I'm now completely done being amazed.

[MadHound]

Back when NAFTA first went through, I was amazed at the number of Democrats who didn't see what was coming, and were actually supportive of a policy that killed the manufacturing sector and impoverished a large portion of its constituents, namely the union members who were in the manufacturing sector. Likewise, I was amazed at the number of Democrats who were in favor of cutting the social safety net, which again did much harm to a large segment of its constituents. This amazement was also my reaction as Democrats supported the '96 Telecom Act and the repeal of Glass-Steagal, again, policies that harmed the constituency of the Democratic party.

Why would a Democratic Administration push through policies that caused such harm to the very people it claimed to represent?

This continued, to a lesser extent, under Bushboy, with prominent Democrats voting for such destructive policies as the IWR and the Patriot Act. I wasn't terribly amazed in 2006 when Pelosi took impeachment off the table, after all, it had become glaringly obvious that somewhere in the past twenty years, Democrats had lost their spine to fight, to do what was right.

Then we came to the Obama administration, and from the get go, I really wasn't expecting much. Despite him being a much vaunted liberal, it was clear, even from early in his first presidential run, that he was little more than another Third Way Democrat. While it disappointed and infuriated me that Obama expanded the surveillance state, yanked the public option, extended the Bush tax cuts, and continues to conduct illegal, immoral military actions.

Now, even though Obama has mounted an offensive against the bedrock policies of the Democratic party, SS, Medicare and Medicaid, I am neither shocked, surprised or amazed. That is because it has become obvious that today's Democratic party is not the same Democratic party of even thirty years ago, much less the Democratic party of my father and grandfather.

This Democratic party is corporately corrupted, and is nothing more than another puppet in this mummer show of politics. It is no longer a party of the people, but rather a party of the wealthy and elite. Sure, it continues to mouth polite bromides about helping the people, but looking at its record, it becomes obvious that the Democratic party is much more interested in helping out the one percent.

Thus, we must face the cold hard truth, that we the people no longer have a party that represents us. We have a party that is openly hostile in the Republicans, and another party that wants to keep us pacified while the elite drain us dry in the Democratic party. It is time to alleviate that situation, one way or another, otherwise we will all wind up simply being corporate serfs.

One thing that does still amaze me is how many people still defend the Democratic party, despite the events of the past twenty five years. That people can be so blind, so stubborn to not see or acknowledge what is before their very eyes, that's amazing. It amazes me that people defend an illegal, immoral drone program, that they defend a military policy that is going to keep troops in Afghanistan for another eleven years, that they defend a record on civil liberties that rivals Bushboy's. That they defend cuts to bedrock Democratic programs such as SS, Medicare and Medicaid, many times using RW talking points. What's next, defense of the Keystone Pipeline when it goes through? At that point, I probably won't be amazed any more, just sad that so many people have put party over people for so long that they've lost their way.

[Arkansas Granny]

1. K&R.

[SidDithers]

2. "It is time to alleviate that situation, one way or another,"

'I'm not saying don't vote for Democrats, but here's how evil and corrupt they are. But I'm not saying don't vote for them'

Spell it out, MadHound. Courage of your convictions.

Sid

[Arctic Dave]

9. I think he saying to actually vote for Democrats.

Not these shitty DLCer repug lites with a D behind their names.

If they are DLC then they are not Democrats but a repug doing a bamboozle on you.

[SidDithers]

18. Yeah. That's exactly what he's saying...

Sid

[Arctic Dave]

28. I know it must be hard for you to know that your DLC buddies aren't all that.

Buck up camper, I'm sure you'll find another to fawn over.

[sabrina 1]

19. You're not very good at this, Sid, which I believe you have been told before no?

Here's how we in the US Democratic Party intend to alleviate it. We will not ever again vote for Third Way/Right Wing infiltrators because we will no longer be depending on the Party which has been seriously infiltrated, to choose our candidates for us.

We intend to clear out the right wing imposters in OUR Party now that the situation has become crystal clear. We waited too long, but Bush fear had a lot to do with that and living on 'hope' and 'anyone but Bush' etc.

