who believes that Blue Dog dems are...

[Slit Skirt]

wolves in sheeps clothing

I think they are rethugs in disguise....they supported Bush's policies but not "our dem President"????

we need to call them out..they are not moderates...

sign in if you think they are republicans in disguise

[GrantDem]

1. They are left leaning republicans that the wacko GOP base would not nominate.

[stranger81]

6. Bingo -- blue dogs run as dems for the same reason Specter is now a dem . . . .

he wouldn't get elected again as a Republican.

[angee_is_mad]

2. I do, I do

they totally disgust me!

[NYMountaineer]

3. They dump their RINO's

They become our DINO's. I'd say we're in a much better position to do some party clean-up than the folks across the aisle, however.

[burning rain]

4. A lot are just against the worst Republican excesses of the GWB years.

Warmongering, burning contempt for the citizenry, Katrina, Schiavo antics, etc. They aren't good proggy doggies and I'd like to break out the older term "boll weevils" to emphasize that they're damn pests. Though I do realize unfortunately that in a number of cases they're about as progressive as one can be in their states and districts and get elected.

[Slit Skirt]

5. no way..I cut them no slack

blue dog?????whatever?
they are blood dollar democrats

[burning rain]

8. I say let Nancy Pelosi....

kneecap them, bring out the thumbscrews, or do whatever else it takes to get them to support the fundamentals like health care.

[invictus]

7. K&R. They need to be replaced in the primaries. n/t

[onenote]

25. by someone who can't possibly get elected?

Do you live in a district represented by a blue dog?

[Moochy]

9. Wild wolves

even!

[mikelgb]

10. Blue Cross Dems

[Nothing Without Hope]

11. I think they are corporate-owned puppets. They need to be replaced in primaries by

people who will actually represent the PEOPLE of this country.

[TheKentuckian]

13. It is easily possible to be out of step with the nation and fit just fine among those in

their specific electorate. Many of these states and districts have been between content and eager to vote Republican very consistently but BushCo went too far and we ran a bunch conservative enough to make these folks comfortable. You don't build majorities with ideological purity. The Republicans tried and it was dismantled at the first opportunity.

Are they bought and paid for? Sure, but you can't ignore that most of these folks come from areas that would generally be attractive to the purchasers. Otherwise, they'd never get away with it short of some heavy duty shenanigans. These people are not taking positions that have their internals crying bloody murder. Being angry, disappointed, and frustrated is totally understandable but refusing to look at the situation as it is can't be sensible.

[pinb1212]

12. A lot of them come from districts where the President

lost badly.Reelection IS important to maintain our majority.

[Slit Skirt]

14. what good is our majority i

if they are nothing more than obstructionists

[onenote]

26. stem cell research. pro choice

While the typical blue dog is a fiscal/corporate conservative, they often are more progressive than the typical repub. Take Jason Altmire, who knocked off Melissa Hart in 2006. She was loyal fundie repub who voted the repub line 94 percent of the time and opposed abortion and stem cell research, to the delight of the repub fundie base that wanted to make her a rising repub star. While Altmire leaves a lot to be desired on many issues, he's certainly no worse than Hart on any of them and on other issues, such as stem cell research, he's solidly in the Demoratic party mainstream (he votes the Democratic position almost 90 percent of the time, which is too little, but still better than a 94 percent repub member).

[Carl Skan]

16. By and large they come from would be Republican districts

and if you throw a true Democrat into those races it will just elect a real Republican.

[Ganja Ninja]

15. I would go so far as to say some of them are CIA/GOP plants.

Especially the ones from states with small populations where a vote can be easily rigged or manipulated. States like Montana.

[Carl Skan]

18. Huh?

Rehberg is a Republican.

Are you accusing Baucus or Tester of being a plant? Baucus is causing problems but he's been in office for 30-years. That would be quite an accomplishment for a plant.

[Ganja Ninja]

20. It's not a far fetched idea.

They do it in other countries why not here? And it really wouldn't be all that hard for someone like Baucus to stay in office for 30 years. As I said the smaller the state's population the easier it would be to control an election. I wouldn't put it past the right wing factions within American intelligence agencies to infiltrate their domestic political opposition. They could plant someone or recruit them after they get into office.

I put nothing past America's right wing. If they'll put anthrax in our mail system then it's hard to imagine where they would draw the line.

[Slit Skirt]

22. Bingo!

I think one of the things that are problematic with progressives is that we are surprised to what lengths republicans and right wing crazies will go. Perhaps it is because progressives are optimistic...it is in their nature....but we need to wake up and realize these guys are just obstructionists and are doing it under the title of "moderate democrats"

[Slit Skirt]

23. David Sirota and the Black Caucus make a great point

these guys in the finance committee are not representative of the entire US.
we are not being represented by these white guys whose (with the exception of New Mexico) constituents are predominently white and are sparsely populated. No representation for Blacks or Hispanics.

