anti-labor laws in revenge?

I seriously doubt that. It's childish bullshit to be saying things like that, and I expect better from our officials. Wait, no I don't.

[Bluebear]

11. AFL-CIO replies:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8518871

This is not going well.

[laughingliberal]

25. +1000 nt

[laughingliberal]

24. They've not been too labor friendly as it is. This will just be the excuse. nt

[robcon]

16. This primary was a WORTHLESS WASTE OF MONEY.

Union members' money was thrown down a toilet.

Lincoln's win is a 52-48 bruising battle, and the Democrats are disunited, and may lose the Senate seat.

edit: correct election result

[Mojorabbit]

17. I donated to his campaign`and

I live in Fl. The admin is not just dissing unions. Every vote that obstructed progress that she made affected me too. I am sure I am one of many many just regular progressives who donated to get rid of her.

[robcon]

19. I think you got taken, if you donated..

Halter is not any different from Lincoln in policies.

Unions, IMO, just wanted to throw weight around... sort of as a warning to other politicians.

The reason why so much money was spent on this primary had NOTHING to do with policy differences, and EVERYTHING to do with unions trying to bully elected officials.

[saracat]

Gee can't have those "union bullies" Much better to have Rahm bullies.

What exactly is it about unions representing the workers and DC pols representing themselves do you not get? Or did you seriosly believe Blanche Lincoln cares about the workers?

[bread_and_roses]

157. Right On, saracat

Can't have those "union bullies" - those ordinary working people that these miserable quisling Pols count on for worker-bees and then kick in the face once they're elected "throwing their weight around" now can we? Don't they know their place? They're disposable worker-drones.

[knixphan]

308. Zactly, saracat.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

39. "Unions trying to bully elected officials"

Hi Rush, I didnt think you would ever post on DU.

[Stevepol]

Why does everybody talk as it the results of this election mean anything?

Who knows who actually won this election? Who knows who wins any election in the US, whether it's somebody with reasonable, humanitarian goals and principles or the usual corrupt corporatists who presently call the shots?

As long as the vote is counted in total secrecty w/o verification, there is absolute no way to know who wins elections in the US anymore.

I suspect that Halter actually won, that is, more people "tried" to vote for him than "tried" to vote for Lincoln, but who knows? The pre-election polling I believe had Halter up, at least from what I saw, in the latest polls and it stands to reason that the challenger would show better than in the polls because his "trend" was up.

I do think if organized labor spent one-tenth the money they spent on Halter publicizing the fact that we don't have a democracy in the US anymore becuase of the voting machines, their effect on democracy would have been and would be greater in the long run.

But IMO if you work toward a worthy goal, no effort is really wasted.

[Stevepol]

66. Why does everybody talk as it the results of this election mean anything?

Who knows who actually won this election? Who knows who wins any election in the US, whether it's somebody with reasonable, humanitarian goals and principles or the usual corrupt corporatists who presently call the shots?

As long as the vote is counted in total secrecty w/o verification, there is absolute no way to know who wins elections in the US anymore.

I suspect that Halter actually won, that is, more people "tried" to vote for him than "tried" to vote for Lincoln, but who knows? The pre-election polling I believe had Halter up, at least from what I saw, in the latest polls and it stands to reason that the challenger would show better than in the polls because his "trend" was up.

I do think if organized labor spent one-tenth the money they spent on Halter publicizing the fact that we don't have a democracy in the US anymore becuase of the voting machines, their effect on democracy would have been and would be greater in the long run.

But IMO if you work toward a worthy goal, no effort is really wasted.

[liberation]

232. Oh, yeah. It is not like Lincoln basically spit in the eyes of the unions on an almost daily basis

during her tenure as WallMart's senators.

It must be them organized crime loving bully unions!

[davidwparker]

143. that was why I contributed too. I did contribute to Sestak more, though, and

I don't live in either state. Any DINO in the senate affects me too.

What I find particularly galling is people say Blanche voted for health reform. True, but this was after it was sufficiently weakened that it her vote for it wouldn't offend her paymasters.

[No Elephants]

286. I'm almost certain she voted against the final version, though.

[knixphan]

306. Me too!

[No Elephants]

82. We should have primary challenges to incumbents, if we don't like how they vote.

So, what do you suggest?

(Disagree about waste.)

[AllentownJake]

117. Democracy sucks

We would be better served if we just let party leaders annoint candidates without pesky elections.

[No Elephants]

149. Democracy's cool. Plutonomy sucks. So do political machines. Rigged elections, also.

[aquart]

204. Like Gillibrand in New York.

Appointed to the job, no primary fight, gets the Democratic slot with no effort of any kind.

I WILL NOT VOTE FOR HER. Had she won a primary, I would accept her as the Democratic candidate and give her my vote in the general. But she didn't bother with that nonsense. Schumer and Obama didn't want to go to all that trouble.

For the first time in my life, I will leave the Senate slot blank. My party disenfranchised me and if I have no vote, I have no vote to give.

[No Elephants]

247. I wish you would write in the name of someone you admire.

[aquart]

394. Like this?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8525096&mesg_id=8525157

It's a cheap attempt to silence a voice you can't answer when YOU try to set the standards for the voice.

[bread_and_roses]

120. So it's a waste of members' money to support members' issues?

Let me tell you something - there's a lot of members out here who think it's a waste of their money to support Pols who take their $$ contributions and depend on them to make calls and knock doors and then turn around and vote for Corp interests, not theirs.

Members aren't stupid - they look at the $$ and time and work and hours and hours and hours - literally, millions of phone calls, leaflet drops, worksite campaigns, doors - millions! - in '06 and '08 and ask, for what?

You don't win every battle. But one loss does not a war make. It's really sad that we are this point with an Admin we broke our necks to help into office. Many of us are deeply grieved by it. But it was their choice, not ours, to kick us in the teeth.

We'll see where it goes. I have not a lot more faith in AFL-CIO leadership than I do in Obama's at this point, they've gotten a lot too inside the beltway for their own good, but I do know that the most active of our members are as savvy as anyone on this board when it comes to politics, and they love a good fight.

And they don't consider fighting for workers a waste of money.

[jeff47]

123. Only if history started yesterday

Sen. Lincoln was a terrible blue dog, greatly hurting her state and her party. She carries most of the burden of torpedoing the public option. She's also got a long history of pro-labor campaigning, and anti-labor governing.

Then she got a primary challenger. Suddenly she's proposing very harsh regulations in the Wall Street reform bill. She seems to have learned her lesson for the moment. We'll have to see if it 'sticks'.

This primary was extremely effective at terrifying a blue dog into removing her head from her ass. That's not a waste of money.

[freddie mertz]

180. It was a worthy fight against a rotten politician.

I am happy to have contributed.

Ya win a few, ya lose a few.

[Moochy]

192. Can't beleive you are actually defending this statement

The Rec's you are getting are not because you support Rahm's loose lips.

[chill_wind]

22. Heh. This is good stuff:

(from Willy T's thread

"Whoop...There It Is!!!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8518832

As Sam Seder tweeted:

and when Blanche loses? MT @benpolitico Sr. WH Official: Labor just flushed 10 mil of its members $ down the toilet in a pointless exercise

And Ezra Klein too:

For a WH that prizes discipline and dislikes drama, some "Senior WH official" is sure shooting off to @marcambinder and @benpolitico

More Ezra:

@benpolitico A few more statements like that one, and bet Labor will launch some more "pointless exercises."

I bet Labor will do it, too. And I'll be extremely supportive.

[DRoseDARs]

28. Versus the hundreds of BILLIONS flushed down the toilet for Wall Street?

Hey Rahm, fuck you. You and your All-Star team of Super Friends bungled the bailout, bungled Health Care Reform, and are actively working to bungle the Gulf Spill.

Shut. Your. Fucking. Mouth.

[Enthusiast]

91. +1

Fuck Rahm.

[davidwparker]

147. +1

[totodeinhere]

167. Rahm works for and was hired by Obama. The buck stops with Obama, not Rahm. n/t

[clixtox]

206. I doubt that!

I believe they were both "hired" by their corporate masters to do the bidding of the uber-rich whose most trusted stooges are behind the curtain actually pulling the strings.