Now all that is over, there is no more doubt among Democrats, REAL Democrats about the facts of the matter.

Surely you did not think that we American Democrats, some of the toughest people around, were ever going to concede OUR Party to the right wingers who have crept into it??


Omg, that is hilarious!


You constantly misread and then foolishly misrepresent Democrats here. How can you be so wrong all the time? Maybe pay more attention to the Left in this country. THEY are the ones who fought for and won every major battle for rights and for people here.

The Left took a break, hoping for the best, but now we are ENERGIZED and huge coalitions are forming here in the US to take this party back out of the hands of the Wall St creation known as the Third Way, basically right wingers who never belonged in this party.

Imagine anyone thinking that we would hand this party over to the Right!!

We have a third party here. It has attached itself like a leech to the Democratic Party.

We are going to remove it. That is what was meant by that statement.

Your comment is hilarious. The Left, give up their own Party??? Whatever made you think that?

[SidDithers]

22. Voluminous...nt

Sid

[sabrina 1]

23. It wasn't meant for you Sid!!

We know you don't read more than, what was it, two lines??

I use posts like yours for people who do read more than two lines. So thanks for the opportunity once again.

[nashville_brook]

27. [phone]

[Marr]

32. +1

[magellan]

53. Exactly!

"We have a third party here. It has attached itself like a leech to the Democratic Party."

Amazing how its proponents like to make out they're the host.

[99Forever]

40. Just when I think someone can't be become...

... more ridiculous and less relevant, they up and prove me wrong.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

3. K&R

[Populist_Prole]

4. Sad, but you're right

We didn't leave the party. Party left us.

[forestpath]

6. +1

[zeemike]

12. I think it more accurate to say

That is was a hostile takeover by moneyed interest.
And there will be a golden parachute when the DLCers retire...lots of positions open up in corporate America for them.

[byeya]

15. I think you are correct. Look how rich Clinton has gotten since retirement. Clinton started as a

progressive governor of AR, got defeated and came back as a DLCer. He learned who had the most butter for his bread.

[Art_from_Ark]

65. Yeah, the Bill Clinton who ran for Congress (1974), attorney general (1976) and governor (1978)

turned into a different type of Democrat in the '80s. I do think that he still had a bit of liberalism in him in his first two years as President, but the loss of the House in the '94 elections, just like the Reagan landslide of 1980, seems to have led him astray from his traditional democratic values *sigh*

[forestpath]

5. K&R

[Armstead]

7. I agree with most of that -- But there are exceptions

Sadly, I share many of the feelings you express above.

I am f'in sick of so -called Democratic leadership that has been pulling the country in the same direction that the GOP has been pulling on the issues that really matter regarding wealth and power.

It's very clear that Third Way, centrist....whatever you want to call them....Democrats are just slightly kinder and gentler Republicans.

However there are still many GOOD Liberal/Progressive Populist Democrats who do deserve support. In addition to the more visible progressives in Congress, I would also include several "moderate liberal" Democratic Congress critters in the House and Senate. They are not firebreathers in their style, but they reliably for the most part support and try to advance a solid set of liberal/progressive policies.

Those are the types of Democrats that still deserve support, and we need to find and support more like them. That may turn the party back on a better course.

[kentuck]

20. I think too many on our side was too quiet and accepting as our Party moved to the right...

In fact, an argument could be made that it is the left that is mostly responsible for the political environment we find ourselves in today. We offered little criticism because we thought it might prevent the Democrat from winning the next election and then the next election after that...

We should have been much more vocal. Not only would it have prevented the Democratic Party from moving to the right, it would probably have prevented the Republican Party from moving as far to the right as they moved. We are now paying the price for our silence and acceptance.

[Laelth]

52. Interesting hypothesis. Thanks. n/t

-Laelth

[ljm2002]

8. It's all about the incentives...

...and the incentives right now push all of our politicians into groveling for money for at least half their working hours, and also into looking out for where they can land once they're out of office.

Until we fix that, we're screwed.

