This is it, Democratic Party, either Alito is filibustered or you are DONE

[Walt Starr]

This is my line in the sand. This far and no further. Either they grow a spine and filibuster Alito, or that's it, I refuse to ever vote Democratic again. Even if I have to file a completely blank ballot to keep that vow, I will refuse to vote for another Democratic candidate ever again.

This far and no further. Fight or die. That's all there is to this nomination.

I would rather have them fight now and get nuked than for them to not fight at all.

[papau]

1. I agree :-(

:-(

[Festivito]

64. Cutting off your head to fight brain cancer?!

Et tu papau? Cutting off the vote to fight bad party politics.

Do you remember that without Nader we'd have won 2000 hands down, first count. RepubliCONs would have been yelling how if they were in charge the DOW would have hit 50,000 even sooner. Some of them would be shouting this, today, from inside the World Trade Center.

We have to use our votes, not cut them off.

Run for office.
Find someone to run.
Convince someone to run.

Quit trying to cut the nuts off people you cannot replace with anything better.

[Flubadubya]

70. Well, at this point it's either cut their nuts off...

or just stand by and watch them cut ours off... not to mention the death of our republic as we know it and have known it for the past 200+ years.

I'm with Walt Starr all the way on this one. There comes a time when you must take a stand... choose you battles, indeed. This is the mother of all political battles... or at least it should be.

I propose a new battle cry...

BE DEMS OR DIE!

BRING ON THE :nuke: SHUT IT DOWN!!!!

[Festivito]

95. You need a better course of action.

You need to tell your rep or other reps that you will have them replaced. Not that you will cut your own nuts off. What? I this a scene from Blazing Saddles? "No one do anything or the black guy gets it!" While the black Sheriff holds a gun to his own feigned frightened face. It's a comic scene showing the stupidity of racists, this is not a comic scene pointing out the same thing about voters.

"Be dems or die" from a guy who supports NEVER VOTING DEM AGAIN???????????????????????????????

Be true to your vote.

[papau]

84. I fire entire Departments - and rehire - if the bad employee infection

can't be cured any other way.

The Nader movement was bull crap - the party had no problem with a Gore or Kerry run. It was not like 63 when SDS seemed the only option.

But not standing up and filibusting means the party is not worth shit.

I absolutely agree with your "Run for office.--Find someone to run.
Convince someone to run.-- Quit trying to cut the nuts off people you cannot replace with anything better."

And primary work for old farts is where you will find me next Spring!

But a serious lack of funds on my part to give to the party makes unlikely that I will be able to convince "party leaders" of anything

I hope the party will realize that the only way we win ANYTHING out of this is if we force them to change the rules - go nuke - so when we get in we can offset with liberals everywhere.

[Festivito]

94. You don't want to teach people not TO VOTE. They must vote.

What are you suggesting, if a RepublCON is running against a Dem and against no one else?

You will let the CON win?
You WANT the CON to win?
You want others to let the CON win?
You want what? ONE CON, ONE DEM? WHAT?

People will believe you, and they will stop voting. And your point is a bad analogy: Got an emp infection so you'd close the whole company, like it was your whole vote. Your logic is better than that. Party leaders are not going to listen to that.

Well wishing your PRE-primary work.

[papau]

96. A short post is hard to make clear - at least for me - I agree that I will

always vote Dem if the choice is Dem vs GOP.

I Disagree if you are saying that there can never be a point when new party to replace - not compete with - old party is due.

I see no profit to the left in multiple parties.

But I fought the Dems in the 60's over 'Nam, and I'll fight them again over civil rights if they do not defend.

The Iraq war vote was for permission to go to war if needed - and such a vote is not something I'd have a problem with. Indeed based on the lies told at the time, you'd have to be pretty sure they were lying in order to vote no. Some Dems were sure and got the vote "right" - but I have no problem with the rest of the Dems.

But the "infection" of a group of bad employees has happened in my career - and we outsource for a 12 months before rehiring and taking the job responcibility back. If our leaders in the Dem party are cowards, then "outsourcing" that leadership makes sense (Gov Dean was the 04 version of this). Green Party or Nader makes no sense in a 2 party winner takje all system.

While Perot's new party actually made sense as a replacement party in 92 - if that was what you wanted - in 96 it was just a 3rd party and did not make sense.

A mass movement 3rd party has to spring up quickly and be well funded so that the actual election is again a 2 party vote with one of the old parties replaced. If that is not going to happen, the primary is the only way to change things.