Rahm is Obomba's Dick Cheney. The actual "manager" of the so-called, "Obama Administration". Obomba no more runs anything, other than his mouth, than shrub did.

Any observer of the meteoric rise of Obomba knew that he was anointed when he was the keynote speaker at the Democratic Party convention in 2004. Obomba would have never been created if he didn't know his role in the whole charade, known as the "American" political system. He has been a blessed stroke of luck for the oligarchs, as is/was Clinton.

After 8 years of shrub, who really wasn't expected to win in 2000 by anyone, and, of course, he didn't, Obomba's deft rhetorical skills, which can, and do, bamboozle the sheeple, are being utilized adroitly.

Have you noticed?

If not, shoot your TV(s) now and read some on-topic books and blogs before it is too late.

Please...

[totodeinhere]

244. I hear what you saying. But there is too much confusion at DU about this.

We have threads at DU where people say the same thing you are saying. But then at the same time we have other threads saying that it's good that Obama's poll numbers are so high. But if Obama is a corporate stooge, then why is it good news that his poll numbers are high? Shouldn't that be bad news, not good? Whom to believe? We can't have it both ways.

[clixtox]

281. Considering any current poll seriously is nuts! They are all corrupt!

You pay the piper, you call the tune!

Any discussion of supposed poll results is a waste of time and brain.

They never mean anything except to mold the opinions of those sheeple who prefer their vote to be for the winning side, since they wouldn't want to "waste their vote" on a loser...

[No Elephants]

289. Harry Truman would be proud of you! (I know I am.)

[dana_b]

274. best post!!

their hypocrisy is stunning.

[alittlelark]

403. +1000 (If the 'unnamed source' is accurate)

[flyarm]

32. You can bet your life the AFL-CIO Knows damn well who in the WH made that statement!

bet the farm on it!..They responded quickly and powerfully to this WH asshole who made this comment.

They do not make statements like they just did without knowing who they are addressing.

Just because people here don't know who said it ..doesn't for one city second mean the Unions don't know who said it!

And anyone who has never heard of the "unknown WH Offical " just wants to be in denial!

And do not for a moment think this wasn't cleared by the "Big boss!"

Only a fool would be so blind...or they want to be fooled.

[krkaufman]

35. am really beginning to loathe this WH

falling so far short of meeting the challenges faced, opting instead for the status quo.

[NorthCarolina]

161. It's really a shame that someone

like Kucinich is considered 'unelectable' in today's America. Imagine the impact of having a peoples champion in the WH. Oh that we can dream..........

[harmonicon]

36. I think this "official" has a basic misunderstanding of the relationship.

Labor will support whoever they want in politics, and should. They do not exist to get Dems elected - Dems get elected because they exist.

[No Elephants]

84. Bingo. WH Democrats dumping on liberals and unions is pure political gold.

For Republicans and third Parties.

[JDPriestly]

40. Any Democrat who scorns unions is a fool.

They will win the primary, but they will not have the workers to campaign for them. We will see that this November.

I always get out and walk my precinct during elections. I used to go to Democratic Club meetings. I still vote Democratic, but I don't campaign. And it's a loss because I put GOTV reminders on the doors of Democrats in three (that's 3) precincts in November 2004. I traveled clear across the country to work for Obama. He has lost my work. He is such a disappointment I am so sorry to say.

This tears my heart, but Obama is going the wrong direction.

Working people have no party. There are two corporate parties, no party for working people.

[Sherman A1]

61. Precisely

They may get my vote in November, but absolutely nothing beyond that.

It is also very possible I will need to work on a scrap book or clean out my tool box that day and just could be too busy to go to the polls.

[burnsei sensei]

197. +1

with pride and joy in the wisdom of your post.

[dflprincess]

248. On the bright side,

alienating labor may be a good way to jump start a progessive party and leave the Democrats to the DLC crowd.

[readmoreoften]

329. +1

[RedRoses323]

341. Dam right!!!

:thumbsup: :yourock:

[flyarm]

43. Emily's List bailed on Lincoln as well..read it here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8511396

Thank you to the DU'er who posted this..

I got a letter from Emily's list with a survey over a month ago..I ripped them a new one if they were to support Lincoln..I guess I wasn't the only one to respond so strongly against Lincoln...and other Dem's who have sold the working person out!

I told Emily's list...in no uncertain terms...not another dime from me..and to cancel my membership.. if they supported candidates and incumbents like this.

Thank you Emily's list..you listened..as are the Unions ..finally!

[No Elephants]

88. Great. EL has been indiscriminate in the past, includong dumping a fortune on Coakkley in the Mass.

primary. (She was the only female in the primary.) We sometimes have bigger fish to fry, though.

Thanks, Malcolm!

[krispos42]

45. Funny how the article doesn't say that...

...the loss of money and goodwill of the unions might be a steep price to pay for a DINO.


Spin, spin, spin.

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[burnsei sensei]

+1

nt

[Aslanspal]

52. Really Ugly thing to say..now it is on Blanche to reach out in the next 24 hours

She will need Bill Halter and all his orginization to beat Boozmann...if she does not ..she is doomed

She must push back as a Progressive.

I do not know if Politico is playing us or someone in the White House really said it and were that ugly..if it is the White House then shame on them.

Labor really does work hard and goes door to door and makes those calls and mostly to the poor and lower middle class..they really are for the underdog.

[yurbud]

53. Rahm can go fuck himself. What good will did unions have to lose?

Obama screwed us on health care, EFCA, and K-12 teachers.

If the left doesn't dig in our heels, we'll continue to only have a choice between corporate and corporater in elections.

[sketchartist]

55. Ooooh, I'm so SCARED...

The Obama administration is pissed? At me, for supporting Bill Halter?

Oh NO! What are they gonna do, sick BP's Tony Hayward on me?

I think this minor setback will only STRENGTHEN the resolve of those of us who are tired of drowning in corporatocracy and who now see the White House attitude toward it's own political base all too well.

[Tarheel_Dem]

63. Welcome back. What kept you?

:hi:

[dionysus]

158. rofl

:spray:

[Tarheel_Dem]

163. I think we both know. Shhhhhh....

;-)

[humbled_opinion]

383. This Adminstation may not get the point until its poll numbers

equal its predecessors. I think America made its attitude toward Bush very clear with his 20 percent approval rating. Obama continuing to act just like Bush should earn him the same nubmers.

[Sherman A1]

60. Well,

as labor has been "flushed down the toilet" by this administration they can kiss my A**

Where is the EFCA?:argh:

[No Elephants]

151. The original version or the current, eviscerated version?

[Sherman A1]

156. I think I would prefer

The Classic Original Version.

[No Elephants]

297. I fear you will be disappointed then. It's been gutted.

[Sherman A1]

385. I expect to be disappointed with this crew

I wrote my Senator (McCaskill) last year on this topic and got a pretty much 'blow off" reply, so I knew a long time ago that we working folks were screwed.

Odd how those charming request for money mailings and emails from her go straight to the trash now.

I don't even bother to email anymore, it's completely a waste of time.

[JHB]

62. Textbook campaign consultant-think...

...looking only at the money, and not thinking "y'know, maybe we need to shore up our support on the Labor front...." And yet he probably views himself as a "pragmatist".

Unions have learned that they don't rate any favors by backing the Democratic leadership early and faithfully. They just get used. Unfortunately, I don't have a lot of faith that the current leadership is "pragmatic" enough to take the hint.

[Waiting For Everyman]

68. It wasn't wasted, it sent a $10 mil message.

And it's really arrogant and stupid that this WH comes out right away and directly thumbs its nose at that message.

That was like saying FU to union people, and all of us who aren't on the corporatist gravy-train.

[cornermouse]

69. I'd be curious to see

how much money the White House and the DLC "flushed" in order to get the Lincoln victory. They weren't just spending advertising bucks in Arkansas. They were spending it in Missouri, possibly other neighboring states as well.

[No Elephants]

74. "How DARE unions back the political candidate of their own choosing? What the hell do they think

this is? A frickin' democracy or something? We'll teach them!"

Democratic voters have been sending a message. Too bad the WH communicaions machine only trasmits.

