Did we win??? Lets check who brokered this deal!***The DLC

[bvar22]

These are the Democratic Senators who brokered the DEAL where the Democrats got NOTHING,
and the Republicans got 3 more fanatic Corporatists on the bench.


Joe Lieberman--DLC

Ben Nelson---DLC

Mary Landrieu---DLC

Mark Pryor---DLC

Ken Salazar---no DLC listing, PHenry rating -(minus)100

Kent Conrad---No DLC listing, PHenry rating -(minus)97.5

Robert Byrd---No DLC listing, PHenry rating -(minus) 60

These are the MOST conservative PRO-CORPORATE anti LABOR Democratic Senators in Washington DC.
Did they serve YOU, or their Corporate Masters?

The biggest objection that the Democrats had against Owens and Pryor were that they ALWAYS ruled in fovor of CORPORATE POWER.


Do you REALLY think that the Working Class (Democrats) got a deal?

If you WORK for a LIVING, you have been stabbed in the back by the Democrats who openly solicit BRIBES from those who OWN the Corporations!

[merwin]

1. Hence the reason they are called moderates. They wouldn't be moderates

if they voted 100% democrat all of the time.

I personally like moderates. I would vote for a moderate democrat (which, btw, is what Bill Clinton was). Usually the moderates are more willing to work with others than the far left are.

[JDPriestly]

36. "Far left???"

What is now refereed to as "far left" was once moderate Republican -- Eisenhower Republican. The "moderate Democrats" would have been considered pretty far to the right Republicans in Eisenhower's day. That's how much the political pendulum has swung. It is time for it to swing back. If today's equivalent of New Deal -- guaranteeing the economic rights of the people to jobs and food -- or civil rights legislation -- such as Gay marriage -- were presented to the Democrats of today in the Senate, many of them would reject it.

[LittleClarkie]

2. PHenry rating hold no water with me sorry

Byrd is cool. Any system rating him that low is myopic.

I repeat. They are not confirmed yet. They still have to get through a vote.

[bvar22]

11. Each their own.

I personally like the ratings.
They are evaluated on bills that have significance in the direction of America.
I notice that you have a conservative Corporatist in your sig line, so you don't mind if I discount your input?


I love Robert Byrd, but didn't he vote:

*not to contest the 2004 election

*FOR Alberto Torqmada Gonzales

*FOR Michael roundup the ragheads Chertoff

*FOR the Bankruptcy Bill

*FOR Death Squad Negroponte

*FOR MORE money for Halliburton and the War on the Iraqi People

*FOR drilling ANWR and REAL IDs

[LittleClarkie]

14. They are evaluated on bills that somebody in Patrick Henry thinks

has significance to the direction of America.

Others would prefer to do their own thinking.

(Looks at sig) Which one would that be? Dean or Kerry?

I'm also not into "ism" or "ist" labels either, really. Labeling someone means a person has put them in a box, and stopped thinking. I prefer to continue to use my brain.

www.vote-smart.org, for a COMPLETE list of voting records and interest group ratings.

[bvar22]

18. Fine. YOU check with the sites you like,

on these individual Senators and post YOUR research.

[LittleClarkie]

20. No thanks. I just offer alternative sources for people to go

get information so that they can do the research and think for themselves. I'm not going to tell them what to think either. Using objective tools, they can do that for themselves.

[bvar22]

23. Then you really don't contradict anything...

...in my original post.

Why bother?

[LittleClarkie]

25. Except that the chart Phenry provides is skewed to a particular pov

and not everyone wants to look at things from the pov of PHenry. So I provide a more neutral site for people to reference, one that shows all votes dispassionately. So people can do their own thinking rather than relying on a club that thinks it's a think tank to do it for them.

That's why I bother.

[havocmom]

3. The real fight is for the Supreme Court

The ability to filibster is still there and that will have a modlating affect on who gets nominated when there are openings. And openings are coming soon.

The fight was about the composition of the highest court in the nation. We still have a voice in that and that, my friend is a BIG win.

[bvar22]

4. NOTHING was preserved.

Do you think that the Republicans cannot challenge the filibuster ANYTIME they don't get what they want...Just watch.

Dems--0
Republicans- 3 more fanatic Corporatist judges on the bench!

[havocmom]

16. They didn't have the strength to get it through now and made a deal

If they try and do it again, Frist will have even less voice, people would insist on some serious ass kicking in the Senate. Only the most extreme of the base would sit still for it. The moderate repblican ranks would swell and they would do our work for us.

They see the writing on the wall. The extremism is NOT going over with the folks at home in most states.

[orleans]

38. that's the way i keep looking at it too. i can't help it.

i'm reading all these posts from folks that are happy about the way things went--it's a relief that we still have the filibuster option, but i'm skeptical that we'll ever be able to use it. and those three judges! omg!

[derby378]

5. Score: DLC - 1, Howard Dean - 0

God, we are so screwed over.