But the change in primary thing was me 25 years ago - now I am simply a helping hand (sponsoring yard signs and doing a walk about with literature)- I just do not any longer have the energy to run with the crowd, and I do not have the money to run!

and thanks for your best wishes!

:-)

:toast:

:-)

[drfresh]

104. I'm with Festivo. -nt

[Tesha]

109. What nuts? Isn't that the basic problem? (NT)

[Festivito]

117. No. Nutted don't run, and nutty thieves win.

That's the basic problem. This thread is about punishing the un-nutted for being un-nutted.

If you have the nuts, run.
If you don't, DON'T MAKE THE THIEVES WIN. Please.

[porphyrian]

119. Let's represent the 2000 election fairly.

Without Nader, rigged elections, voter apathy, corporate media and "moderate" Democratic policy, we'd have won 2000 hands down. Any and all of these factors played into it, and singling out Nader to blame is dishonest.

[Festivito]

121. Dishonest? Dishonest you say under a heading of fair?

What, one honest item is suddenly dishonest because of, get this, a list of other honest items. Two wrongs don't make a right. When did five right ideas begin to make a wrong idea? So bad that singling out one of the right ideas is a bad idea. :shrug:

Talk about unfair.

[porphyrian]

122. It's dishonest to single out Nader as the reason 2000 was lost.

I am not saying that Nader was not "a" cause of the loss in 2000, but that he shouldn't be singled out as "the" cause. Your "right" and "wrong" idea doesn't make sense in the context of what I'm saying.

Blaming Nader is easy and convenient, but not "the" reason we lost. It's a complicated issue, and it's intellectually dishonest not to recognize that. Think whatever you want about Nader, but don't present half-truth as fact.

[Festivito]

123. That is rude and ridiculous.

I am the person who singled out Nader in my post. I am not dishonest for singling out Nader as THE reason or even A reason for 2000. It may be incorrect, to you, and others, but it is NOT DISHONEST. And, I resent your implication.

I still have reason to hold Nader as A cause of 2000 loss that my first post uses for the ease and convenience being understood. Nader didn't know it would be so clearly close. Had Nader voters thought more deeply in 2000, as I did, because I would have liked Nader as well, the CONs would not have been able to call it a win.

Your notions of dishonesty, intellectual dishonesty, and presenting half-truth are ridiculous.

The fact remains that in 2000 had the Nader voters, (Nader supported openly by RepubliCONs in order to defeat Gore) voted for a person with a chance, Gore would have won handily. And, it can happen again with a bunch of disgruntled persons staying away, or voting third party in a fixed two-party system, because they didn't get their way and will be too proud to backtrack on what will become some new historically obscure point, the kind that started this whole thread.

[porphyrian]

124. Sorry, but I disagree.

And I didn't imply that singling out Nader as the reason we lost in 2000 was dishonest, I clearly stated it. I was in Florida in 2000, in Tallahassee, in fact. I watched what happened closely. I spoke with Blacks who were turned away from the polls. Nader was one of the least reasons Gore did not win. I recommend anyone who hasn't already view the documentary "Unprecidented: The 2000 Presidential Election" for more of what exactly went on.

You can believe what you like, but singling out Nader as the reason we lost the 2000 election is dishonest, intellectually dishonest and presenting a half-truth. It is not ridiculous.

The way to get people to the polls is not to attack or alienate them for voicing their opinions and dissent concerning the current Democratic policy of inaction. Nor does attacking and alienating those who supported Nader, however problematic hindsight has proven that decision. Perhaps the Democratic party should pay more attention to what they are doing to lose votes rather than ridicule those whose votes they've lost.

[Festivito]

127. Well, if you do waste your vote, it won't be for intellectual dishonesty.

Good luck.

[porphyrian]

128. I never said anything about my vote.

I said it was dishonest to blame Nader alone for the lost 2000 election, and that doing so and attacking people with valid feelings about the direction of the Democratic party was not a good way to get more Democratic votes.

[nadinbrzezinski]

125. Yes lets do so

Nader or no Nader Bush was going to win. It was a coup.