[madrchsod]

75. it`s politico and ben smith.. the story is bullshit...

until proven otherwise.

the election was fucking rigged.

[No Elephants]

145. Diebold?

[madrchsod]

152. there was a county that had 42 polling places...

the guy that runs the county`s elections reduced the number to--two.80,000 voters had to travel to two voting places. he also opened up the polling places sat but closed them with in a few hours because he found out it was "illegal" for him to do that...ya blanche had the fix in.

it was mentioned here and most of the liberal media

[KamaAina]

270. Garland County

home to Hot Springs. One of the larger counties in the state.

[madrchsod]

380. thanks..hard to remember all the stuff that`s happening

[No Elephants]

303. Thanks. That I had seen. I thought you meant the vote itself.

[disndat]

155. Suspicious, for sure.nt.

[mystieus]

78. Politico.... meh

[Bluebear]

312. Meh, huh? Funny that nobody at the White House has denied this statement

[Name removed]

79. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rucky]

80. Ben Smith has never been known to exaggerate.

:eyes:

[madrchsod]

95. ya ...old ben has three sources going so far.....

[Hubert Flottz]

81. Call Joe The Plumber ASAP!

Money spent for a good cause, is well spent.

It's too bad the US Senate wasn't flushed as well.

Edit...The log never falls very far from the log-jam.

[RubyDuby in GA]

83. I think the unions should just have anouther "pointless exercise" and stay home this Nove

Ya know...since this WH hates them so much.

[Tarheel_Dem]

90. Politico, with it's "unnamed sources" sure knows how to get liberals in a tizzie

:eyes:

[saracat]

94. Yeah and some just hate those liberals.

[Tarheel_Dem]

96. Only "some" liberals. When you manage to get rid of McCain & Kyl, then you can talk.

:hi:

ps: Weren't you crowing a couple of weeks ago about the president's lack of coattails (Specter v. Sestak). So, by your logic, you can hardly credit the WH with Lincoln's win, right? I mean, since he has no coattails, right?

[saracat]

100. Where do I credit or not credit the WH in this topic? I think the WH comment

about the unions was disgusting..And I really don't care WHO said it. It is indicative of the WH philosophy. And I really don't care if you believe me or not but I know that for a FACT. Many of those who work for the WH collaborate that. But believe as you wish. You will anyway. BTW, if the WH wants credit for coatails for a disreputable candidate, they can have it. Even so, It was a very close race, which should not have been for an incumbant Dem endorsed by the WH and with a lot of Party money and the machine behind her.

[Name removed]

162. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[saracat]

370. So you would rather Democrats lose? If Gore had carried AZ, and he almost did,

we never would have had Bush. Any true Democrat never dismisses any state. And "Union Money" is not party money. It is offensive that you wouild state that. The Unions have discretion of how to spend their money and as of yesterday's WH comments, it may no longer go to the Democratic Party.

[saracat]

102. Gee. maybe if the Democratic Party would get off their duff and nominate a winner we could.

but OFA is too busy getting ready for 2012 as that is all that counts. We send all our money to others states at the DNC request. Go figure. Maybe Rodney Glassman CAN take out McCain but he'll have to do it without party support.

[Name removed]

172. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[saracat]

345. Do you realize Clinton carried Arizona and we have a Democratic Majority in our congressional

delegation? That we had the wealthiest State party in the nation and spent more on the Presidential race and other Federal elections than any other state party? And that President Obama took our Democratic Governor to be head of Homeland Sec? You really have no idea what you are saying. I am sure President Obama would be delighted to carry Arizona as Clinton did. Fortunately others are not as politically silly as you are.Ed Rendell personally told be one of his greatest regrets was that more money and President Clinton presence being added was not done ion AZ by the DNC because Gore would have won in AZ and made Bush unable to win.
Republican primary voters showed us who they are in Arizona, no one else.

[Tarheel_Dem]

348. AZ won't be able to elect a Democrat for dogcatcher after this. Have fun.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8520501

[saracat]

354. Baloney.

[Tarheel_Dem]

359. Yeah, well good luck with that. (nt)

:rofl:

[madrchsod]

98. that`s what he paid to do and they are getting their money`s worth

[mdmc]

89. solidarity

I'll stand with the workers

[RedRoses323]

340. Yes!

:toast:

[donheld]

404. Always

[ima_sinnic]

99. and I flushed a couple hundred down the toilet in support of Obama

that is a mistake I won't make again, nor will I waste a vote on another corporate ass-kissing union-dissing fake "democrat."

Arkansas can now count on a Republican senator, because Democrats are going to sit that one out or vote third party. Bookmark it.

[Union Yes]

101. Today, I am a 3rd party voter.

[Grinchie]

104. I'm with you.

So long Republicrat stooges.

[ima_sinnic]

223. me three

reregistered several months ago--but I still get fund appeals from the DLC corporacrats (DSCC, DCCC), go figure.
I use their postage-paid envelopes to explain in foul language why they won't get a dime from me.

[Omaha Steve]

103. Remember this money comes from a voluntary PAC, NOT FROM DUES! by law

Last count had AFSCME kicking in 1.5 million $. I'm a proud contributor to the AFSCME PAC (must be an AFSCME member to contribute).

I have no problem with the $ AFSCME kicked in to kick her out. And there were shenanigans going on with the voters and numbers.

OS

[RedstDem]

107. The white house has their collective foot in thier mouth

and are chewing away...

I'm actually contemplating sitting the next election out for the 1st time in my life.
I'm almost 50.

[wial]

108. well, getting the administration

to show its hand has to have some value. At least we know which side they're on now. Not ours. Lesser of two evils, at best. One thing to win, another to be contemptuous of the working people. I trust this wasn't Obama himself, because he was once a community organizer. More likely Rahm, who's probably still in a mood after his IDF friends slaughtered a bunch of activists and he had to figure out some way that was ok and anyone who criticized it deserved to be fired. It's the kind of bloody-minded, mean-spirited thing he would say.

[No Elephants]

319. PLease see Replies 176. 244. and 245.

Obama can't believe something like this because he was once a community organizer for 3 years--before going to law school and spending over 20 years in politics?

That doesn't hold up to any analysis whatever.

[SILVER__FOX52]

111. If this is true..........

the White house can kiss my ass.

[Demit]

112. I think the real pointed message was from the unions to the White House.

A 10 million dollar message: "We will not back candidates who don't back unions."

[robcon]

115. What a misinformed position.

Halter doesn't support unions any more than Lincoln does (please cite if you disagree.) It was just an exercise in raw power by the unions - to attempt to intimidate future Democrats through the threat of union support of alternative Democrats in primaries.

It was money down the toilet.

[RedstDem]

136. You've got a point

Try and find a real politician to represent the interest of working people in Arkansas.

aint gonna happen.

[jeff47]

148. Wow are you small-time

Lincoln has literally campaigned as pro-union, and then govern as anti-union. She's been at the fore of blocking a lot of legislation labor wants. The plan was to get a primary challenger so she has to tack left to cover her ass.

She got a primary challenger.
She tacked left.
She barely survived the primary due to her leftward shift.

Doesn't seem like such a waste if one pays attention to the entire process, instead of falling into the media's lazy "horse race" style analysis.

[olegramps]

228. It would appear that you are as anti-union as the White House.

[BlueDemKev]

346. I agree

While I for the most part support what labor unions stand for, I do not always agree with their strong-armed tactics as they tried to use here. That money could have and should have gone to protecting the 50 or so vulnerable House seats we need to defend if we're going to have ANY kind of pro-worker policies left in this country.

[LynneSin]

113. Did Obama say that? Nope.

nuff said

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

119. Yes, he did. By proxy.

The "senior White House official" either spoke for the president, or he's on the presidential shit-list.

If there's a resignation or apology from a "senior White House official", then I'll believe the prez didn't approve the statement.

:hi:

[LynneSin]

173. Was it? I mean haven't we all spent 8 years on DU NOT trusting the Media

And suddenly someone from the Media claims that a "Senoir White House Offical" made an awful remark like that and we believe the Media?

Personally I rank "White House Offical" up there with Fox's "Some People Say" comment. We have no clue who the hell this is but the media 'found' someone (or invented) and made it a news story. We just need one news outlet to create the story and the rest of us are on it like flies on shit.

