Alright folks, could we please just settle down?

[Guaranteed]

The Democrats are getting up and running, now. We had 13 votes against Rice, that's great. It's looking like possibly *25* votes against Gonzalez, and that is OUTSTANDING. They're doing an EXCELLENT job fighting the SS thing. There's a lot going good for us, right now.

Dean's probably getting the chairmanship. We ARE seeing progress, here. Our leadership is "getting it." While we still need to keep the fire lit under their asses, let's not go overboard with this, k?

Please, settle down just a little bit- all sides, everyone. And, Obama...well, who wants to bet me that he'll vote "no" on Gonzalez? :P

[Walt Starr]

1. I'll bet you a $25 donation to DU he votes Yes

Are we on?

[Guaranteed]

3. You got it.

:P

[Walt Starr]

47. Looks like I'm about to cut an I O DU $25

:evilgrin:

Damn I'm glad he's coming down against Gonzales! Restores my faith, it does!

[Guaranteed]

49. Thanks Walt

You're a good sport :)

[genius]

43. "Here's the rack. Hope your social security is making you happy."

[Padraig18]

2. No, we must have instant, rigid, ideological purity.

Any deviation will result in excommunication from the party!

:tinfoilhat:

[Guaranteed]

4. Rigid, ideological, yes...

Instant, no.

PATIENCE, PEOPLE!!

[Padraig18]

7. No, we must make The Charge of the Light Brigade look prudent!

We must hurl ourselves uselessly against the Republican lances, ruining our chances of ever winning for generations, all for the glory of leftist purity!

[Guaranteed]

10. There's plenty of time for that later.

Let's give the Dems a chance- I think they're trying, and very hard, too.

AND- we got Dean.

[Padraig18]

11. But, but, but....

They must be perfect, you see? We can have nothing less than rigid purity, BGL!

[Guaranteed]

12. I'm all for purity, but when

I see this kind of effort from them, it's hard for me to get down on them for it.

They're TRYING. In fact, with the filibuster threat, they're even playing with fire. Let's give them some credit.

[Padraig18]

15. Credit???

Why should we give throughly good and decent men and women a silly thing like credit, when we demand that they immolate themselves and the party's future, and remain 'pure'?

[Just Me]

22. You guys crack me up.

It's all good. More than merely a handful of Dems are fighting as best as they can. That's all the inspiration I need.

[juajen]

41. Too funny!

I'm really proud of them lately, and am crossing my fingers for Dean.

[crispini]

14. AMEN, Padraig 18!

Practicality HAS NO PLACE in our Democratic party! We must all promptly become lefter-than-thou. A fig for winning elections! A fig, I say! Purity of thought, word and deed is ALL. Compromise shall be BANISHED from our vocabulary!!!!!!11

[Padraig18]

18. Long live tilting at wind mills!

Who needs to win elections? We shall be pure, and that's all that matters!

[Guaranteed]

20. LOL look, the purists have an important point.

We need a clear message.

What I'M saying is that we're just starting to build up our momentum. Now is not the time for Pickett's Charge. People are getting frenzied.

[Padraig18]

21. But they WANT Pickett's Charge!

They want political grandstanding that will make 'The Charge of the Light Brigade' look prudent, BGL! Ideology is all that matters, don't you see?

[last1standing]

34. Good to see you're feeling better.

:hi:

[TeacherCreature]

39. But we have been LOSING over and over with the Dem lite strategy...

It's not working, and hasn't worked since 1996 at the latest.

What we have now with Dean and DFA is not a call for suicidal purity, it is a call for clarity and PRINCIPLE.

As a one-time Dean supporter, I trust you have read his very fine little book on all this stuff.

If not, before working yourself into any more of a frenzy, why not take the man's advice and RELAX and look at what Dean and his movement are trying to say?

It's not all super-radical purer than thou stuff--most of it is just good pragmatic and principled political philosophy.

[ScreamingMeemie]

36. I don't want to win them at the expense of the very threads that make

me a Democrat. And right now, that's what it feels like. We need to be more concise in our differences from the right. We cannot be wishy washy. The lack of clear definition is what costs us, imo. 60% of people question this war. Most people are not as hung up on gay/lesbian marriage as the GOP is. They just got better at whipping people up in a frenzy. We have to do a better job at exposing just what is wrong with the GOP. I cannot give up those very principals that I hold near and dear to my heart. It's not worth it...to win an election. I understand the thought process, but it would kill me to go along with it.