I don't see how we fix it though. The politicians are entrenched into the system as it is (see "It's all about the incentives&quot . The Supreme Court wants to increase the influence of big $$ donors in politics, rather than decrease it. Most people don't look that closely into the system, and if you criticize the overall system what they hear is "America bad" and they tune it out. Yet if you talk to regular people, on various parts of the political spectrum, about our politicians in DC, most will agree they don't give a rat's patootie for you or for me, they're beholden to the moneybags.

So how do we fix it? I really, really wish I had any idea, but I must confess I do not.

[A Simple Game]

11. A good start toward fixing it would be to bring them home. There is no longer a reason

for our Representatives and Senators to be in Washington full time. Bring them home where they have to face the people they represent and the people can watch what they do. Go to dinner with a lobbyist? The people would know.

[ljm2002]

14. It's an interesting thought...

...in this day and age they can certainly use videoconferencing to meet and things like that. Although one might argue they will lose a lot of collegiality. I know I always got value out of going to the office and being with coworkers in person. When I worked remotely, a lot of that was lost.

On the other hand, if our representatives had to stay close to home, it would also mean the lobbyists' power would be diluted, since they'd have to have reps in all 50 states rather than concentrated in DC. And as you say, they would be closer to us and therefore we would be able to monitor their actions more.

But I think the real solution is limiting the amount of money that can be spent on campaigns, and closing the revolving door by having a clause where a member of the House or Senate cannot go to work for any industry they took money from, or regulated, for 10 years after they leave office.

[A Simple Game]

33. Losing their collegiality would be a good thing, they are elected to represent us, not each other.

Their collegiality needs to be with the people they represent. They could also spend more time with their families, that often seems to be a problem. Your other ideas are good and I support them except I would modify the last one, if I were to decide they could never work for anyone they took money from, directly or indirectly. They are there to represent us, not benefit themselves.

Campaign reform could also start with only money from your own state or district. If you can't vote for the person, you can't give them money. Let the Koch brothers screw with their own Representative and Senators and leave the rest alone.

[ljm2002]

46. I like the idea of money only from those who can vote for you...

...I hate, hate, hate it when out-of-state groups pour money into electing candidates or into statewide referendums. Stay in your own damned state!

[A Simple Game]

47. And corporations can't vote. n/t

[DFW]

74. Really?

I gave money to Elizabeth Warren, Tammy Baldwin, Mazie Hirono, Bernie Sanders, and many others outside of Texas.

You'd forbid me to do that? I'm not a "group," but I'm someone who cares plenty about the makeup of our Congress. If I think someone is progressive enough to inspire me to a contribution, I'll continue to do so.

Stay in my own damned state of Texas? A fat lotta good that does these days. I'm giving to DFA, too, to try to change that, but I'm not gonna sit idly by and watch people like Tammy Baldwin lose close races because she's not from Texas.

[CrispyQ]

80. Agreed.

My weak dem senators will never get a dime of my money & my rep is safe, so I send my contribution dollars to races in other states, in support of liberals.

[ljm2002]

83. Good points all...

...and I've given to out of state candidates too. But if the laws were changed across the board so that there were strict monetary limits on campaigns and no one could give from out of state then it would even out.

I know that the Citizens United ruling also gives unions a bit more power to contribute to candidates of their choice, just like does corporations in general. But that doesn't mean I like the ruling.

However, you are correct, there are always wider effects and often unintended consequences. That's why the law itself tends to a cautious approach rather than encouraging sudden sweeping changes. I had not considered our own out of state contributions when talking about this. That's what's great about having wider discussions isn't it -- we have to hear what others have to say and may (hopefully) learn or be reminded of a thing or two along the way!

[caseymoz]

10. There were a lot of people who benefited in the 90s.

I'll admit I was taken in by NAFTA. We had been exposed to the RW media for a decade by then, people were beginning to buy the theory that taking down tariffs were a good thing.

However, I never liked the Telecom Act, and I hated Welfare "reform."

But you have to see, in the 90s things were booming, and many people became convinced that technology had overcome the "old" rules of economics. They also bought into lies like their going into debt was actually serving a national interest by supporting the economy. The generation had been sold on that. There was a lack of any concern for personal economy. Our healthcare system hadn't grown too rotten yet. Ayn Rand's philosophy and radio talk show hosts held a great sway. That's my memory of the zeitgeist of the 90s.