[porphyrian]

126. Exactly. - n/t

[Born Free]

108. As long as you reward bad behavior...

you continue to encourage that bad behavior, the only way to stop bad behavior is to stop rewarding it. The elected democrats are almost worthless, they refuse to stand up for anything, yet they keep crying because the American people don't trust them to protect them- well (as the the kids say it) duh!!! How can any elected democrat think the American people will ever trust them on security when they repeatedly run from any type of fight? Too man of the elected democrats are political cowards, plain and simple, there are no leaders that are willing to stand up and lead, they all want to hide throwing one excuse after another. Yeah, we can keep rewarding them, keep making excuses or we can stop supporting the bad behavior and let them know they need to start performing if they want our support. It's "Tough love" but the only way to force them to do something. The democratic party has many great people, people willing to stand up for America, people willing to sacrifice all they have to keep America strong and safe, unfortunatly they are not the democrats in office now.

[Festivito]

113. Not voting rewards BAD-der behavior.

Not voting rewards the GOP CONs. CONs love Dems getting advice like to not vote. Talk about DUH! Look at the partisan voting in Congress, better a pitifull Dem coward than ANY CON.

If you see a better candidate, vote for it.
If you don't see a better candidate, RUN for it, not from it.

VOTE. VOTE early. VOTE often(but not on the same day). But, VOTE!

[elehhhhna]

2. I'm in.

[Walt Starr]

3. Thanks. There's no reason to be loyal to the Party

if the elected officials in the party refuse to be loyal to us.

[NYC Liberal]

13. It's time to clean house with the Democratic Party.

Get rid of all those DINOs, pro-Repukes, pro-corporate, and SPINELESS "Democrats" and elect some true liberals who care about the people they are serving, not about catering to the Republifascists.

[leeroysphitz]

59. Past the time...

Remember them in the primaries. Vote for the challenger, send these people a message. It's the only tool we've got, it's the only thing they might respond to more than corporate money.

[ronnykmarshall]

76. Your sig line pic tells it all ...

No wonder the Astros lost!

[elehhhhna]

19. no joke.

i gave this it's 1st nom btw.

Lurking Dem stategists etc. need to see it.

[VolcanoJen]

4. Sign me up.

:thumbsup:

[Howardx]

5. been there for a while myself

n/t

[seabeyond]

8. if you have refused to vote dem for a while, why are you here?

[Howardx]

17. what business is it of yours why i'm here?

i dont troll, disrupt or naysay so i cant really see it being any of your concern.

[AllyCat]

75. Uh...here because of rule #1 in the forum:

1. Who We Are: Democratic Underground is an online community for Democrats and other progressives. Members are expected to be generally supportive of progressive ideals, and to support Democratic candidates for political office. Democratic Underground is not affiliated with the Democratic Party, and comments posted here are not representative of the Democratic Party or its candidates.

Have to admit, I'm one of these people too. Often vote Dem, never Republican, but I am a Green. Sometimes, the greenest vote is to vote for the Dem candidate (as in voted for Kerry, not Badnarik). This is a progressive community, not a Dem forum.

[Clark2008]

116. Key words are "other progressives."

One doesn't have to be a Democrat to be here, merely a progressive.

Just saying...

[whatever4]

6. *sigh* You're right, if they aren't "against" the nazis. Add me too nm

[AngryAmish]

7. Last warning

this guy cannot get on to spew his bigotry and hatred

[catmother]

9. i agree. n/t

[mestup]

10. Rightwing nuts have longed for this "fight." Let the fight expose them.

I've heard fanatical wingnuts tell Talking Heads they've been waiting for a fight. They want to come out - swinging their bibles over our heads. It's time complacent voters see what the fundamentalist crusaders are all about.

http://www.removerepublicans.com

[ollie79]

40. I can't take no more!

I am sick and tired, sick and tired of being thumped and talibaned with bibles.

We Fired up! We aint takin no mo!!!

[EndElectoral]

11. This could signal the end of the hardcore Dem's if they fail in this

[Walt Starr]

14. They are teetering on the edge of a straight razor

One slip now and it's all over.

Either they have the courage of their convictions or they are no different from the Republicans.

Now is the time to fight. If they do not, it's over.

[AllyCat]

77. Agreed. After watching my beloved Feingold in the Roberts confirmation

I have little hope for these spineless people. When Feingold sees Roberts 1) not answer questions, 2) not encourage the WH to release documents, and 3) have little experience as a judge and proclaim him "a man of integrity", I have lost faith in this party.

Call your Senators TODAY!

[kentuck]

12. They have declared war. They have fired the first shot.

They could have nominated a better person.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

Didn't * say Harriet Miers was the best person in the first place,

so now he's nominating this Alito dude, who obviously must be less qualified than Miers, if she was the best?

[MindPilot]

15. Agreed. We are in NLTL territory now.

NLTL = Nothing Left To Lose

[BL611]

21. If a had a dollar for every time I heard someone say that...

I'd be in the position to take full advantage of Bush's "tax reform", and yet there always seems to be MUCH more left to lose...