Shame on us!

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

191. I saw a number of articles on this topic

and some attribute the quote to "a White House aide". I assume that would be a much lower position than "senior White House official". Maybe an unseasoned kid with one or two beers in the belly, wanting to sound important to some news reporter.

In which case it would not be "Obama by Proxy".

If the story has legs, then eventually the source will be unveiled.

[LynneSin]

193. Senior White House Official could be the head chef or chief lawnkeeper of the Rose Garden

or it could be the figment of someone writers imagination since they probably didn't have a source.

If it's a real story a named person will discuss it. I think what pisses us off is if the story is truly heinous even Obama won't stoop to justifying the story. The Media WANTS Obama to comment on what was said but if he does then he only propagates the story as being real.

It's like having some horrible rumor being spread about you that you know is untrue but if you defend yourself it only keeps the rumor alive and adds some sort of validity to the story. That's why my Dad said you should just ignore rumors - if you do people will get bored and it will die out. And you know what Dad was right (hey I was a highschooler - I know how that shit is).

[No Elephants]

225. Ah, yes. No one Obama hired to work in theWH--and can fire--ever speaks for him,

even his press secretary. We heard all that when Napolitano, Gibbs and every other relevant member of the Obamadmin was saying Obama would not veto a health care reform bill that lacked a public option. It was as silly then as it is now.

[robcon]

118. A victory for the Obama administration.

I think this was a victory for the White House and for local Democratic parties.

Lincoln Bucks Tide
By JEFF ZELENY and ADAM NAGOURNEY Published: June 8, 2010

WASHINGTON — Senator Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas survived a tough challenge from her party’s left wing on Tuesday to capture the Democratic nomination in a runoff primary election, resisting the anti-incumbent wave that has defined the midterm election year.

Mrs. Lincoln withstood a multi-million-dollar campaign against her from organized labor, environmental groups and liberal advocacy organizations from outside Arkansas as she prevailed over Lt. Gov. Bill Halter. She faces a difficult contest in the fall, but her victory challenges the suggestion that voters are poised to oust all officeholders.

“We proved that this senator’s vote is not for sale and neither is yours,” Mrs. Lincoln said. “We took on the outside groups seeking to manipulate our votes.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/09/us/politics/09elect.html?th&emc=th

[AllentownJake]

122. 51% in a Primary is not a victory for anyone running for re-election

Shit load of fences to mend.

[robcon]

135. You're right, the problem is, of course, the fences to mend.

The union attempt to hijack the Arkansas Senate race was disgraceful.

[AllentownJake]

139. I think by Lincoln's donations

She had plenty of outside hijacking on her side as well.

[laughingliberal]

153. +1000 And I'm betting it wasn't groups who support workers. nt

[Moochy]

195. WTF Hijack? A Primary Challenge is a hijacker?

Your misguided OP cheering on Rahm got so many recs. And not for the reason you hoped.

Sneer all you want at unions, corporatist stooges.... keep sneering and jeering.

[RedstDem]

256. Anti union asshats like you should go to Haiti

go work there and stop polluting my beautiful country..
D bag

[No Elephants]

324. Hijack? Disgraceful? LOL.

Please see Reply 74 and the posts on this thread about the dirty tricks used against Halter.

The notion that the DNC should control primaries and that incumbents are owed nominations for as long as they want them are whatt's disgraceful.

[davidwparker]

129. Did they get to the bottom of why 48 precincts were closed in an area

where Halter won big? Only two were opened in comparison to primary day where there were 50.

I know they were offering Saturday for early voting, but AK law says no voting on Saturday.

[politicalmajority]

133. SOUNDS LIKE RAHM EMANUEL SAID IT

If not it is one of his very close subordinates.

[Lorien]

249. Yep. He should be sent away to play with his super soaker. nt

[Jefferson23]

134. A very close race, and the WH sends a message along with

Linoln, fuck labor. How nice to have that validated.

The money was well spent, and THAT is what pisses off the WH. Expect more challenges to come, not less Obama.

[robcon]

137. The money was wasted. Halter is no more pro-union than Lincoln.

It was all a charade by the unions.

edit:spell

[Jefferson23]

141. Charade my foot, the WH was not happy to have a challenge and

they will see more of it.

[robcon]

142. In other words, you think Halter was more pro-union than Lincoln

Got any cites or links to support that?

[Jefferson23]

154. You keep reposting this false premise, you can try and frame it

that way, but it would still remain a false premise. I don't think you appreciate what this challenge represented. This was not solely about
Halter being more pro union than Lincoln. This article sums up the issues and motivations pretty well. The WH will indeed not appreciate
their efforts, because as a result of the money spent they came very close to pushing her out and that fact pisses them off imo. Btw, Labor is well aware of Halter's political positions.

snip* "I'm conservative on some issues and I'm progressive on others," Halter said in an interview at the annual Toad Suck Daze festival in Conway, Ark. "In terms of fiscal policy, I'm as conservative as anyone -- and I'm more conservative than the incumbent."

* on card check: Halter's position on the issue is unclear. Asked about it in an interview, Halter did not say how he would vote because the bill "is no longer being discussed." Halter said he favors a compromise that includes imposing sanctions on those who try to inhibit "democratic elections

Labor organizers said they are so furious with moderate Democrats they will do anything to purge Lincoln. Her defeat, they said, would send a warning to Democrats everywhere that support from labor cannot be taken for granted.

"You do this to win, and Arkansas will be much better off with Bill Halter representing it," said Steve Rosenthal, a former political director of the AFL-CIO who is organizing anti-Lincoln efforts. "But short of that, the fact that Lincoln has had to fight this kind of fight, raise the money to do it . . . and to the extent that other senators see what's happening in Arkansas and think twice about it, this becomes -- win, lose or draw -- a very important fight."

snip* But Jon Youngdahl, national political director of SEIU, which is running more than $1 million in ads across the state, said, "It doesn't do us any good to conjecture what it means if we lose." The race, he said, is a symbol of "the frustration that people have had with the vote in favor of the Bush bailouts, then the long delays in getting health-care enacted, the lack of attention to job creation and the inability to pass Employee Free Choice Act." (end) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/10/AR2010051002126.html


To continue to support Lincoln, now that would have been a waste of money. If you really want a shift, you have to be willing to take your
chances and fight like hell...they came very close.

[laughingliberal]

181. delete wrong place

[laughingliberal]

171. Saw him interviewed on Ed yesterday. He did say he was working with union officials on EFCA

Did not say he'd vote for card check but, rather, a compromise which is being worked out. Not an overwhelming show of support but I doubt Lincoln will vote even for a weak EFCA.

[olegramps]

233. Sounds like you are really anti-union.

Yeah, those workers don't have any right to be meddling in politics by attempting to out an anti-labor DINO.

[RedstDem]

140. It was worth every penny Rahm....

We're not stopping either.

[patrice]

146. a very divisive thing to say/do. But then, what does anyonne expect from a machine.

[Jester Messiah]

150. The truth hurts.

Not that I'm a Blanche supporter, far from it... but she's probably as blue as most Arkansans can take and still vote Dem (as the primary indicates), so why waste money blowing against the wind? The money would have been better spent elsewhere.

[No Elephants]

328. What truth? The money was not wasted AT ALL.

I donated to Halter rom Massachusetts and consider the money well spent. If anything flushed a toilet, it was his arrogant, foolish remark.

[NorthCarolina]

159. Can Halter run as an Independent in the General, or has that time passed? eom

[tavalon]

165. Why do they keep calling Rahm an anonymous senior official

It's not like we don't know Rahm's crap when he spews it and he spews it more often than someone with stomach flu.

[Autumn]

168. One thing this Administration understands is flushing

money down the toilet. They have done an excellent job of that. What a stupid thing to say, but very eye opening.

[rasputin1952]

170. Politics ain't Beanbag...

This is just the way it goes. I can think of a thousand ways I'd like to see money spent that would benefit the people of this nation, but I don't blame the WH for how Unions spend their money, and I've been a Union supporter for decades. I think it's kind of a dumb complaint.