When times boom, people lose touch with what is real and become susceptible to being misguided by propaganda. It's called giddiness.

[Armstead]

21. It would be great if we were ever capable of balance

In the 90's it was very frustrating that the economic "boom" made people blind to underlying problems.

Rising housing values also meant unaffordable housing for many, as an example. But nobody else cared.

THen after the crash of 08 there was plenty of affordable housing -- But fewer people could even afford that.

It would sure be wonderful if society were able to have a healthy economy but also have a social conscience.

[walkerbait41]

13. +2

Well said

[woo me with science]

16. A cold blast of truth.

[Fuddnik]

17. Kick and Rec!

[cantbeserious]

24. Agree Completely - The DLC Third Way Has Destroyed The Democratic Party

eom

[sabrina 1]

29. Yes, they are Wall St creation intended to do just what they have done. Wall HAD the Republican

Party but they needed both parties to get done what they wanted to get done. So the invented this 'Third Way' bullshit, people who don't care one way or the other about issues like abortion, so they can use them to pretend to be Democrats. But they are NOT, they are Republicans who want to turn the Democratic Party into Republican lite, with just enough difference, on abortion, eg, to fool other democrats into thinking they belong in this party. They do not and we need to start clearing them out now.

[cantbeserious]

31. Agreed - The Democratic Party Needs A Purging To Drive The DLC Types Back To The Republicans

eom

[valerief]

25. Yep, it's all Bullshit Theater. nt

[libodem]

26. Ah, come on

Now, you are sounding just like my boyfriend. Damn, you guys. He has a problem with both parties and doesn't want to vote for either one, although he leans liberal and labor.

[GeorgeGist]

66. Smart boyfriend.

You? Not so much.

[libodem]

79. Snort

Hee hee.You're right.

[Life Long Dem]

30. You forgot to mention

That Jimmy Carter did the same thing in 1977

"Carter" made an adjustment to the CPI in "1977". House, Senate, and Presidency, were all controlled by Democrats.

Lawrence O'Donnell talked about this the other night, and said he said "been there done that" already. He said Reagan, Clinton. and Nixon as well.

[duffyduff]

41. And you forget this

From Barack Obama:

But he framed the economic recovery efforts more broadly, saying it is impossible to separate the country's financial ills from the long-term need to rein in health-care costs, stabilize Social Security and prevent the Medicare program from bankrupting the government.

"This, by the way, is where there are going to be very difficult choices and issues of sacrifice and responsibility and duty," he said. "You have to have a president who is willing to spend some political capital on this. And I intend to spend some."

Obama is not the first incoming president to make bold declarations about overhauling the nation's retirement and health-care systems. Both Bill Clinton and George W. Bush made similar vows.

And this beaut:

That discussion will begin next month, Obama said, when he convenes a "fiscal responsibility summit" before delivering his first budget to Congress. He said his administration will begin confronting the issues of entitlement reform and long-term budget deficits soon after it jump-starts job growth and the stock market.

"What we have done is kicked this can down the road. We are now at the end of the road and are not in a position to kick it any further," he said. "We have to signal seriousness in this by making sure some of the hard decisions are made under my watch, not someone else's."

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2009-01-16/politics/36899872_1_barack-obama-key-economic-priority-items-entitlement-reform


Don't sit there and try and confuse the issue by saying Carter did the same thing. He didn't. Carter didn't go around thinking Social Security ought to be "reformed." Obama has.

[johnnyreb]

34. K&R clean house

...as but one small part of the war Bernie Sanders called for.

Real Dems only... Money Out Of Politics ... the return of Shame and Honor as values...wholesale-priced Pitchforks.... tar and feather distribution networks....

[DarkLink]

35. The way to stop this mess is to arrest CONgress

I thought I was done being amazed too until I read the news this morning...

'Congress Repeals Financial Disclosure Requirements For Senior U.S. Officials'
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014452676

This coming after the info a few days ago
Fed Sends Insider Info to Goldman Sachs, Barclays, JP Morgan, CITI, HSBC, UBS and Congress!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022650050

They are cashing in on insider trading right in front of our faces

[sabrina 1]

38. Unbelievable. Thanks for the links. And these are the people we are supposed to trust with

our affairs.

