okay talk me off the ledge...

[jackster]

after that 75-25 vote I'm considering unbecoming a registered DEMOCRAT today.

Spineless, immoral, back-stabbing, face-savers.

I've had it!

How can we get through to these people?

First these "filibusters" that aren't really filibusters, now this.

Enough is enough.

[againes654]

1. I would but....

I am on the same ledge you are.

[backscatter712]

51. Same here.

I joined the Democrats because I believe in the principles and the people of the Democratic party.

The politicians that are supposed to represent us have been a bunch of sniveling proto-fascist quislings. I've had it with them.

I'm out on the ledge with you.

Someone give me a reason why I shouldn't jump. Why should I continue to support these spineless sacks of shit? When I joined the Democratic party, along with millions of others, and put the Democrats in control of the leadership of Congress, I sent them there with an expectation that they would end the war in Iraq, fight for our liberties, and come back either with their shield or on it.

I'm sick of "bipartisanship." Being bipartisan with the Republicans as they've become today is like being bipartisan with the Nazis. You can't compromise with these fuckers. To paraphrase from The Terminator, they can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until we and our liberties are dead.

Why don't they fight?

[TwilightGardener]

2. Please. They're not going to go to the mat for a stupid ad. You're making WAY too big a deal here.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

7. Stop being an apologist for the indefensible

They should have taken the issue from the Republicans and re-framed it by saying that the government has no right to condemn free speech just because it's insulting to a public figure.

They failed to stand up for the First Amendment at a time when there would have been little cost to do so.

The anti-MoveOn hysteria is completely media-generated, not some spontaneous mass opinion.

[TwilightGardener]

13. I'm not being an apologist--I'm just not joining the mass hysteria.

This has NOTHING to do with the first amendment. MoveOn can still buy ad space, they can still say "betrayus", all they want. Get...a...grip.

[AuntPatsy]

29. Its not that simple, because you see, the message became lost in the shuffle

where as MoveOn's ad now just became almost non existant to the media by the Dems not reframing this obvious ignorant and wasteful attack on someone doing the exact same thing the repubs themselves have done in the past present and will obviously continue to do so while in a way ensuring they are not the ones being laughed at.

[TwilightGardener]

38. I wish Boxer's amendment had passed--it didn't. I refuse to make a

big deal about the Cornyn amendment--it was a stupid political stunt. Many worse things are going on now--I refuse to give this too much attention and importance--that's what the GOPers want, and we're giving it to them.

[AuntPatsy]

72. I would have to agree and I myself fhave fallen for it all while the real crimes

are being ignored for the time. your right, it must be what they want.

[AuntPatsy]

97. I was wrong earlier, this whole stunt could be a blessing in disquise.

And I think it is up to "us" the people to ensure it continues to benefit us.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

30. It's the symbolism of it

It's the Republicans going, "Bwa-ha, we can make you condemn a mild insult to one of our guys with a Congressional resolution, but you can't or won't do a thing about our army of hysterical liars, rabble rousers, and slanderers."

[ljm2002]

49. Precisely!

Good synopsis.

[TwilightGardener]

52. Sure--it's annoying to see us in this position. But it's only symbolism--no law

changed today. Important to keep perspective.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

56. "Only symbolism"

I guess you don't have a clue about how powerful symbolism can be.

It was VICTORY symbolism for the Republicanites. You can be sure that THEY don't think it's insignificant.

[TwilightGardener]

59. Actually, it won't help them much--they're just desperate for a distraction--

and MoveOn gave it to them. Polls after Petraeus's appearance haven't moved at all. No one cares about what he said. And since many Dems voted to condemn the ad, it takes any partisan damage out of the amendment.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

Partisan damage?

No, I think it will just decrease the number of Democratic rank and file members who are willing to work hard for Democratic candidates.

By refusing to stand up to bullies, the Democrats are heading in the direction that the Whigs took in the 1850s.

[global1]

62. It Has Everything To Do With The First Amendment......

maybe it won't effect MoveOn - but others that would consider doing a similar ad - might not do it because of todays vote. It's just another notch up of the heat in the pot of us lobsters. We were thrown into cold water and slowly they are upping the heat until we just succumb to the boiling.

I got to ask this question - what was at stake for Dems if they voted against this amendment? What do they have to lose if they voted 'nay'?

I don't see a downside to a 'nay' vote on this amendment - am I missing something?