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

16. Agree and that goes for MODERATE REPUBLICANS too!!!!!

Arlen Specter, I am speaking to you. I want him sliced, diced and grilled in the judiciary committee for all to see then I want your 'NO' vote out of committee and 'NO' vote on the floor.

It's not just Roe, it's his opposition to FMLA too. Family values, my ass!!!

[enough already]

33. You can forget about Specter

Alito is from Philly. That is not a coincidence. I'm so fucking pissed about this. I insisted that the line had to be drawn on Roberts, but everyone said "no, we'll fight the next one." We're totally fucked now.

[montanacowboy]

18. Thanks Walt! count me in

That's it, it's now or never - either these Dems get their shit together or they can all fall as far as I am concerned. I am a life long Democrat and I am going to change to Independent or Green. They have shown us NOTHING, NOTHING, NOT A GODDAMED THING.

[converted_democrat]

20. K&R

Thank you Walt, thank you from the bottom of my heart.

[tx_dem41]

22. So if the leadership supports a filibuster strongly...

yet four senators (say...Pryor, both Nelsons and Blanche Lincoln) were to break ranks...then you will NEVER vote for a Democrat again.

Yeah...whatever.

[Walt Starr]

24. Yep, I'll never vote for another Democrat again

The GOP gets their shit together, time for the Dems to do the same.

Four Dems break ranks and I am done with the party.

This one is for all the money. No prisoners. Do it or else.

[tx_dem41]

25. Like I said...

whatever :eyes:

[Walt Starr]

29. Take whatever road you want. I sat back through Roberts. I sat back

through a lto of shit.

This is it. either they fight or they are through. I will not stand for the Democrats not fighting this nominee.

Filibuster, or I go another way becauyse there is absolutely no difference between the parties.

This is it. They put up or they shut up.

[FreedomAngel82]

39. Here's what you can do instead

Find better canidates to replace those who aren't doing their jobs. I'm still voting next year and in 2008 and for democrats. I don't want republicans to have this type of hold ever again. If you don't vote that has a huge possibility of happening and than we'll be even more screwed. You think it's bad now? Wait until they have the hold on the government for the next ten years.

[enfield collector]

50. I agree, the time is not right for a 3rd

party. we need to make the dem party reflect what we want

[WyLoochka]

110. The only way to do that is to

strike FEAR in them. If we want them to "reflect what we want" - we have to make them believe we will not vote for them when they "reflect" what the repugs want. Then, if they still do, we have to stick to our promises to ourselves and not vote for them - ever again.

They have been rolling over and supporting repug policies for 12 frigging years.

We have had NO representation. What good is it to work our asses off and donate to this one, donate to that one, in order to continue to send them there just so they can stab us in the back and turn around and do the repugs will?

I'm with Walt. If even one Dem dares to cross this line to support Alito, I will be finished with the Democratic Party. I HAVE HAD ENOUGH!

In order to assist Reid and Durbin in getting the Dems in line, I suggest we have a cattle prod drop shipped to them.

http://www.redhillgeneralstore.com/A24333.htm

The Hot Shot SS36 Cattle Prod features:
"Good" Economical Hot-Shot
Circuitry Type: Mechanical
8,000 volt prod
Repairable in field
Effective with most types of livestock
Unique safety clip - prevents accidental shocks
Uses six size "C" batteries (High amperage alkaline)
Overall length 36" Shaft measures 24"

Hot Shot SS36 Cattle Prod

A24333 $59.99 4 lbs

[DanCa]

23. I am usually not a one issue you voter but I agree with you on this one.

[Tomee450]

26. I agree

This man appears to be awful. The reporters are saying that he's called Scalito because he is so close to Scalia in his views. We sure don't need another Scalia on the bench. The democrats are hopeless if they can't stand and fight this one.

[Broken_Hero]

27. damn...

I don't know..well, hell, i'm a poker guy, i'm in...*shoves chips in*

They better do something about this guy, i haven't seen the dems all united against anything bush has done, all i see is a handful here and there, this is another "chance" for them to show us, that they actually care...

[bryant69]

28. What if some of them fight and others don't?

Also, that didn't take long.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[specimenfred1984]

30. How About Torture, War Crimes and Treason?

I can't stand any of those either but, if you don't vote dem who will you vote for?

The repubs will just nominate one bigoted liar after the other so why quit the democratic party because of that?