It just seems to me, that reading some of the responses in this thread, that if PO suddenly came up w/away to deal with everything at once, and Peace broke out across the world, there would be some people that would crucify PO and the Administration.

I find it more interesting that two candidates in CA spent tons of cash for jobs that pay a pittance compared to what they are spending. $60-80 million dollars were spent each by Fiorina and Whitman and people just pass over that, but someone finds a piece that can be used against the WH, and people flock in to take their shots.

I am not a fan of Lincoln, but I don't live in AR either, and will not have a chance to vote in the General there. Whom PO decides to endorse is the issue, unless you live in AR, I can't see the problem. Halter would have been a better candidate IMO, but such is life. I'm a little more worried about the county that decided they could get get away w/just 2 polling places than I am about money already spent.

I guess some people will just look for anything to bash PO over, rather than work a little harder on getting things done that would bring about Equality for a portion of our society, get us out of the damned wars or a host of other problems. It is just a case of, "Oh, someone mentioned the WH or PO, lets get a big stick and beat him up for a while."

[Better Believe It]

174. And what have labor unions won with the goodwill of the White House?

[inchhigh]

175. Speaking of flushing

I just have to say that more and more it feels like it was my vote and efforts for Ombama that were flushed down the toilet.

I have always said the the biggest regret of my political life is that i didn't vote for Jimmy Carter (voted for Anderson). As regrets go, my vote for Obama is running a very close second.

[freddie mertz]

183. I remember trying to talk people out of voting for Anderson.

As for Obama, there was no other "choice," but I feel very let down by what has followed.

[FailureToCommunicate]

176. "Good morning White House!" Scott Brown was supposed to be a wake up call; THIS $10 Million

spent on the more Left candidate is a wake up call... What will it take for them to WAKE UP?!? This is like the WH and DLC are stuck in the beginning of "Groundhog Day"

Rahm sounded jealous "... If even half that total had been well-targeted..."

And, of course, the $10 million WAS wasted: It went to media ad buys, like most wasted campaign money.

Think how much good that kind of cash could've done anywhere else: school districts, cancer research, food banks, Red Cross...

[FailureToCommunicate]

333. Add: Some perspective here. BP has just spent $50 MILLION on TV and print ads to

try to clean up it's image -as if that were even possible at this point! Beyond making newspapers and station executives happy for the ad buys, this $50 mil COULD have gone to do some good in the Gulf region couldn't it?

http://money.cnn.com/2010/06/03/news/companies/bp_hayward_ad/index.htm

Disgusting.

I agree with Robert Reich: Privatize the US branch of BP. Our Gulf restored before stockholders paid...

[NoodleyAppendage]

178. FUCK YOU, RAHM EMANUEL! You are lower than the scum on a Teabagger's loafers.

Plus, you couldn't get your DINO/DLC Blanche installed without CHEATING!

J

[Duchess]

179. Actually, it sounds like they are scared. n/t

[laughingliberal]

182. My email to the White House, aka exercise in futility

I am writing to let you know that, once again, the progressives in our party who stand for traditional Democratic values were treated to an insult out of your administration. I still remember the 'fucking retarded' comment about groups raising money to pressure lawmakers to support the public option which, as I recall, was an issue you campaigned on in the primaries regardless of the fact you later denied this.
Working people continue to struggle and lose ground as we have for 3 decades. They voted for you with great hope of seeing that trend reversed. Little has been done to stand up to the forces driving us down and now your administration insults a group which stands for improving our lives.
We never saw an apology to the groups who were called 'fucking retarded' and I don't expect we'll see one now. Instead we continue to be told, in every way possible, you're just not that into us. I predict that is starting to cut both ways.

[bluetexas]

184. No, I am pissed

I want the name of the idiot who said this.

[SocialistLez]

185. Labor needs to start giving to Green Party and Socialist candidates.

[pundaint]

215. Green is a lovely color. Their platform is also lovely.

[xxqqqzme]

186. That White House 'official'

is certainly a vindictive, nasty, petty little prick. Gee, I wonder who that could be???

DLCers have openly worked to marginalize unions for years.

[Bluenorthwest]

187. Typical of this administration's language and style

A vicious, divisive gloat. Just about as petty as can be imagined.

[The Stranger]

188. United we stand, but divided we fall.

Why spend so much against one another, when we should save it for defeating the GOP?

[liberation]

239. ... Because a conservative blue dog Dem ain't that much different than a GOP candidate?

I still for the life of me don't understand why progressives are still sticking with the Dem party, when it is obvious that it just serves as a low pass filter to get progressive candidates out of the election cycle.

In every primary cycle the likelihood is that it involves 1 conservative Dem vs. 1 progressive Dem, while the GOP fleets 2 conservative candidates against each other. Meaning that there is a 75% probably that a conservative will be elected to the specific office. That is stacking the bases in a gross manner, and one of the reasons why progressives are being filtered out of the government offices: they need to fight on the primaries AND the election. Whereas conservatives are guaranteed to make it to the election no matter what.


It is time to smell the coffee and support progressive platforms, even if they are outside of the Dem party. Since it seems the function of the party is to slow down progressive candidatures/platforms. Rather than actually supporting them.

[The Stranger]

305. As a Progressive, I agree, but anything is better than the 8 years of Neocon Bush Junta rule.

We should pick our battles and not make perfect the enemy of the good.

[No Elephants]

338. UGH! Rahm wore out that cliche when taking his tantrums about holding out for a public option.

Thing is he was lying and he knew it. Medicare for all (single payer) was the perfect, not the public option. (And even single payer would not really have been perfect.)

Halter would not have been perfect, either. But allowing incumbents to go unchecked is folly.

BTW, Lincoln was not running against Bush. No one is, or ever will. And, if Democrats stop acting like Bush acted, Democratic voters will stop trying to unseat them. Until then, trying to unseat them is the only hope of getting hem to act like Democrats, instead of like Demlicans or Republicrats.

DONE WITH DINOS!

[No Elephants]

332. Because we should fight to unseat incumbents whose votes and other behavior we disapprove of?

It's the Democratic Party, not the Incumbents' Party.

[Jakes Progress]

189. Union official: White House just flushed 10 million votes down the toilet.

Okay I made it up. Still true.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

261. and even with an admittance of being made up

your comment has more credibility then the 'anonymous senior white house offical' mainly due to actually having a name attached to it

[Barack_America]

190. All I had to do was read the title to know it was Politico and Emanuel. nt

[burnsei sensei]

194. The White House

has no business telling organized labor what to do.
I have yet to see such willingness to lead with respect to the oil industry.
I have yet to see a genuine pro-labor anti-corporatism.
I want labor unions to grow and grow. They are the historically proven weapon against the whores of corporate America.

[abelenkpe]

196. A white house official?

BS. Politico would love to see dems fighting amongst themselves. I call BS on the whole thing. Since it's based on an anonymous source this entire article is better suited for the gossip pages and not taken seriously. It's a quote from a chicken with no balls.

[NobleCynic]

366. This. Politico is not to be trusted, especially when no names are mentioned. n/t

[Kokonoe]

199. It was the best $10 million ever spent.

The primary is the only opportunity to take back our party.

And thats less money for corporate sellouts, to use a workers donation and pretend they're a democrat.

$20 million in the right direction.

[pattmarty]

200. My response to that is; "suck my dick and good luck motherfuckers in 2012".

[No Elephants]

343. Stop mincing words and say how you really feel!

[meow mix]

375. yeah... cant wait to hear the next round of promises and lies in 2012

they can blow me i give up

[Crowman1979]

203. Congratulation White House! You've just made yourself an enemy of the working-class.

Now go and sell-out like you always do.

[bvar22]

230. Well, they didn't "just make themselves an enemy".

The Democratic Party "Centrist" leadership has ALWAYS been an enemy of LABOR and the Working Class since the 80s. They have simply made their allegiance to Corporate Management undeniable.
They have also publicly admitted that they NEVER really wanted a "Public Option".
The whole thing was a sham.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

207. Mainstream pols always support the incumbent

even if the incumbent is more like a Republican than like a Democrat (cf. Lieberman).

It's not, "Stand up for principles." It's "Keep our little club safe from outsiders."