This vote will come back to haunt the Dems after the nominee's are selected and we get into the heat of a presidential campaign.

This MoveOn ad was the only thing that the Repugs had to hang their hat on last week because everything else was bad news for them. I can't believe that they took this thing so far and they actually won the vote on this.

It just goes to show you how powerful they are and how weak the Dems are - and the Dems are in control. Right?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

66. Exactly! There would have been no downside to voting "nay," especially if

they had gone on the offensive, saying that it was a vote for free speech and coming right out and saying that the Republicans were acting like a bunch of crybabies.

[TwilightGardener]

70. Argue about the political fallout--that's debatable. But there is no First Amendment

infringement here. None. Your saying so does not make it so. MoveOn can run any ad it wants, anywhere it wants, as long as it meets the news organization's conditions to be published. You are overstating the importance of this amendment, and giving it more attention than it deserves.

[global1]

81. Again - You Are Right - Anybody Could Still Run Any Ad Their Little Wallet Desires But......

the point I'm trying to make is that their might be other organizations, causes, individuals - that would like to say something of the level of MoveOn's Betrayus Ad - but now might think twice and decide not to do it because of the events in the Senate today. No - this vote did not take away First Amendment rights - but it is just one of those stepping stones to maybe ultimately put more restraints on people. This is how it happens - it is a slow inching along - a nick here - a nick there and then - you look back and what was once a right is now gone. Don't we have other examples of this with *Co?

[global1]

90. Just An Afterthought - Before This Vote We Had CBC Fire Dan Rather .....

political infringement - WH wanted him silenced. Again - slowly but surely - we see things like this - when its all said and done and added up will hit the First Amendment.

[gilpo]

84. My Email to Klobuchar this afternoon

Dear Senator Klobuchar,

I would like to express my deepest disappointment in your vote this afternoon to condemn the advertisement run in the New York Times by moveon.org. What gets me about this is your total lack of regard for the First Amendment to the Constitution. How is it appropriate for an elected official to condemn free speech? Shame on you, Mrs. Klobuchar; we elected you to stand up for the constitution against the Republican attempts to subvert it. You repay the citizens by voting with the very Republicans you should be fighting. It is no wonder that your collective approval rating is now below 11%. I am disgusted.

Respectfully,

gilpo

[StarryNite]

20. You have to look at the big picture.

If the Dems won't even stand up to the repubs on something like this then how can we ever expect to see them stand up to them on the really big issues? The Dems just rollover for the repubs on everything. This never even should have become an issue but since it did it would have been nice to see the Dems grow a spine.

[TwilightGardener]

31. It's not a matter of "standing up"--it's a matter of distancing themselves

politically from a toxic ad. That's all. I wish it hadn't come to a vote, I wish the Boxer amendment had passed instead, I wish MoveOn had used better judgment to begin with. Oh well. We move on.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

39. "Toxic ad"?

It was a mildly cheeky ad that people barely noticed till the Republican pundits began yelping like whipped puppies over it.

Then the Democrats, as they usually do (cf. Wellstone memorial service) rushed to soothe the poo' widdle Wepubwicans hu't feewings.

Never mind that the Republicans turn out gallons of toxic sludge on dozens of media outlets on an hourly basis.

[TwilightGardener]

40. Yep, toxic, politically-speaking. Unwise. Not saying it's fair for GOPers

to make a big deal about it, but nothing is fair in politics.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

53. Who cares if it's politically unwise if it's TRUE?

:banghead:

It's all a game to some people.

[TwilightGardener]

54. I didn't think the ad was true. Just because you agreed with it doesn't

make it true.

[Blue_Tires]

99. +1

[AndyTiedye]

64. Because Democrats Must Always Make Nice, While It's Always OK For Republicans to Play Dirty

That's because the Republicans own the Media, and the Media makes the rules.

[TwilightGardener]

71. Politics ain't beanbag.

[AndyTiedye]

77. Yes it Is, But Their Beanbags are Full of Lead Shot

[StarryNite]

75. You are correct

What it boils down to once again is the hypocrisy of the thing. That and the fact that the Dems won't stand up to the repubs. So the repubs once again get away with taking the focus off the real issues by making an issue of a non issue. In the meantime, the bloodbath in Iraq continues, the dollar dies, and the war drums for Iran keep on banging.

[damntexdem]

87. You're giving me more reason to donate more to MoveOn.org.

BetrayUs applies to more than a general. It also applies to the Dems who voted to condemn MoveOn.