[LittleClarkie]

9. When did Dean enter the Senate

How are you seeing that this has anything to do with Dean at all?

[derby378]

17. Two points

1. Al From and the DLC luminaries hate Howard Dean's style and attitude, and helped torpedo his primary run.

2. DLC Senators usually vote for all the bills that Dean hates.

[Hippo_Tron]

6. Why is the PHenry rating an almighty source of how good a senator is?

Oh yea, BTW, Byrd was named senator of the year by the PHenry think tank.

[bvar22]

15. It's NOT almighty,

but it IS a very good quick reference on how our represenatives vote on important issues.

It doesn't take into account posturing on the floor or soundbytes for the people back home....only the votes.

[LittleClarkie]

19. Not THE votes -- SOME votes

The votes that are chosen are spun from a particular point of view. If one shares that point of view then they will think this is a good reference.

But not all of us share the point of view of the Patrick Henry Club.

And some prefer to actually use their brains.

[Hippo_Tron]

21. I think that some DUers use it as...

An obnoxious way to degrade some of our senators and representatives and make Dennis Kucinich and Jon Conyers out to be godlike. The thing takes into account one year's votes, not a lifetime record. Dennis Kucinich may look great on that chart but if I were going to make a judgement on him, I would want to know that he had voted YES on the constitutional ammendment to ban flag burning even though the vote hadn't been casted this year. Also, if I were going to make a judgement of say Russ Feingold, I'd certainly want to know that he voted NO on the Patriot Act and on the Iraq War Resolution. Neither of those votes are on the Patrick Henry chart.

[bvar22]

27. You are certainly entitled to your opinion.

...and there is more in depth information available. PHenry certainly has its shortcomings, and I wouldn't advocate its use to judge anyone's political career.

However, it is a GOOD quick reference.
Membership in the DLC is also a good quick reference.

With the exception of BYRD, PHenry hit the nail on the head with the allegiances of the other Senators listed above.

This post is not about the merits of PHenry. It IS about the agendas of the Senators who made this disastrous DEAL with the Republicans.

They GAVE AWAY 3 judges to the rabid Corporatists and PRESERVED NOTHING.
Perhaps YOU can research the other sites and provide evidence that these Senators actually represent Working Americans and haven't SOLD their votes to their Corporate benefactors.

If you can do that, be my guest.

[Hippo_Tron]

30. They kept similar judges from getting to the SCOTUS

Brown, Pryor, and Owen are awful and are not qualified to be on the bench, I'll give you that. But the bottom line is that we can't keep all of the extremeists off of the bench. Our only hope of that was getting Kerry elected and we failed to do that. What we did was make the GOP look like uncompromising extremeists. By the time it comes up to the SCOTUS nominees and Frist starts talking about the "nuclear option" most Americans will say "not this bullshit again". The political ramifications will be so bad that Frist will not even consider using the nuclear option and we will keep people like Brown, Pryor, and Owen from being on the SCOTUS.

[bvar22]

33. Those judges haven't been kept from anything.

Their nomination has NOT been removed. They are EXACTLY where they were yesterday.

Hopefully, your opinion about the political ramifications of using the nuclear option in the future are correct. I see nothing to support that opinion considering the current state of our CorpoMedia. But I DO sincerely hope you are correct.

[LittleClarkie]

28. And the same chart make Reps look better than Senators

because Reps can afford to be more partisan and ideologically pure. The House is a much more partisan place where majority rules and subtlety is wasted.

So the differences between the two houses are not taken into account either. Neither is the idea that some votes are more important to some of us than others. It is not objective. It is only valuable if one agrees wholeheartedly with the Patrick Henry club.

[orleans]

40. senate.gov shows who voted for what

just click on legislation and records. from the votes since january i found nelson from nebraska voted with republicans more than any other dem. (biden and his junior senator, carper, voted with the repukes far too often too!)

[KittyWampus]

7. Just Like A Broken Record. DLC DLC DLC DLC DLC

squawk DLC

[bvar22]

12. Do you DENY that this was brokered by

a core of the most conservative "lets increase the power of Corporations in the Democratic Party" DLCers?

OR

are you trying to cloud the issue.

WHO BENEFITS????
FOLLOW THE MONEY!!!!

[demwing]

8. We would have lost this fight, the nomination, AND the filabuster

Now we walk away with our greatest weapon intact, the Republicans are wearing the mantle of loser, and Darth Vader remains a character in a movie :)

You say we lost.

I say we win big.

[bvar22]

13. If you believe that the US Government and the Courts...

...should be MORE friendly to Corporate Management and MORE opposed to the Working American, they you did win big.

The weapon is no more intact than it was yesterday.

[NVMojo]

10. hmmmm, this makes some sense, more than just thinking it was so wonderful

[Ilsa]

22. We should change our nation's name to

United States of America, Inc. These are corporatist judges, to be installed by corporatist senators to advance a corporatist financial agenda. In other words, we're screwed.

[LittleClarkie]

26. What is a corporatist?

Are you against all corporations, or only some?