[yurbud]

208. organized labor aint getting much love from this DLC, corporate boot-licking admin

[Fearless]

210. +1000000

[defendandprotect]

254. misplaced --

[yurbud]

406. misplaced hope in Obama?

[phleshdef]

209. They DID flush it down the toilet. For a candidate not much different than the one they were against

It would have made sense of Halter actually was vastly more progressive than Lincoln. But that wasn't the case.

[elzenmahn]

213. Not surprised, but disappointed...

...that Lincoln won, and to be perfectly honest, it won't matter who wins the general in this race now since her voting patterns (and funding sources) are really no different than most repubs. In fact (and I never thought I would say this about a Dem), but I hope she loses in November...

As for the unions "throwing money down the toilet"...please remember:

1. Obama is not, and never really was, a true progressive;
2. The unions are the enemy of both parties, not just the repubs;
3. Our political system today, thanks to Reagan, the Bushes, and Clinton, cannot handle a true progressive in the White House. The oligarchs who really run things won't tolerate it.

I'll accept the loss, as I contributed to Halter's campaign. And I don't see it as money thrown down the toilet, even though he lost - I see it as free speech, just like the Supreme Court said money is.

[Mr. Sparkle]

214. Good luck on getting the progressive base to come out and voting for that piece of crap. n/t

[olegramps]

216. The Obama Administration has just sealed its doom!

Does anyone need further proof that the Democratic Party has failed the working class then when a Democratic administration endorses an anti-labor DINO and then ridicules the Unions' endorsement of a candidate that who would actually represent their interest. I am beginning to actually believe that Obama may be a one term president. Without the unions' support I can't imagine him winning reelection. I suppose that it wasn't enough to lose the support of the Teachers' Unions, now they have succeeded in alienating the entirety of organized labor.

The change in the attitudes of many people here on DU is nothing short of dramatic. The groundswell of enthusiasm when Obama was elected and the great expectations have been replaced with bitter disappointment that increases daily. So far this administration has been a flop when it came to addressing the major issues.

I hope that I will live long enough to see the working class class come to their senses and unite as they did during the depression before the are driven to the point of desperation. I sincerely hope that a candidate from the organized labor can launch a successful bid for the nomination. Hopefully a person who actually represents the interests of the working class in contrast to the those who only provide labor lip service.

[Jefferson23]

220. Democrats to organized labor: drop dead

Wednesday, Jun 9, 2010 07:10 ET

By Gabriel Winant



For an entity that's supposedly the bought-and-paid-for servant of organized labor, the Democratic Party sure has a hell of a way of showing it. When it looked like Arkansas Lt. Gov. Bill Halter's labor-backed challenge to Sen. Blanche Lincoln in the Democratic primary was going to succeed, Lincoln's backers in the Democratic establishment tried to turn the race into a referendum on organized labor. And it worked. Lincoln won her primary last night. Then her allies turned on the unions for not toeing the party line. In other words, the critics have it backward: it's not Democrats who are supposed to act like labor's servants, it's labor that's expected to act like it belongs to the party, with no reciprocal obligations.

First of all, though, maybe we all got a little ahead of ourselves in imagining that Halter had this thing sewn up. He was never ahead by more than a few points in a few polls. So it might be that Lincoln's comeback doesn’t need that much analysis at all. These things happen all the time.

But if we’re going to analyze it, here are some things to keep in mind: like every Southern state, Arkansas is right-to-work, meaning that it has labor laws that are particularly unfriendly to unions. It has the sixth lowest union density in the country, and is home to Wal-Mart, the bugbear of the union movement.

Moreover, the South has always been the graveyard of the union movement. Southern companies traditionally manage the most hard-assed opposition to unions, and they have a long legacy of success to draw on. For over a century, Southern conservatives have labeled union activists as radicals and meddlers, likely to endanger what Southern workers hold dear. In the 1940s, the CIO (it hadn't yet merged with the AFL) ran a major effort to organize Southern industry, and to elect friendly politicians alongside. After some initial success, the CIO saw its two best Southern friends in the Senate -- Florida's Claude Pepper and North Carolina's Frank Graham -- go down unexpectedly in 1950 primary challenges. The lesson then, as now, was that it's not really in the power of organized labor to determine Southern elections. Yesterday, labor relearned the ironic lesson that endless millionaire vanity candidates have been taught: spending a big pile of money on a campaign can't make up for a missing base of institutional support or a determined opposition that does have one.


The way conservative Democrats ran against Pepper and Graham and bashed the CIO in earlier years is much the same as the way they stood up for Lincoln. One newspaper warned in the late 1930s, "The record proves undeniably that when friction and fighting arises in a community, especially among the Anglo-Saxons of the South, it is the result of the deliberate efforts of outsiders who come in for the specific purposes of creating disturbances." A Georgia radio host captured the essence of Southern anti-union rhetoric when he said in 1946, "Do you value your independence as a Southern American? The unsophisticated Southerner, never having seen nor experienced the North, may listen to this alluring propaganda not realizing that he is surrendering … independence and personal freedom." (I've lifted these examples from historian Michelle Brattain's book, The Politics of Whiteness.)

Compare that talk with Bill Clinton's, campaigning for Lincoln. The unions, Clinton accused, are "using you and manipulating your vote." They wanted to make Lincoln a poster child for "what happens when a Democrat crosses us." Lincoln herself refers to the unions backing Halter as "those D.C. unions." On Monday, she said, "Tomorrow, when all those outsiders who flooded the state get back on their airplanes and buses to go back where they came from, our campaign will stay rooted right here in Arkansas." Get it?

SEIU and AFSCME, the two major unions backing Halter, have always denied that they were outsiders invading Arkansas, looking for the scalp of a disobedient senator. But they've got to deny it, even though it's obviously what they were doing. Lincoln, a senator beloved by the Chamber of Commerce, helped kill the public option and the Employee Free Choice Act -- labor's top priority. And she only tacked left on financial reform because of the primary challenge. So it's entirely appropriate that organized labor would try to hold her to account. But with no base of their own in the state, the unions ran headlong into the obstacle that's always blocked them in the South: business-backed conservative Democrats, like Clinton and Lincoln, who are willing to stick together against labor.

What's worse, the White House has made pretty clear what it thinks of labor's efforts to stand up for itself. An anonymous senior official who sounds a lot like Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel told Politico's Ben Smith last night, "Organized labor just flushed $10 million of their members' money down the toilet on a pointless exercise. If even half that total had been well-targeted and applied in key House races across this country, that could have made a real difference in November."

Actually, $5 million wouldn’t amount to that much in the grand scheme of the fight for Congress. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has already raised $80 million this year, and spent $53 million in the 2010 cycle. And the real action hasn't gotten going yet. All of that is on top of spending by actual candidates, and given the rapidly diminishing returns on massive campaign expenditures, an extra $5 million probably wouldn't make a "real difference."

But that's not the real point the senior official was making. What's being said there, instead, is that organized labor is just an adjunct to the Democrats. Unions shouldn't expect to get the party to move on their main issues, and they shouldn't fight about it. The best they can hope for is that Democrats stay in power and keep workers from being screwed too fast or too dramatically.

Imagine if the president and Bill Clinton had instead thrown in with Halter. I know it's unthinkable for establishment Democrats to do this kind of thing, but just play along: what if they had said that it's important for Democrats to understand that there are consequences for a senator who repeatedly betrays her party and the progressive agenda? It's hard to imagine Lincoln could have pulled it out with Clinton campaigning against her.

In other words, elite Democrats had a real choice, and they decided to stand with the Chamber of Commerce and treat the unions like the misbehaving hired help. They ran the same campaign that conservative Southern Democrats have been running for the better part of a century to keep labor out of the South, and it worked.

But this is the campaign that has been undercutting progressives in general for decades. As long as labor is weak in the South, it's weak everywhere. Runaway plants move from union-friendly states to right-to-work ones like Arkansas, killing the unions where they're strong and driving down wages. Without strong unions, working-class voters are much less likely to vote for progressives, or even Democrats at all. And why should they? With wages stagnant and inequality constantly growing, how much has mainstream center-center-left liberalism shown that it still has to offer?

