Are blue dogs literally Republicans masquerading as Democrats??

[TheCoxwain]

are they, in reality, pukes who have infiltrated the democratic ranks inorder to disrupt our agenda ..

[valerief]

1. Does the Pope wear a skirt? YES! nt

[stray cat]

2. So Bill Clinton is the same as W? conservative states don't elect flaming democrats

[TheCoxwain]

3. I am willing to concede that they might have a different position on certain social issues - but the

vigor and urgency with which these bastards are fighting our own initiatives after a hard fought election - is giving me serious pause..


Who are these people and why do they have (D) next to their name???

[Echo In Light]

5. The vitriol created over 'social' issues is what they want as it masquerades uniformity re business

....convergant interests, and maintaining the National $ecurity State ruse.

[Individualist]

7. ...

"The Democratic Leadership Council's agenda is indistinguishable from the Republican Neoconservative agenda," - Dennis Kucinich

[Echo In Light]

12. Good ol DK!

[JitterbugPerfume]

4. Democrats in conservative states

have to walk a thin line

[trotsky]

6. Yes, exactly.

But rather than acknowledge electoral realities, it's easier to just demonize them and say they're the problem, right? :)

[damntexdem]

8. No, they're slimy Dems who are worse than Republicans.

[Orsino]

9. Not literally...but they are bought with the same money. n/t

[aikoaiko]

10. No.

No conspiracy.

[brooklynite]

11. in a word, no

Not all Democrats are progressives (myself included) or even liberals. There's still a lot of distance between that and Republican orthodoxy. More centrist or even conservative Democratic voters are not going to vote for a Dennis Kucinich for Congress, but they might vote for a "Blue Dog" if the alternative is an even more conservative Republican.

[onenote]

13. obviously not.

Given that not a single House repub voted for the recovery act and around 75% of the blue dogs did vote for it, its pretty clear that there are distinctions between repubs and blue dogs.

That said, I don't agree with the blue dogs positions on various issues, but as the vote on the recovery act proves, we're better off with them than with repubs.

[BlooInBloo]

14. Check out their voting records at a site like progressivepunch.com .

[mwb970]

15. They could be a nascent third party.

At this point, the Democrats are center-left, the Blue Dogs are center-right, and the republicans are batshit crazy. Which two groups would make for the best two-party system?

[moondust]

16. GOP refugees.

Beware the Arlen Specters of the world trying to save their own hides but remain essentially loyal to conservatism (whatever that is nowadays--obstructionism).

[warren pease]

17. Why do they even bother continuing the pretense...

...that they have anything whatsoever to do with a party allegedly grounded in human rights, labor rights, women's rights, the right of the peasantry to lead lives of dignity and at least the illusion of upward mobility? In other words, progressive values.

They're about as progressive as a sheet of plywood, and far less useful.

I suppose it's because almost nobody can get elected with that little "R" after their name dragging them into the 12th century. But if that's true, why then do these "D" obstructionist assholes insist on adopting positions and voting in patterns that make them indistinguishable from their soul mates across the aisle?

If it's nearly impossible to get elected running as an "R" these days, and yet they fake their "D" credentials and pile right on the wingnut bandwagon as soon as they hit D.C., doesn't anybody notice? What do they tell their constituents at their town hall meetings? Do they think they were sent to D.C. to vote with the asshole contingent?

Just curious. Fortunately, I've never had to deal with one of these scammers, although Earl Blumenauer here in Portland comes close. He's mostly just an ineffectual twit marking time and accumulating seniority. At least he's not a militant obstructionist like many of the southern Running Dogs.

And while we're at it, screw a bunch of colors and cute little epithets that serve to excuse their behavior. Just call them useless cowards and reactionaries. That's what they are and they need to be labeled accordingly.

And as usual, DK nails them cold. The DLC and the GOP are indistinguishable.


sf

On edit: tpyos

[lurky]

18. Baucus and Nelson are doing everything

they can to embarrass the Democratic party, undermine the Obama presidency, and derail every initiative by the Dems in congress. They are actively and loudly working against the party across the board. Typically, a moderate Dem from a conservative district will have a few issues or bills where they will quietly deviate from the party. These guys, especially Baucus, are acting like a fifth column.

Does that mean they were elected as some kind of Republican sleeper cell? I doubt it. I think it's more likely that they saw how well it worked out for Lieberman to attack his own party and hold the congress hostage. Rather than hurt Lieberman, it vastly increased his power and prominence. Another example is Pedro Espada from the New York state senate, who defected to the Republicans in the "Albany Coup" a few months ago and then back to the Democrats. He managed to throw the state into chaos and derail a lot of important legislation. His punishment? They made him Senate Majority leader.

The lesson is clear: Being an obstructionist and playing both sides can be very rewarding.

[quiller4]

19. Not just no. HELL NO! Republicans in those districts are radically

anti-labor. Some Blue Dogs have better labor records than some progressives. That is a key difference.

[closeupready]

20. No, I just think they are crooks, who have been bought off

by moneyed interests.

[harun]

21. No, they certainly are not what Pukes have become.

Both parties have been moving to the Right for years. Pukes went so far Right they went Fascist. There was room in the Dem party for some normal fiscally conservative non-bat sh*t crazy pro-corporate peeps. That is what they are.