The white power structure is representing all of us.....no right not fair.

and Blue Dogs are the worst...why are they in control of those committees? Why did they farm it out to them to write these bills?

[onenote]

27. why not just put a republican in the seat if the elections are fixed

I'm not seeing any logic in your tinfoil

[Slit Skirt]

29. save the tinfoil comments...not necessary here

have you ever heard of rat-fucking...what a perfect way to screw over the democrats and the progressives and the democratic platform....put people in posing to be something other than they are

now wouldn't that just screw us....you can here the talking points now....

"Dems have majorities in house, senate and the white house and still can't get healthcare (or anything else) passed."

this is not so far-fetched..and we have to call these people out for getting into office on the coat-tails of this president, but then show more support for the republicans

[onenote]

31. an interesting theory, but most of the blue dogs have been in office for years

Only six of more than fifty blue dogs were elected last year. Most were elected during the time when the Democrats didn't control the House. Moreover, most blue dogs still vote with the party's position 85-90 percent of the time, while the repubs that would otherwise hold the seats under your theory would be voting with the repubs virtually all the time. I can't imagine any scenario where the repubs would give up fifty votes (and a proportionate number of committee chairs, etc.).

[Slit Skirt]

32. hey..they voted for tax breaks for the rich and the war

good enough for me...these blue dogs are obstructionists...period

and I am not sure of your 85-90 percent stat..no offense...just want to see the numbers on that

[onenote]

34. Here you go

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/111/house/party-voters/

Thus far this congress, six blue dogs have voted the party position less than 85 percent of the time. An equal or greater number of blue dogs have voted with the party at least 95% of the time. Most fall in the mid-range between those points.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending blue dog votes on any specific issue. I wish they were more progressive. But anyone who thinks that there is no difference between the blue dogs and repubs is ignoring the facts. Here is one: President Obama's recovery bill, the first bill introduced under his administration and a bill that, had it not passed quickly, would have defined his presidency in a particularly bad way, passed 232-195. Not a single repub voted for it. Around 38 blue dogs voted for it. If half of those blue dog seats had been occupied by republicans, the bill would have been defeated.

[Slit Skirt]

36. thanks for the link....also look at this

http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/07/31/blue-dog-donations-health-reform/Blue Dog opposition may be ‘underwritten’ by pharmaceutical giants

Typical “Blue Dog” Democrats — moderate members of Congress who have been the most ardent among Obama’s own party in thwarting ongoing national healthcare legislation — receive 25 percent more campaign cash from the healthcare and insurance industry than other Democrats, an investigation has found.

In fact, a Blue Dog’s average receipts from the medical industry was just $3,625 less than that of the average Republican. Republicans have worked to block plans to enact universal health insurance legislation, saying that it would restrict individual choice and lead to the rationing of medical care.

Blue Dog Democrats say they’re for moderate fiscal policy and aim to reduce the overall cost of a health insurance measure. It appears, however, that their ideological opposition is underwritten by the industry most affected by proposed changes.

Notably, the Blue Dog Political Action Committee has received lavish financial support from pharmaceutical giants Pfizer and Novartis; insurers WellPoint and Northwestern Mutual and the trade group American’s Health Insurance Plans.

The average Blue Dog got more than half (54 percent) of total 2009 financial contributions from the medical care industry. Its PAC has more than doubled in size since 2005 — at a time when both national Republican and Democratic campaign committees reported double-digit drops in funding.....more


they're all liars and SOB's
I give no slack to people obstructing health care...when the very dollars that allows THEM health care is out of my pocket

[onenote]

35. delete dupe

[Odin2005]

17. May Blue Dogs come from areas that would never elect a real Dem anyway.

[avaistheone1]

28. Then don't run as a Democrat.

if you are only going to support the Republican agenda.

[onenote]

37. except that they don't "only" support the repub agenda

Most blue dogs vote with the Democratic Party position between 85 and 95 percent of the time. Most repubs vote with the Democratic party position next to never.

Example that I've used before. The Recovery Act was a signature piece of legislation for President Obama and the Democratic Party. In the House, not one republican voted for it. At least 38 blue dogs supported it. If instead of blue dog Democrats, half of those seats in congress were occupied by actual repubs, the recovery bill would've lost.

I don't like the blue dogs position on health care, but anyone who thinks that blue dogs are indistinguishable from repubs across the board (and on some other issues that are pretty important) hasn't bothered to inform themselves.

[Moochy]

19. "never elect a real Dem"

So we might as well support a fake one, and not count on them for any support on important democratic issues.

pre-emptive defeatism helps blue dogs.

[depakid]

21. “Ye shall know them by their fruits”:

I think that's how the book goes....

Whether they bother to read that particular one is another matter.

[dgibby]

24. Here's my take on them.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/dgibby

[Slit Skirt]

30. that is very good...

I think I am going to send some of these posts to a few people in the house and senate

[Chisox08]

33. Just like the DLC they are Republicans who aren't ...

batshit crazy enough to be Republicans.