And far from toxic, the ad was correct in predicting the basics of what would be said. And the polls show that most Americans basically agree.

[JVS]

22. Why the hell are they even voting about an ad

they are off task and they suck

[TwilightGardener]

35. I wonder why Harry Reid couldn't stop this? Or, did he WANT to give

Dems a chance to condemn this ad, for political cover? Hmmm.

[Matariki]

33. Voting NO is hardly 'going to the mat'

[TwilightGardener]

43. They wanted to get away from MoveOn and the ad. That's a political

judgment that you may disagree with, but in the end it's not going to amount to a hill of beans.

[brentspeak]

3. Who cares about this?

Another DUer correctly described the Cornyn resolution as "political fluff"; it's part of the Senate game that's been played for over 200 years. All that matters is that the Democrats continue to push for substantive things like they did for Webb's bill from last night. There's an election next month, if you recall; more seats for the Democrats means that Webb's bill -- and more -- will finally pass.

[Robbien]

10. This is not just this. This is a huge trend of DLC/BlueDogs working closely

with GOPers and refusing to even allow other Dems to know about their secret negotiations with GOPers.

There is an ugly cancer growing in the party.

[Greyhound]

34. Can we please stop calling them DLC and or "blue dogs" and name them what they are?

Fascists working toward the death of our nation.

[Robbien]

47. I like the name that some blogs are pushing. Bush Dogs

They are just corporate lobbyist lackeys who curry favor with GOPers every chance they get.

[loudsue]

60. from WITHIN the democratic party.

....just had to finish that sentence for you...

[Greyhound]

65. Thanks. n/t

:kick:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

11. People who care about what their country's turned into.

[jackster]

14. a voice of reason, thank you...

I would not be so emotional, however, had I not read the words of Boxer and Durbin on the Senate floor asking why the SEnate wasn't up in arms when John Kerry and Max Cleland were smeared?

It might be fluff, but god damn it 75 to 25? This is an insult. That means that 1/2 of our "Democratic" senators agreed with the hypocrisy of this smarmy move....

Maybe it's just the straw that broke the camel's back for me....

[ljm2002]

57. It is exactly the straw that broke the camel's back for me...

...because our Democratic senators have managed to make 90-lb weaklings look good.

They are afraid of being smeared by the MINORITY party, and they can't get a vote condemning Swift Boat tactics against decorated vets, and still they don't have the 'nads to fight back. Screw 'em.

I honor the Dems who did fight back, but I'll not stand silently by while the Senate condemns free political speech. Not only no, but HELL NO.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

17. It's not fluff. It's the Republicanites demonstrating proudly how they can

wrap the invertebrate half of the Democratic party around their little fingers.

The symbolic significance of this vote goes WAY beyond its substance.

What is there that the Dems won't cave in on?

[leftchick]

24. invertebrate half ?

more like 3/4. Wait let's use percentage, 97% invertebrate.

[OzarkDem]

19. They're batting zero

They haven't done shit in 7 years. Please stop pumping sunshine up my skirt.

They're has beens, useless. They have never produced any legislation of value and will not do so before the next election. They will continue to give the GOP whatever they want.

[rucky]

21. it didn't have to go to a vote

and it didn't have to pass.

The only thing I care about is: why the hell does the US Senate care?

[Greyhound]

26. Care to make a wager on that? n/t

[Trisket-Bisket]

27. Well stated.

The political naivete here is astounding.

[Zodiak]

4. The one thing Repukes and DLC-type Dems agree on

They hate liberals. Hate them to the point of running them out of their own party.

...and it is working.

[rudy23]

92. Absolutely. They're trying to throw us off the ship before the '08 elections.

They're overconfident that we'll climb back on board to vote for the Dem candidate, so they're only interested in showing how well they can serve Republican interests.

[Robbien]

5. I am now officially registered as No Party Affiliation

Dems meeting secretly with GOPers to vote yes on the FISA warrantless spying vote was the last straw on my camel's back.

[leftchick]

12. me too

though my last straw cam when impeachment was removed from the table. All of the other insults and insanity just add to my conviction that I was right.

[damntexdem]

83. We don't register by party in Texas. But I wouldn't unregister as a Dem for this reason.

However, nor would I try to talk others out of unregistering as Dems for this reason. That is for the same reason that I argue that the peace movement needs to keep a distance from any political party -- politicians have their own interests that may often conflict with those of the peace movement, or of any other movement. As I have said on another thread, I DO stand with MoveOn.org.