[sampsonblk]

37. No, we must have instant backbone and integrity-nt

nt

[yazsir]

38. I'd like just an authentic response...

driven from principles rather than politics. That'd do just fine.

I'm a "real American" and I just eat that stuff up. I nurture a private hope that most of America feels the same way, or at least will vote as if they did.

[Capn Sunshine]

40. we won't be a party if we don't define some limits

and putting the Torture Memo author in charge of Justiice is over that line.
Wake the F up.

[Withywindle]

5. I'm so longing for another DUDQ Awards thread right now...n/t

[Guaranteed]

6. What's that? nt

[Withywindle]

8. Du Drama Queens

Parody threads, basically....Can you search the archives here? There were a couple of good ones a few weeks ago.

[Just Me]

24. There's some great DUDQ threads right now.

I mean, WOW!!! :wow:

[crispini]

13. Call a meeting!

If you build it, they will come. :evilgrin:

[blm]

9. Some are new to politics and government and just don't know that cabinet

choices are almost always unchallenged....period. The fact that Bush's are even being challenged in these positions is remarkable and historic in their own right.

[welshTerrier2]

23. were these war crimes?? they certainly were inhumane ...

hi blm ...

that's painting about as rosy a picture as you possibly can given the facts here ..

the facts you cite are true ... most cabinet appointments sail through ...

but Gonzales wrote the documents that gave cover to war crimes ... didn't he? whether he was told to write them or really believed what he did, is his conduct any less severe than some of the Nazis convicted of war crimes ??

it just seems to me that this is not a game of numbers where we count how many Democrats voted with us ... maybe i'm missing something here but i really believe Gonzales, bush, rumsfeld, cheney and probably some of the top generals would be convicted of war crimes in a truly impartial international tribunal ... the stuff they approved clearly violated the Geneva convention ...

i guess i just can't get my head around seeing the glass as half full given the circumstances ...

btw, i'm going to be posting Naomi Klein's recent article ... she was incredibly critical of Kerry and the campaign he ran ... i hope you get a chance to comment on it ...

[blm]

26. Yes, I am in agreement over Gonzales, but, that doesn't change the fact

that he is going to get confirmed, and some Dems will be choosing another battle to concentrate on.

I am sorry, I am a liberal first, but pragmatist comes in a close second.

[welshTerrier2]

28. here's my question ...

no need to apologize for being pragmatic ... "picking your battles" is always a reasonable approach ...

and if you were going to filibuster a cabinet nominee, you have to make damned sure you're on very solid ground ... of course, the republicans will talk about the "minority" obstructionist Democrats if they do filibuster ...

and i realize the filibuster may soon be used, at least once, over a Supreme Court nominee ...

but it seems to me, if you have, as Kennedy said, the smoking gun in the form of memos Gonzales either wrote or approved, and the crime is as serious as flaunting international law and basic human decency, there couldn't possibly be a more legitimate time for a filibuster ...

it may or may not be true that the Dems even will filibuster a Supreme Court nominee ... but it's clear that failing to stop Gonzales is sending a terrible message to many in the Party who genuinely believe most elected Dems lack a spine ...

even if they're wrong, there's something to be said for motivating the troops ... i, for one, think the situation is ripe for a filibuster ... if a torture supporting AG is not "the right time", what will be?

[ginnyinWI]

35. the fact is that our president is a war criminal. period.

The rule of international law says that the worst crime you can commit is a war of aggression, and that is certainly what the invasion/occupation of Iraq is.
Germany (Germany!) has indicted Rumsfeld for war crimes (but won't be able to get at him, unfortunately).
Bush is eagerly seeking to add more persons of that bent, who have no respect for the rule of law--so we get Gonzales.

So it isn't only the violations regarding torture. Don't forget the illegal war, a far worse crime against humanity. The war, and the torture have stained our once-noble country, and it will take a new administration and a 180 degree turnaround in our behaviors to even begin to erase it.