The direction we're headed in, judging by that White House official, is for Democrats to show the door to working-class voters. For years, Democratic leaders have desperately want theirs to be the party of upper-middle-class suburban professionals. And if Blanche Lincoln loses in November to her Republican challenger, as she probably will, all we'll be able to say is that Democrats got their wish: they wrote off working people, and working people wrote them off too.

Gabriel Winant

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/06/09/lincoln_halter_labor_democrats/index.html

[polichick]

221. What assholery! No mystery who the WH works for. nt

[on point]

222. Not $$$ wasted, but a shot across the bow, a warning to the White house

[ecstatic]

224. This is how the media keeps us divided. Why exactly would a White

House official say that? has anyone asked themselves that question before jumping to conclusions? What would the motive be? And if it was said, maybe the context wasn't delivered properly?

[defendandprotect]

253. Why would Obama and Clinton be supporting Lincoln . . . or Lieberman ?????

Or Arlen Specter???

Those are the questions to be asked!

[No Elephants]

353. Like 'fucking retards?"

The DLC wing of PNAC decided to divide Democrats long before it occurred to the media that dividing Democrats was a possibility. Democrats are just now waking up and fighting back.

[BlueDemKev]

408. "Dividing" Democrats

The DLC was created in 1985 after the Mondale-Ferraro debacle in an attempt to "modernize" the party so it could start winning national elections again (at that point we had lost 4 out of the last 5 elections, 2 of them by 49 states).

Democrats dividing occured long before the DLC was created. Remember all the congressional Democrats in 1981 who supported Reagan's tax cuts? What about back in the early 1960s when the party was deeply divided over the issue of civil rights? President Kennedy actually made a trip to Texas in late 1963 to try and heal the warring factions within the party (didn't go so well, did it?).

And wasn't it during the 1930's when Will Rogers said, "I am a member of no organized political party. I am a Democrat."

The Democratic Party has always been a coalition of diversified groups and individuals, but those differences began to hurt us about 30 years ago with the backlash against affirmative action and the globalization of the economy began to take hold.

[MidwestTransplant]

227. Rahm is obviously that "senior" official.

[Enrique]

229. DU loves Politco and anonymous sources!!!!

+28 recs!

As long as it's pro-Blanche Lincoln and anti-labor!!!!!!!

[Wandawilkerson]

296. The rec's don't mean the recommenders agree with the anonymous source

I recommended because I want the White House's anti-union comment to be exposed.

[flyarm]

390. well seems to me the White House can deny it or expose who said it ..pretty easy solution..

if the White house does not deny it, then there is a balless, gutless wonder in this white house in a senior position..it seems..

I can not for one moment believe ( having been a lifelong union member and a husband who was a VP for a very sucessful National union..not the AFL-CIO ..) the AFL-CIO would respond to just a Politico story without real facts of who said what..and the Union didn't hide behind an anonymous Union person..his name is wide spread all over the internet now!

[defendandprotect]

238. Obviously, the corruption of our election process is deep and wide ....

that's the only way I can see that Blanche Lincoln held onto her office!

[robcon]

243. Lincoln held her office because Halter held identical positions.

Halter outspent Lincoln, but was rebuffed. The corruption was by the unions, not Lincoln.

There was no THERE there... Halter was not any more pro-union than Lincoln was.

[defendandprotect]

252. Are you an Arkansas voter? The union was corrupt?

Want to add some details there?

[No Elephants]

358. You've exhausted that poor straw man. Not one post I've seen so far on this thread

claims that Halter is more pro-Union than Lincoln.

And Lincoln held her position by dirty tricks.

Still, the message got tsent.

[Name removed]

242. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[robcon]

245. I'll vote for the Democrat.

You can vote for the "symbolism," if you want.

[ooglymoogly]

266. This admin does not care if Blanch loses.

All they care about is not having a progressive win.

[frylock]

272. seems to me that you're the one voting for the symbolism

[mistertrickster]

250. Or Obama could just FREAKIN' DO SOMETHING for organized labor. How'd that be? nt

[ooglymoogly]

255. Blanch Lincoln relied heavily on voter suppression, The polls belie the result.

It was a fixed election.

It was a crooked election.

Fixed elections are becoming the norm in this country; especially in red states.

And nobody raises a peep; or a bah-ah-aaah in this case.

The sheep have been shorn to close to the skin and are bleeding.

[Joanne98]

258. They just threw their money away too. She not going to win. Everybody hates her!

[colsohlibgal]

265. This Removes Any Doubt

Any doubt that is, by any rational progressive, that the White House and official democratic apparatus is not really your friend unless you have a couple of million in the bank. Sorry apologists, but I don't know how you read this any other way.

I'm highly suspicious of the vote in Arkansas, it's just the latest race (Kerry/Bush, Demint/Cleland for example) where the loser, always the more liberal candidate, has a comfortable lead in the polls right up to the election then strangely loses. Something is rotten, and certainly not in Denmark.

The deck becomes more stacked every day, it's going to be one Hell of an uphill battle to change the US from an increasingly corporate state back to a true democracy.

[robcon]

278. I think you're wrong on several counts

1. 'Obama is not your friend.' I think you are very, very mistaken. Obama is one of the best presidents of the last 100 years. He got health care passed.

2. 'I'm highly suspicious of the vote' I'm highly suspicious of your suspicions. Your guy didn't win - so you call foul. Sounds like amateur hour, unless you have more evidence than that.

3. the loser, always the more liberal candidate' Halter was not more liberal than Lincoln. His positions were identical, although he would have to have been beholden to the unions if he had won.

[mvd]

310. IMO Halter has better positions on:

1) Banks. From his campaign website: "I support the strongest possible reforms to do this, and I hope Congress addresses this in a way that gets real results for Arkansas families, not just another Washington shell game. We need an independent watchdog agency, stronger enforcement of what's already on the books, an end to sky-high corporate compensation, and better checks and balances on the more outrageous financial industry practices."

2) The environment

3) Health care (thought Lincoln bowed to the insurance companies in weakening the bill)

4) Unions, which are very important to the middle class

Obama is what we have right now and we should support him over the Republicans for sure, but it's too early to call him one of the best Presidents. There's still a lot of work to be done in passing progressive legislation; the President needs to push harder in that direction or there won't even be much incremental change. And although reforming health care was a milestone, we'll see how much it actually helps people with affordability and whether there are too many loopholes.

As far as the stolen election goes, I'm not sure in this case, but a close eye is always a good thing because elections are vital to our democracy.

[robcon]

393. Sounds exactly like Lincoln's positions.

n/t

[mvd]

407. I don't agree

If you look at Lincoln's positions, they are all watered down. And no wonder, with the money she has taken.

[BlueDemKev]

342. Cleland's Loss in 2002

Look, I'm from Georgia and while I was devastated by Cleland's loss in 2002, I can assure you there was nothing "funny" about the voting. At the time, the Democrats controlled both the legislature and the governorship (and even Zell Miller campaigned hard for Cleland).

What happened was this--Cleland was leading in mid-September, but his lead dwindled rapidly in the remaining five weeks before the election. Georgia is rabidly anti-union (and voters were still reeling heavily from 9/11), and they were furious at Cleland for backing (even though half-heartedly) employee protection regulations in the newly-created Dept. of Homeland Security (even though every federal govt agency has such rules for their employees). The Republicans were able to perfectly spin it and make it look as though Cleland was more concerned about receiving union $$$ than he was about protecting the country from another terrorist attack. Chambliss held a slight lead in most polls going into election day, but still the race was pretty much a toss-up. The final nail in the coffin was LOW TURNOUT among African-American voters in Atlanta. Election day was cold and rainy and many of them just stayed home. Had there been a heavier turnout in DeKalb and Clayton counties, Cleland probably would have squeaked through.

[No Elephants]

360. Those facts are entirely different from the facts of this runoff, though.

[bluethruandthru]

273. The white house should be pissed at Blanche..not at the unions!

Blanche turned her back on the party - many times - including the President. Obama should have learned to play hardball with DINO's. Those who don't support him fully on key issues should be left flapping in the wind at election time....and the president should throw his support to the primary challenger!

[jxnmsdemguy65]

276. Bullshit. Organized labor got it's point across...

Southern dems will now have to watch out for threats to their left... and that's a good thing. Hopefull will keep them on their toes!