There are DINOs who would vote for any criminal so they can get some kind of kickback or because the DINOs are too fascist to take a stand.

How are you going to change that by quitting?

[LoZoccolo]

51. Yes, any seceder supports pro-torture Republicans.

5 Republicans voted against the anti-torture bill.
0 Democrats did.

Anyone who risks not stopping the torture doesn't care.

[UTUSN]

31. Oh Yeah, That'll Defeat the Wingnuts (Not) n/t

[Walt Starr]

35. Say whatever you like. There is a time for war and a time for peace

The GOP has now declared war. We fight or we die.

If the Dems decide to hide behind the couch, they don't deserve to be in office.

[tx_dem41]

56. Or in your case, "we fight or we give up". n/t

[Walt Starr]

57. Wrong again

The Dems fight, or I go join a team that WILL FIGHT!

[tx_dem41]

62. Praytell Walt...what team would that be?

The Greens?

[Walt Starr]

69. Maybe

Who knows, but if the Democrats fail to fight this nomination, then the Demcrats simply refuse to fight and voting for Democrats is a waste of time and effort.

[LoZoccolo]

32. Take a stand Walt!

Just like you did when you said you wouldn't vote for anyone but Howard Dean!

Oh hey...

[Walt Starr]

36. Take this one to the bank

If there is no filibuster, I will sign my Opus at DU because I will never again support any Democrat on any level.

[LoZoccolo]

52. Wow. It's not like people who took that position in 2000...

...are at fault for every single one of Bush*'s nominees to begin with, are they?

[Walt Starr]

58. Either the Democratic Party is an opposition party

or they are not.

If they do not oppose this nominee, I can only conclude they are not an opposition party and will act accordingly.

[LoZoccolo]

65. That fails to address my point. It is a non-sequitor...

...and by introducing this into the dialogue you are wasting our time.

[Walt Starr]

67. Then I suggest you stop answering my posts and you will no longer

"waste time"

:eyes:

[LoZoccolo]

68. You're right.

Every attention whore needs a john. I'll stop now.

[Walt Starr]

73. I don't believe you. n/t

[Wabbajack]

83. LMAO!!

Priceless!!

[cally]

34. I won't vote for the establishment Dems ever again

and that includes nearly all of the Senate and House. I will support the proven progressives but I won't fight or donate just because they are Dems anymore. For my entire life, I thought party mattered. I still do but this is my line in the sand. This is it. You can't count on me unless you stand up for our rights.

[FreedomAngel82]

44. That's why you research the canidates before you vote

That's what I do. I research the canidates and see how they are by their voting records etc. All you have to do is do like Dean suggested. Vote for more progressive people over Dinos like Liberman. Even Hillary votes right (well left I should say) more than he does.

[jim3775]

37. Let me see if i understand this

You are essentially saying: "if the democrats help the republicans, I am going to help the republicans".

In the american system of government a vote for a 3rd party is a vote for the republicans.

[FreedomAngel82]

38. Hear hear!

Maybe Reid knew something we didn't and that's why the democrats were silent on Miers. Saving up for the big fight. I hope so anyways.

[Arugula Latte]

41. I called the office of my Dem. Senator (Wyden) and said as much.

n/t

[Gregorian]

42. At least we all have to say it.

But I agree with the poster from Canada, just above.

You see, my line in the sand came twenty years ago. I said, to hell with the Democrats. And look what happened. And look where I am today.

Still, we can shout and threaten. Let my voice be heard amongst you!

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

43. You have fun with that one.

Are you going to take your ball with you?

[mzmolly]

45. Oh for gawd sakes. So we demand a backbone and lock in step thinking

at the same time? :eyes:

Democrats EVERYONE OF YOU AGREE WITH ME OR ELSE!

[Greybnk48]

46. I'm in Walt

If the SC is stacked to placate a small faction of the American public and the Dems don't fight to the death to support women's rights, I'm finished with them---all of them.

[DemExpat]

47. I tend to agree here, Walt

if they don't fight this, then they are useless.

DemEx

[philly_bob]

48. About lines in the sand...

What's on the other side of your line in the sand?

On the other side of my line in the sand is:

Democratic (i.e., non-Republican) control of one of the houses of Congress after the 2006 election, restoring the public's right to investigate and impeach.

I'm not sure whether a filibuster/nuke strategy is the best means to that end. It may be. It may not be.

Perhaps a delay-offense, assuming Sandra Day O'Connor hangs in there, would be best.

I'm totally pragmatic on this issue, and I'm weak on parliamentary procedure.