[googly]

16. With the huge latino population in Chicago, Obama might

take the politically pragmatic road. I think he is more
pragmatic than an ideologue.

[Guaranteed]

17. I think at this point he's probably feeling the pressure and looking

to show his supporters that he's not a pansy-ass.

I think he'll vote no.

[Malva Zebrina]

19. So let me get this straight

The Latino population is for Dr. Torture so that is why Obama is struggling with his own ideology,(and whoever said that ideology is not the noble thing to do?) if he has any, at all? Is that not saying something negative about the Latino population?

That is nonsense. It is saying that Latinos are stupid, uninformed and tacitly racist by insisting Obama appease their racism.

[googly]

29. It is a tactical mistake to let feelings overtake pragmatism if

one wishes to get to the top. We will soon find out what
senator Obama is made of, ideology or cold pragmatism.

Never underestimate the kinship minorities in US feel
for their own kind. Obama has little to gain by voting
against another minority candidate, especially if the
senate is moving towards confirmation of Gonzales anyway.
My guess is senators who have ambitions for higher office
will not antagonize any voting block.

It will be interesting to see how it all unfolds.

[Dr Fate]

25. They will try to Swiftboat Obama with or w/o that vote...

so he may as well do the right thing and vote against torture.

[googly]

30. I have to believe a fresh face such as Obama has little to worry

about a swifties type attack. I have not read of any skeletons
in his closet. His career is too young to have accumulated
anything bad in his bio.

[Dr Fate]

42. How soon we forget- they can MAKE IT UP. Remember the Swiftboats...

...or "Al Gore Invented the Internet" or "Bill & Hill killed Vince Foster/were chinese spies, etc?"

It does not matter how clean Obama is - all the media has to do is find one of his old girl friends or one of his old drug buddies- they can make up the rest.

I think we need to be on our guard a little bit more than you suggest.

[googly]

44. You are right, and I never said to let the guard down, as for Obama

the thrust of my posts is to say that Obama should not go
on record as having opposed minority candidates for cabinet
positions. THAT will come back to haunt him if he decides to
run for higher office. He correctly voted to confirm COndi.
He has little to gain and more to lose by opposing Gonzales
for a temporary cabinet position lasting less than 4 years.

[Dr Fate]

45. So sezzz the GOP & media.

If anyone is immune from being labled a racist, its a Black Democrat who votes against torture & lying- and repeatedly gives that as his reason.

Its all in how WE frame it- or how we allow the GOP/media to frame it...

We will have to agree to disagree.

[googly]

50. Fair enough n/t

[maxsolomon]

27. i just want an OPPOSITION party

& there's plenty to oppose. perhaps my math is off, but 25 senators voting against gonzales means 20 democrats voting FOR gonzales. that doesn't look like a spine to me.

face it: there's a HUGE percentage of us who are more anti-repuke than pro-dem. but let's say i get fed up with this corporatist democratic party which is just a kinder, gentler version of the coporatist republican party. where am i gonna go? nader?

[googly]

31. I understand how you feel, but I would rather undercut the repubs

by going along with the cabinet positions. They are all
temporary. It is not the SCOTUS life long appointment.
If you vote against one caninet position candidate, they
will find another scumbag as replacement.

I also think it was a strategic mistake to pick on Condi.
She got the senate approval anyways. And by picking on her
competency we antagonized a whole bunch of blacks. The
smart cold political calculation would have been to let
her pass. That would have undercut any points the repubs
picked up in the black community.

If our goal is a strategic win of presidency in 2008, the
best tactic is to not let emotions get in the way. Yeah, the
Boxer led 13 gave a lot of us emotional relief, but gained
little in strategic terms.

[ultraist]

32. Are you asking us to show restraint, strategize and pick our battles?

:nuke:

That takes ALL of the FUN out of it!

[googly]

33. LOL

[G_j]

46. no

I won't thanks.

I would hate to have a serious disease and have the Dem strategists treat it.
.. the finger tips are effected, don't treat it yet,gotta save our energy... next the stomach..not yet!... lungs..not yet, gotta save our medicine ya know
disease reaches the heart..OK now lets treat it..oops too late!
:shrug:

[Guaranteed]

48. KICK

:P Walt