[CrispyQ]

72. I read this news yesterday & had to walk away from the computer for awhile,

lest my blood pressure shot to an unacceptable level. They are taking down the scenery.

"The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it's profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery..."

~Zappa

TPTB are very happy to watch the distraction over our 2nd amendment rights, as they dismantle our 4th & 5th amendment rights. When they lock you* up without due process, how the hell are your guns going to protect you then? Oh yeah, that's right. Your guns are going to keep the feds from getting you & locking you up.


* The generic you, not personal you, DL.

[DhhD]

36. Democracy. Where has representing the People, gone to?

http://americablog.com/2012/05/pete-petersen-hosts-bill-clinton-paul-ryan-simpson-van-hollen-to-discuss-social-security-compromise.html

[DhhD]

37. Wall Street.

[sabrina 1]

39. Who elected Pete Petersen to anything? Why are our elected officials asking for the advice

on SS from one of its most infamous enemies??? Disgusting, it gets worse every day.

[dawg]

69. Corporations *are* people, my friend.

[Utopian Leftist]

42. Change will come, but not without an epic fight.

It will all depend on how many Americans can be brought to the streets.

Meanwhile, all progressives should join forces with those who are calling for a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United and reverse corporate personhood. The other significant effort going on is the fight for publicly-funded elections. Without getting the money out of politics, the only other solution is revolution.

[AzDar]

43. K & R

[Spitfire of ATJ]

44. What are we getting in return?

We sell out a basing principle and their side is expected to do the same.

Doesn't happen though. The other side twists everything so we are the bad guys and they are the heroes.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

45. I feel politically homeless

With few exceptions, the Democrats are playing "me too" with the Republicans, and the socialist parties, who are more to my ideological taste, are too caught up in petty squabbles and over-intellectualization to be effective.

[Curmudgeoness]

48. I am started to think that it is us who are out of step.

And that scares the hell out of me. All I ever hear is that I am "too liberal" to be taken seriously. Now I am beginning to feel as if my views and ideals really are the minority views, and no one who I would like would have a prayer of winning an election.

I am not amazed anymore either. But I am beginning to feel beat down.

[Laelth]

55. Don't feel that way.

In poll after poll, the American people have shown a preference for liberal policy on nearly all economic issues and on most social issues. Except on the issue of guns, I'd say most Americans are fairly liberal. On the other hand, the powers that be are, on balance, quite conservative on economic issues, and because they have the power and pull the strings of government, policy in the United States is very conservative on economic issues as well. Our leaders don't seem to care what the people really think.

It is not you who are out of step, it is TPTB (or the American political caste or the 1% or whatever you prefer to call them). It is they who are out of step with America. Sadly, they could care less what we think. There is very little that people or ordinary means can do to hinder them.

-Laelth

[Curmudgeoness]

56. There is not very little we can do IF we would pull together.

And that means all these people you are talking about who prefer liberal policy when asked about specific instances. Right now, they are making every effort to keep us from organizing with each other by starting culture wars between us. I don't know how to get everyone on the same page, but if that happened, we could not be ignored.

[Laelth]

58. It seems to me that the American people are too well-sedated to pull together.

Not only well-sedated, but well-divided too--by design, of course.

I don't see a revolution on the horizon. Much more, if you are interested, here: http://laelth.blogspot.com/2011/01/turning-american-ship-of-state.html

-Laelth

[deutsey]

67. I heard an interview with Chris Hedges on Friday

where he said he did believe something's going to erupt in the coming years as the parasitic practices of the wealthy drain away our future.

However, he wasn't sure if it would be an Occupy-style eruption or a right-wing paramilitary-style eruption. If I remember correctly, he said the left is pretty much destroyed in this country and right is organized, so that's not a good omen.