[spanone]

6. here, hold my hand, let's jump together.

[leftchick]

8. "How can we get through to these people?"

um, unless you are a corporate "person" you can't.

[superkia]

46. Thats why I support Kucinich, hes my only hope for change in politics.

[truebrit71]

9. I would but I'd be lying to you....

They're all about as useful as a kick-stand on a jackass...

[quinnox]

15. go ahead and become a damn green

yea right, there is no difference between the parties. Jesus, anyone that has paid attention to the past years knows that is a load of crap!

You aren't a democrat to begin with if you would leave the party over this!

[jackster]

23. In my heart I will always be a Democrat

whether or my registration says so

and I've ALWAYS believed that you stay with your party come hell or high water. Well hell and high water have come and gone and we're at a crossroads. This is about what's right and true.

Thankfully, I'm in Massachusetts so I know that my senators and congressman usually vote exactly as I would, but I don't know that I can continue to support a party that can't find its spine much less its soul.

[quinnox]

32. the Democrats are the only game in town

And I think you and everyone else with sense recognizes that.

But its your choice and I suppose an independent party affiliation might be the way to go if you are that disgusted with the dem party.

[Raksha]

67. Well, it's about time they STOPPED being the only game in town!

Anyone interested in starting a Progressive Party? Because I'd join it in a heartbeat at this point. I am beyond disgusted!

[backscatter712]

74. Fuck it, it's time to throw this game.

If these quislings are the only game in town, I'm going to stop playing.

If the Democrats don't start obeying their base, then the Greens are going to take their base. Is that what the DLC wants?

I WILL help sabotage this party if it doesn't start representing true progressive interests. If getting them in power means we'll see only DLC neo-lib trash policies, I don't want them in power.

Maybe that's what it takes to get the assholes in power to listen to the base - some actual threats of desertion. Don't think you can keep the majority without the progressives. If you drive them out, you'll be the minority again.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

25. My first vote was for McGovern in 1972

I have never voted for a Republican presidential candidate, although I did vote for Nader in 1996, out of disgust for NAFTA and welfare reform, but only because I knew that Dole wasn't going to win.

I have voted for exactly ONE Republican in 35 years of voting, and that was Mark Hatfield, who was one of the last of the old-time Oregon Republicans who believed in peace and environmentalism.

I was active in the 1980s until I got frozen out of my local chapter by the local DLCers who objected to my objecting to aid to the Contras.

I came back to life after the 2000 theft and was active in GOTV activities in 2002 and 2004.

If I want to be disgusted with this quivering pack of corrupt cowards, I've earned the right to be disgusted.

[quinnox]

36. fine

That seems reasonable.

[OzarkDem]

16. Those cowards are not Democrats

they don't represent the values and ideals of the Democratic Party. They are candidates of convenience who, for the most part, must be pretty brainless.

They've decided to throw their trust and loyalty to a party (GOP) that will betray them time and again.

They've decided to support legislation that is highly unpopular with voters and the American public.

They get fooled again and again and again.

They won't be around much longer, voters have learned their game and will dump them next time around.

[rucky]

18. after the primaries.

at least while there's still one or two to pick from.

[debbierlus]

28. I can't. Your thread is gonna get shut down. We aren't allowed to defect or talk about a 3rd party

Per the board rules.

DU will allow debate about unpopular dem policies but NOT debate about leaving the dems or supporting a different party.

And, the dems are FORCING us into this place. DU is what it is...however, they run the risk as becoming as empty as the conservative sites by this policy.

[FiveGoodMen]

44. Maybe it should be 'democratic Underground' -- small d

If the party who call themselves Democrats turn out to be nothing of the sort, should we be siding with them or with democracy?

[backscatter712]

76. Maybe Democratic Underground should become the Progressive Underground.

Skinner would have to tombstone at least half of DU's members if the current trend continues.

[loudsue]

85. Maybe we could change the name to Democracy Underground.

We're sure not getting any (democracy) with the democratic party, anymore than we are with the repervlikins.

[valerief]

37. Couldn't they just not vote at all rather than vote yea? nt

[ljm2002]

41. Well I just did the only thing I could think of...

...which was to donate to Moveon.org, and then sending them an email letting them know why they were getting a donation from me now, and encouraging them to keep up the good work and expressing my hope that they'll be able to step up their ad campaign (and their exercise of free political speech) with the extra donations they receive.