Just get the madman with the bloody axe out of the camp counselors' cabin, whatever it takes...

[ClayZ]

49. Two more, from this house, stand behind that line!

:kick:

[onenote]

53. ever is a long time

As I recall, Walt, you live in Chicago, which suggests to me that in 2006, neither of your senators is up for re-election and your representative in congress probably has a safe seat.

Come 2008, when Durbin is up for re-election and there is Democrat on the ticket running against the likes of George Allen, will you really sit it out? Would it make any difference if Durbin votes for a filibuster and/or votes against Alito? What if the Democratic presidential nominee is a senator that voted for a filibuster and/or against Alito?

onenote

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

54. To filibuster is to talk - Talk about Plame and Iraq!!!

I'm sure they could talk about a lot of corruption and treason in lying to start a war.

[LincolnMcGrath]

63. Great Point

Talk for a month about the Bush Crime Family. Talk about Ricky Santorum wanting birth control to be illegal again. Talk about Abramoff, Safavian, Frist, Delay, and don't forget to read over and over and over all the flip flop statements of the 90s GOP re; supporting the troops, and perjury.

[mom cat]

55. I think that they should be filibustering a lot of things. Someone has got

stand up to the unelected dictator. If the Dems can't draw a line in the sand, then maybe I will have to draw my own line.
We have the majority of the people of this country on our side. The buffoon on the throne should not be allowed to appoint a file clerk much less a primary arbiter of the law. The Dems must Stand up in a show of no confidence.
If they do show such courage, they will have the people behind them and go on to win in 2006 and 08.
If they duck this one, then the discontent will spread like wildfire, in spite of the best efforts to contain and control the rage.

[Norquist Nemesis]

60. I have a qualified ultimatum on future voting

Any Democrat who votes in support of Alito will not receive support (money OR vote) from me.

I'm not ready to dump the whole party. Who knows what the future holds on that. But those currently in elected office...well, they'ld better vote NO!

[dchill]

61. So...Walt. I take it you don't like this...

Sausalito guy? Me either - but filibuster or not, I'm just guessing that I'll probably vote Democratic again. Given the options.

[SlipperySlope]

66. I predict you will get your wish.

I would rather have them fight now and get nuked than for them to not fight at all.

This is exactly what I see happening.

[AllyCat]

79. Wish I had your optimism SS.

I just don't think many of them will fight. After Roberts, I put nothing past these murder-enablers.

[nashville_brook]

71. coming from Walt Starr -- pay attention ya'll

walt's no greenie. he's as rank and file as they come and i don't think he'd take that as anything but a compliment. i sure wouldn't.

[readmoreoften]

72. I agree.

If they don't fight the worst RW candidates and nominees then what is the point of having democrats.

[Tom Joad]

74. The Demo party did so little to oppose the Iraq War....

I think it is way too late for me. They STILL are doing nothing about getting the troops home. (I don't think plans for withdrawal to start, START, mind you, next year count as anything.) With the exception of a handful of Congresspeople, they are a complete waste of taxpayers money.

[Tony_Illinois]

78. I Understand The Frustration,

as I too am disappointed. However, your not ever voting Democratic again would be just great for W and the Republicans.

My view is that this nomination will, in fact, be successful and we will be stuck with the consequences. Although most Americans are not part of the evangelical herd, they are unorganized and do not speak with one voice as the Christ-O-Crats do. Until that changes, we will continue to see these victories by the right.

What I am most offended and troubled by is this intrusion into politics by the evil ministers of deception, e.g. Rod Parsley, who are calling the shots on the right. How delicious that these moralists are being led by the party of Ken Melman.

[Walt Starr]

86. If the Democrats won't fight this nominee

tell me exactly how they are different from the Busheviks?

[CrispyQ]

97. And that, exactly, is the 64 million dollar question.

How the hell are they any different if they don't oppose appalling legislation, an illegal war & atrocious nominations?

If the party no longer represents liberal values then what is the point in continuing to support them? I will support individual Dems on a case-by-case basis, but the entire party, carte blanche? No way.

I'm with you, WS.

[IronLionZion]

80. Or.....we could vote for the GOOD Democrats

we can watch for the ones who fight and re-elect them. And watch for the weak or corrupt ones and vote for the challengers during the primaries.

Dems don't march in lock step. If you want to be part of an organized political party, join the Republicans.

[eyesroll]

81. But what if the nomination fails in committee?

Or Alito is caught with his pants down and has to withdraw?