[bvar22]

29. I will respond since I used the word first.

Mussolini once said that fascism should be more properly called Corporatism.
Those who support the subordination of government to those who own the Corporations (the very RICH and the Investor Class) can rightly be called Corporatists.

Free Trade
Unrestrained Capitalism
Profits over People
Cheap Labor


The Bankruptcy Bill is a perfect model of the Corporatists at work.

[LittleClarkie]

34. So which one in my sig picture is the corporatist?

since up thread it was said that I have a corporatist in my sig.

[bvar22]

37. The answer to that question would take another thread,

but the quick version is that the Democratic Party produced a Corporatist Platform for the 2004 elections, and John Kerry was forced to run on that platform in order to secure funding from the Corporate Backers in the DLC during the Primaries. Personally, I know that the Senator and the Man John Kerry is more liberal then his campaign. His discomfort with some of the provisions in the Platform was obvious. He WAS in the same situation that John Dean is NOW. My heart goes out to both of them.

Corporatist positions:

*Expanding the Military

*Increasing the Defense Budget

*Free and unrestricted Trade is GOD

*NO effective stand AGAINST Corporate influence in Washington

*No REAL campaign reform

*More Corporate Welfare (fight outsourcing with Tax Breaks for Corps{laugh})

*NO Single Payer HealthCare

*Tax Breaks to encourage Corporate Environmental Responsibility (This one is ESPECIALLY outrageous)

*(This one is scary, but no mention of Corporate Ownership of the Votes)


Alot of the DLC Corporate influence in the Party Platform 2004 was NOT in the things they campaigned on....most of the influence was used to PREVENT Pro-Labor, Pro Working Class, anti-War. and anti-Corporate POWER topics from being discussed.

Like I said, stuff for ANOTHER discussion.

[Geek_Girl]

24. The DLCers Brokered the Deal

But Reid tried to broker similar deal

<snip>I offered Senator Frist several options similar to this compromise, and while he was not able to agree, I am pleased that some responsible Republicans and my colleagues were able to put aside there differences and work from the center. I do not support several of the judges that have been agreed to because their views and records display judicial activism that jeopardize individual rights and freedoms. But other troublesome nominees have been turned down. And, most importantly, the U.S. Senate retains the checks and balances to ensure all voices are heard in our democracy and the Supreme Court make-up cannot be decided by a simple majority.</snip>

Link

My guess is Frist had to take a deal because he didn't have the votes for the nuclear option. Politically he had to think this was more advantageous than to take a deal from Reid.

[bvar22]

31. I also believe that Frist didn't have the votes.

The Dems caved for nothing.

That is why I am questioning the allegiance of the Dems who brokered this DEAL.

Alone and BY THEMSELVES without Party Consent or Agreement, these members of the DLC were able to help the Republicans install 3 fanatical Corporatist judges to the Federal Bench.

[Geek_Girl]

32. No I don't think they've caved for nothing

Reid had to endorse the deal. Since he tried to broker a similar deal. He would have looked stupid otherwise and ultimately this stings the repugs were it counts, their base.

But we'll see what the Gang of 14 does come Supreme court nomination time. I'm a little worried that these guys will sell us out in the end.

[LoZoccolo]

35. What is the ratio of DLCers to non-DLCers amongst all Senate Democrats?

Also, what is the average PHenry rating?

Of course you should go find this out, it will only help you prove your point, right?

[bvar22]

39. No.

If you are going to contradict the data I have posted YOU neeed to go do the work.
Otherwise, your post is unfounded and a waste of bandwith.

Cheers

[LoZoccolo]

41. You've established nothing.

I'm not contradicting the data. I'm saying you haven't established yours. You're basically saying that there are only four DLCers in the Senate or at least no more than eight. If there are more than eight, than most of the DLCers in the Senate were against the compromise, and it's ridiculous to say that they're much of a threat to anything if there are less than eight of them.

:woohoo:

Peanut butter jelly and a baseball bat.

Anyways, you can say what I should do or what I should not do, but everyone sees my point anyways.

[bvar22]

42. Not even close.

you said:
You're basically saying that there are only four DLCers in the Senate or at least no more than eight. If there are more than eight, than most of the DLCers in the Senate were against the compromise, and it's ridiculous to say that they're much of a threat to anything if there are less than eight of them.:eyes:

That is not what I said, basically or otherwise. In the future, please quote me directly instead of making stuff up.


THIS is what I said (condensed and simplified):

The Democratic Party was BETRAYED by a small but powerful group of Senators with direct monetary ties to Corporate Contributions (DLC).
This group, alone and without Party approval or Consensus, brokered a DEAL that established 3 of THEIR judges (fanatical Corporatists) on the Federal Bench. They preserved NOTHING for the Democrats.

[LoZoccolo]

43. I'm not making stuff up.

Just because you didn't say it literally doesn't mean your logic doesn't imply it.

P.S. Everyone else can see what I'm saying, whether or not you try to save face.