I also emailed both of my Senators and let them know the same thing: that I donated to Moveon.org, and why.

On edit:

I very much hope that a lot of folks will be inspired to donate to Moveon because of this, thus spinning a defeat into victory. Because what better way to fight back the Senate's ridiculous resolution condemning free political speech, than to make sure that Moveon has the wherewithal to do MORE of the free speech that so scares our ruling class.

[The Count]

42. Ummm, can I step out, next to you?

:shrug:

[brentspeak]

61. Isn't this like the hundreth time on DU that you said something like that?

I'm surprised you didn't use this occasion to once again smear Edwards.

[The Count]

93. Actually, it's the first - and it's interesting that the guy who says "who cares"

is monitoring me so closely in the name of Edwards. All my posts about him have been factual - not unlike Moveon's ad about Betrayus. Nice straw man, though.

[Greyhound]

45. The replies are not very encouraging are they?

"Go on, we don't need you anyway" is how the Democrats have been losing for 25 years.

Apparently they were the kids on the short bus.

[Gregorian]

48. There is no alternative. It's the best you have.

At least until the system supports more than two parties.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

58. As the Democrats fail to tackle the most important issues of the day,

they should carefully study the history of the Whig Party.

[Gregorian]

86. My god, I'm ignorant.

I actually had no idea they existed. My interests have been far from politics up until this administration. I got A's in math, and D's in history. So did my dad. I think it's genetic.

And they had presidents in office!

Thanks for the prod. And besides, maybe it's time to start working for more than two parties. I have always thought it would be better. But from threads I've seen on the subject, I know it's more complex than it seems on first thought.

[RufusTFirefly]

50. Misson Accomplished -- Ad's allegations get lost in the shuffle

Hard to believe that Rove is gone.

[Hydra]

82. Rove never left

In this admin, you can "leave" when you're tired of taking public flak, and keep your office and your salary.

I have to say that it's disgusting how many "centerists" and "politically informed" would be happy to see lefties like myself go from the party, or at the least, shut up and give them my vote.

Where did these people come from???

[The Count]

95. Bingo - as * was playing the same card : "Democrats are more afraid of offending Moveon than

the troops" Now Betrayus = the troops.

[Hydra]

96. And Patraeus never fudged the facts, did he?

If he had, the Dems never would have censured MoveOn. So he spoke perfect truth, right? :sarcasm:

[GliderGuider]

55. from Wednesday's toons

Need I say more?

[Maine-ah]

63. the whole thing is just a waste of time

they shouldn't have even been voting on this.

how many people are dying daily in Iraq? And the critters acutally thought this was important?

[Vinca]

68. I realize the ledge is getting filled, but the alternative to Democrats

really is a whole lot worse (if there's a President Giuliani, I'm a Canadian). I'd suggest we work on finding vertebrate candidates in the future, but it seems there's something in Washington that sucks the spine right out of them. We have to get a nonfilibusterable (is that a word?) supermajority.

[orleans]

69. GET OFF THE FUCKING LEDGE! n/t

[progressoid]

73. [yawn]

Go ahead, jump.

That'll show 'em.

[jackster]

78. I just went and donated to moveon.org

and after hearing that my beloved senators Kerry and Kennedy stood with the truth, I'll be calling them to say thanks.

Don't know if I'm still on the ledge. Maybe it's more like a fence right now, but I'm still perched up there and can't decide what to do. I've loved and worked for this party my whole life and can't imagine being anything other than a Democrat. But this was never about that damn ad, it was about the Republicans setting the tone and framing the message, and being able to use the media to reach their "base" and now they've won another round.

I'm just heartsick.

I don't know, between this and the Red Sox tanking as usual in September, I just need to get a grip!

[loudsue]

88. So which side of this did hillary & obama come down on?

I'd really like to know.

[jackster]

89. on the vote?

They both voted Nay I believe.

The surprise to me was Leahy voting with the 'thugs!

[jackster]

91. Obama didn't vote I hear now....

n/t

[The Count]

94. Was he in the room? Biden?

[EVDebs]

79. There's no safety net with the GOP, come to the progressive side and there is one ! nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

80. I'm a registered Dem (since '65) but they don't own my vote.

In 2006 I voted for the most progressive, anti-war, candidates on the ballot without regard to party.

They need to be reminded that their votes influence my votes.

[Kceres]

98. Just as soon as I remove my head from the oven.