Or what if he has a heart attack and dies before his hearings start?

There will be no filibuster.

Your either/or says you'll still have to refuse to vote Democratic.

[Walt Starr]

87. That'll work for me n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

82. I will make a prediction based on history

within the next ten years, (asuming a hot civil war does not break out) a third party will rise... for very similar reasons as the Populists

Teh feeling that the Dems are betraying the base are increasingly common... so it will happen...

Ah for all them teachers who claimed that history does not repeat itself

[Triana]

85. Need to send this to EVERY Dem Senator, congresscritter, and the DNC

If we all wrote short and 'sweet' sentiments of a similar nature and BOMBARDED Dem mailboxes, phones, and email with it...MAYBE they'll HEAR something!

[sendero]

88. I'm willing to go so far ..

... as to say that any Dem in congress who, through action or inaction facilitates this wingnut gaining a position on the SCOTUS will never get my support again.

I'm not bailing on the Dem party because, as disgusted as I am with especially the Senate, I have no where else to go.

[Czolgosz]

89. I agree (wish there was an effort on Roberts who is no less activist)

[arwalden]

90. Even In Local Elections? Even In Presidential Elections?

Wow! That'll really teach 'em a lesson! :eyes:

I share your frustration with that nominee, but I don't understand how not voting ever again (ever, ever, EVER) will solve anything.

What if a new Democratic candidate comes along that you really like? You're just going to piss on him or her because of some desire to get revenge on today's Democrats in DC?

[eyesroll]

91. Fuck my Alderman!

Go to hell, Water and Sewer Commissioner!

[triguy46]

92. If not now, then when? What will it take if they don't filibuster scalito

[Alcibiades]

93. Natural consequences

How will the nation learn not to vote Republican if they never have to face the consequences? Yes, OK, have a confirmation battle, but when it's over, Alito will still be on the SCOTUS. No matter what, the Supreme Court is headed for extreme right wingerville. When they start handing down crazy "activist" decisions, we need to remind people that this is what you get when you vote Republican, and that goes the same for every time a soldier dies in Iraq, every time we have a global depression, etc.

[papau]

98. And going Nuke now will make changing back a hell of a lot easier when

we get a simple majority in the Senate plus the White House.

[mom cat]

99. But we didn't vote dimson in. It was stolen.This is not a lesson we

deserve.The consequsnces will be brutal and perhaps deadly for what little democracy that remains.
Now is the time for the Democratic party to stand together.. not lock step. but with the determination that the voters deserve.

[depakid]

102. It'll take an economic crash

The ONLY thing that ignorant and apathetic Americans understand is when THEY (each of them) are personally harmed to the extent that they're forced to make the connection.

And the one thing you can do to hurt Americans- more than any other people- is to take away their fat and happy routines.

Serious economic crashes have a way of doing this- and Republican fiscal and trade policies virtually assure that this is going to happen- the only question is when.

[LoZoccolo]

103. OK Pol Pot, you got it.

Time to punish people, even the people who didn't vote Republican.

[bettyellen]

100. I'm only supporting Dems who fight this nomination with all they got.

and this party better rally, because Dean ot not, they get not another penny from me until i see them get their shit together.
anyone who gives this guy a pass is going on a list that i'll carry around in my wallet for the next three years.

[Joanne98]

101. Agree

[bliss_eternal]

105. I'm with you my friend--

Let's see what happens. In the meantime, I'll be fighting. Let's hope the Dems will too...

If not--god help them.

[Warren DeMontague]

106. If we don't fight this, what the fuck WILL WE fight for?

Seriously. I'm with you, Walt.

[IndianaGreen]

120. Appeasement has become a way of life for the Beltway Democrats

It is hard to develop a spine after not having one all these many years. We should have impeached Reagan for Iran-Contra, but chose instead to leave him off the hook.

[Nothing Without Hope]

107. An important element of strategy: Alito threatens MUCH MORE THAN ROE:

by this extremist candidate. He is on record for having opposed many basic civil rights and even many people who oppose abortion will be appalled by some of his radical positions. We must gather the documentation, organize it, and blast the public, the media, and ALL members of Congress.