[TomClash]

280. Profile in Cowardice

Assuming this story is true, the "Senior White House Official" is a coward to call Ben Smith, make a very pointed statement and then refuse to have it attributed to him or her. That Senior Staffer sure sets a great example for the soldiers laying their lives on the line in Afghanistan. Not exactly a profile in courage

[4lbs]

282. In a way, it's correct, even though it was a bad way to state it.

Arkansas' union membership is almost nil.

There are 2.8 million people in Arkansas, but only about 85,000 belong to a union. That's just 3% of the population.

By comparison, New York has 25% of it's population in unions, and California, Washington, and Hawaii have around 20% of their state population in unions.

Arkansas is also the home of Wal-Mart, which is about as anti-union as a company could get.

It's going to be difficult for any union-backed candidate to win in a state that has almost no union membership, and whose top company is notoriously anti-union.

[RoccoR5955]

293. They ought to be careful of that.

The unions backed Obama. There may be repercussions for that. Even though union membership is low, there have been a number of smaller unions who are on the rise. It's only a matter of time until things come back around. It just proves who owns them. They are again working for the corporations, and not WE THE PEOPLE.

We need to take our country back.

Personally I'd vote for Kucinich, Sanders, or Grayson in a primary in a New York second, over Obama.

[Bluebear]

298. 'My name is Eddie Vale of the AFL-CIO & I don't hide behind anonymous quotes'

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8522076

[sinkingfeeling]

317. More un-named WH officials quoted by Politico.

[BlueDemKev]

337. A Tactical Remark

This remark reeks with a tactical purpose. With the average independent voter (not necessarily primary voters) saying they're frustrated by extremism on both sides and lack of any cooperation whatsoever, the Obama Administration is trying to show that while it generally supports pro-worker policies, they are not "owned" by the unions. The problem is that many union folks (like those posting on here) are feeling slighted while those who are ardently anti-union will not be mollified. Independents were key to getting Obama and Democrats elected two years ago and they will again be key in our keeping control of Congress.

To union supporters, if you think that the Democrats' policies towards workers/unions is bad, just wait until you see what the Tea-Bag Party will do.

And to union opponents, I say if corporatism and greed didn't have the tendency to go so far off the deep end, unions would never have been created in the first place.

[The Second Stone]

339. How about they identify the official

as Rahm Emmanuel, or whoever it was. Letting them get away with an anonymous snipe is useless. They need to know that we will primary our enemies, and Lincoln is one of them.

[WileEcoyote]

344. But was the statement all that inaccurate?

Blunt, maybe even condescending, however not entirely wrong.

While I agree that Blanche Lincoln isn't the best Democrat, had the ten mil been spent around other races later on it surely would have helped more Democrats.

As it is we'll be lucky if Blanche Lincoln even holds her seat.

We still haven't recovered from 30 years of ultra Conservative governing. Best to stock up on even tepid Democrats until the tide shifts more.

After all it isn't like Arkansas is a Liberal minded state. Lincoln faces a very uphill battle in November after being beaten to a bloody pulp by a divided Democratic Party.

[No Elephants]

363. You're assuming union money is supposed to be spent in accordance with

the wishes of the WH and that the objective of unions is to elect Democrats. Those are the same fallacious assumptions the unnamed WH official seems to have made. The unions have already responded hose fallacious assumptions.

[WileEcoyote]

387. We tend to forget how Conservative much of the U.S. is.

Granted, Conservatism is a failure however this doesn't mean that people can see it for the failure that it is.

Like Blanche Lincoln, Bill Clinton is from Arkansas. Hardly the most liberal Democrat around, but can you imagine how awful things would have turned had George Bush Senior served out his second (Presidential) term?


Thus Lincoln is an improvement over the GOP candidate running against her in the fall. Obama sees this as does his staff. They are not Conservatives but are trying to deal with the possible as opposed to the impossible. A progressive candidate winning in the general election in Arkansas is probably impossible. See what kind of odds Las Vegas gives you.

So i really don't have a problem with the White House pointing out the obvious.

The rest of you seem to be forming a circular firing squad...

[PADemD]

350. That's $10 million that Blanche will not receive.

[BlueDemKev]

351. It's also $10 million that can't be used against Pat Toomey

Have you thought about that?

[No Elephants]

365. Sending a message was worth $100 million. More.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

372. What you said!

n/t

[Zorra]

356. Zorra to WH official: Maybe you need to learn a lesson from this, you corparasite POS.

[Name removed]

357. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Zhade]

367. Fuck him. Standing up for your principles is never a wasted effort.

He should be listening, but he doesn't care.

[ProudDad]

368. When is big labor going to figure out the Dems aren't their friends either...

Just look at the Obama Admin...

Hell, Obama was trained by Harvard Law, the MAJOR defender of rich, white privilege and the status-quo...

And he was a middle-of-the-roader there!

Why the surprise...

[meow mix]

376. really starting to hate this fucking white house

peice of shit

[mariawr]

381. I know the RRW likes to start rumors but

..did I read the Gibbs opined that the money could have been better spent?
If he did say this, then this is one rumor (unnamed sources tick me off) w/ legs.

[politicalmajority]

384. OBAMA SHOULD FIRE RAHM AND APPOINT HOWARD DEAN AS WH CHIEF OF STAFF

If not, Howard Dean can replace Obama in 2012.

[jwirr]

386. What I hear here is Rahm pushing us to the fringes. I for one will

continue to withhold my donations from the party and give to the individuals. Sick of the corporate suck up.

[robcon]

388. Obama is right. The funding of Lincoln's opponent was shameful and wasteful.

It was a power grab by some unions, and had nothing to do with policies, union support or winning an election.

Lincoln's and Halter's political beliefs are identical.

Fortunately, the power grab/intended intimidation didn't work, although it probably weakened the Democratic party's chances of holding on to the senate seat in Arkansas.

[scarletwoman]

389. Well, if this quote is true, then I obviously flushed my 2008 presidential vote down the toilet.

I won't make that mistake again.

sw

[robcon]

391. Sad to hear you're abandoning Obama.

He's one of the best ever.

[meow mix]

392. this is the best we can expect?

that only confirms i need to find someone who deserves my vote.

[scarletwoman]

395. One of the best at what? Best at bamboozling people into thinking that he was on their side?

He's not bad, I'll grant you that. Although Bubba did it with more elan and flair.

No matter. I understand quite well that our country is a plutocracy, and our Federal government is nothing but the consigliere of Big Business. The president is just a front man for the ongoing imperialist/capitalist project of controlling the world's wealth, and siphoning it into the pockets of the already wealthy and powerful.

As Emma Goldman said so well and succinctly: "If voting actually changed anything, they'd make it illegal."

sw

[tqla]

396. Everybodies believing an "anonymous" statement from a blog on Politico?

How 'bout we wait and see who said it, or if it's even true? Boy.

[flyarm]

398. seems to me the White House now had a whole day to deny it ..did they?

and do you honestly..really honestly think the AFL-CIO would reply to a comment like this only on the word of Politico?? ..Do you think they are bat shit crazy to make such a reply with their membership like that? Think again!

There is bat shit crazy..but it is not the AFL-CIO !

[robcon]

409. They no only didn't deny it, they confirmed it.

Robert Gibbs: "I don't think that the President would necessarily agree with that characterization made by somebody here. I think we would certainly agree that we are likely to have very close elections in very many places throughout the country in November. And while the President might not have agreed with the exact characterization, I think that whether or not that money might have been better spent in the fall on closer elections between somebody -- between people who cared about an agenda that benefited working families and those that didn't, that money might come in more handy then.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/robert-gibbs-exchange-about-ar.html

[Divine Discontent]

397. one of the best??? hardly. and anyone saying that 18 months in should be questioned.

I know you've made a good dozen posts supporting the WH in this thread, and I understand some people just adore no matter what mistakes are made - unfortunately the rest of us live & breathe, and we appreciate the good that's done by the WH, and are none to happy about the questionable decisions and comments they've made.

[NorthCarolina]

399. How much $$ did Organized Labor flush away in helping to elect Obama? eom

[Name removed]

400. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[savalez]

410. Yikes.