See these two threads for more info as well as (in a reply) links to THREE PETITIONS to defeat Alito:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2204776
thread title (10/31): Why Alito? Booman explains: Roe destroyed, Bush’s crimes buried. Petition:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2206263
thread title (10/31): Not just Roe - Think Progress gives ALITO's awful civil rights positions:

And also the insight and advice in this piece at Steve Gilliard's blog:

http://stevegilliard.blogspot.com/2005/11/cry-for-help.html
(posted by gaije, Mon Oct 31, 2005 at 03:28:53 PM PDT)

(snip)

With this nomination, Bush is forcing Republican senators to go on record for or against Roe, as they enter the 2006 campaign season. Two thirds of Americans support Roe v. Wade. The Senate knows that. Any senator who votes for Alito will be saying good-bye to all those votes. Moderate republicans, swing voters, countless previously apathetic voters, will be going Democratic. The Democratic party will be galvanized around a single issue like it hasn't been in years, and its coffers overflowing. For a GOP senator, that's no good, it's no good at all.

Vote against him though, and they'll alienate the religious right. All that reliable fundraising, voter turnout & volunteer manpower down the drain. That's no good either. Apparently, someone forgot to tell Bush he's not supposed to put them in this position (Maybe that was Scooter's job.).

(snip)

Democrats are not going to be able to get behind this one, unless they're looking to retire.] Roberts they had to give a little benefit of the doubt, but this one's just impossible. The nuclear option's not going to fly on this one either. Frist's power is somewhat diminished, thanks to that pesky SEC investigation (so many investigations these days, so hard to keep track!). The GOP rank and file are caught between a rock & a hard, hard place here. They may just be thinking a fillibuster's their best out. How many do you really think are going to be willing to fall on their swords for the least popular (and worst) president ever? Their much vaunted "message discipline," has been slipping away for weeks, as they've realized Bush's ship is sinking, and they'd better jump off well before November 2006.

The thing to do here, is to base our opposition to Alito on everything but his anti-Roe potential. It'll take the GOP by surprise, they'll be all prepared with their "litmus test," talking points, and defenseless in the face of other questions. It also offers them some cover for a no vote.

(snip)

This blog piece ends with a suggested list of NON-ROE topics on which Alito has demonstrated extreme views that need to be publicized. It's much the same list, re-worded, as in the Think Progress list given in the opening post of this thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2206263
thread title (10/31): Not just Roe - Think Progress gives ALITO's awful civil rights positions:

Let's research, organize and frame talking points around the many outrageous positions Alito has taken. Then blast them to the media, the public, Congress, and take this to the wall. There are reasons to believe that if we give them an out (i.e., reasons besides Roe v Wade opposition), at least some moderate Republicans will join this fight.

And we must INSIST VEHEMENTLY that ALL the Dems stand against this would-be destroyer of civil liberties.

[MrBenchley]

111. Geeze, Walt....

considering you also wanted to pretend you needed guns to fight off the freepers....

[JNelson6563]

112. If we lose you Walt

the party will surely dissolve.

Ugh. :eyes:

[mmonk]

114. Yes, this is mine as well.

[Strawman]

115. The reaction to this post is telling

Personally, I don't know what I will do if there is a cave in on Alito. Regardless of what happens, I will support Democrats who are strong on the issues over "electable" Democrats who have their finger in the wind. I will reward Dems (and others) who try to break the spiral of silence about how our society rewards the rich and powerful at the expense of everyone else.

Whether I share your plan of action or not, you can be damn sure that I won't be critical of the sense of urgency you bring to this issue. This is the time our representatives need to put up the fight of their lives and if they don't, we need to face reality and find leaders who will fight for us. Some people are afraid to fight the Republicans. They're afraid of a showdown on the central issues. They think we need to try to be all things to all people, deliberately ambigious, "mainstream," and electable. Anything just to the left of awful is good enough. Push them to put issues first and real world outcomes and results first, and they'll turn against you or try to blame the sorry state of the status quo on the likes of Ralph Nader. I didn't vote for Ralph, but to blame Nader for a Dem cave job here is not just ironic, it's a pathetic counterfactual. And it's pathetic for people to go after people like you who just want the Dems to be accountable and who want to fight the Republicans and stand up for our constituency.

I think we can all agree that a cave job here would be awful. BUt let's not turn that into a self-fulfilling prophecy either. I'm going to support the Senate Dems and expect them to resist this nomination unless they give me reason not to do so. If they don't, you won't cath me pointing any fingers at the people who are justifiably pissed off about it.

[recoveringrepublican]

118. Same here. They crossed my line awhile back, but this

may redeem some of them for me, well a little.

[philly_bob]

129. Reid's closed senate maneuver

A good example of strategic flexibility, bringing attention back to WMD lies.

In public, wait till Alito's performance at the hearing.

Privately, we expect him to be a right-winger.