[Laelth]

70. Quite.

The essay I linked to above explores the rare and short periods in the 20th century when liberal policy directed the Federal Government. It seems that we have three options in order to bring about a leftward shift in government policy: 1) fear of revolution, 2) global depression, and 3) cold war against a leftist superpower. From my point of view, revolution is the least desirable of these three options. Revolutions are bloody, nasty affairs that injure a lot of innocent people. Besides which, their results are very unpredictable and the damage they do is very long-lasting. I suspect that a right-wing revolution in the United States is more likely than a left-wing revolution. Besides which, left-wing revolutions are just as dangerous and destructive as right-wing ones. The Russian Revolution of 1917, which ushered in the U.S.S.R., created a brutally repressive totalitarian state, despite the fact that the new government was founded on lofty, socialist ideals. In sum, if I had my choice of means to bring about fundamental change in our republic, revolution would be my last choice.

A true depression might be the better alternative. A recession is an economic event in which the poor and middle class suffer while the rich make record profits. That's what we have now. A true depression, on the other hand, is an economic event in which the rich suffer too, and, when they do, history shows that they will demand fundamental changes to the system. That, I think, is what we need in order to see a leftward shift in American politics.

Thanks for the reply.

-Laelth

[CrispyQ]

76. You say, "Don't feel that way."

and then you end your post with, "There is very little that people or ordinary means can do to hinder them."

Aren't the polls that show the American people are predominately liberal, conducted, making certain not to use terms like liberal & conservative? Once you throw in descriptives like liberal & progressive, support goes down. ???

The repubs did a great job of demonizing the word liberal & the dems stood silently by, deserting the word, & soon after, the policies. I think there was a combination of fear of being shamed by the repubs, with the help of the bought out media, & the lure of big money. The party has betrayed us. We have a few good liberals, but their voice is not strong enough to be heard over whoever the media wants to give voice to.

Me & a lot of other people are with Curmudgeoness on this - we are feeling beat down.

[Laelth]

78. I feel I have been a bit misunderstood.

All of us on the left should feel beat down. We are, in fact, quite beat down. Our Democratic President is afraid to even appear to be a lefty, much less actually be one. Make no mistake, liberalism is discredited among the American political caste, and that's not likely to change in the near future. We have every right to feel "beat down" as you and Curmudgeoness say.

On the other hand, what I am saying is that we should not believe that our liberal principles are out-of-step with the American people. By and large, the American people are fairly liberal. It is our political caste is out of step with the American people, and the evidence I have seen shows that our political caste doesn't care one bit what the American people think or want. They intend to pursue neo-liberal policy without regard to the wishes, ideals, and desires of the American people.

At present, I see little or nothing that people of ordinary means can do to change this course. I am open to suggestions, of course, but history appears to be against us. From my point of view, nothing is going to change until our oligarchs feel a real and present danger to either their wealth or their lives, and neither of those threats seem immanent at the moment.

-Laelth

[CrispyQ]

82. I agree with every word you say.

I am beat down, but I DO NOT believe that liberal principles are out-of-step with the American people. But how do we get them to see that?

Too many people shut down when policies are advocated as democratic, or worse, liberal. I sent my right wing mother that Joe Conservative essay & asked her what points she took issue with. She never wrote back & when I asked her about it on the phone, she said she didn't know what I was talking about. She was so entrenched in her ideology that she could not & would not see facts.

I would have thought people would be revolting now, having to work three jobs instead of the one we worked 10-15 years ago. Having a mountain of debt for a college degree that gets you a job at McDs. Hoping you & no one in your family gets sick because you have no way to pay for a doctor. Having to train your overseas replacement in order to get your severance package. How do we get through to the people who are living this day to day & still chant, "USA Number One!"? My husband works with a room full of them. My BIL is one.

If it's not bad enough now, I wonder, how bad does it have to get?

Today is a lovely day & my internet time is up!

[Laelth]

84. Sadly, getting ordinary people to "see" the truth is unlikely to change anything.

Our oligarchs don't care what the people think, so enlightening the people accomplishes nothing. Americans are already pretty liberal. It's not the American people we need to convince. Instead, we must convince our oligarchs that reform would be beneficial to them. How to do that is the question that concerns me.



-Laelth

[AAO]

49. MadHound - awesome rant

Agree wholeheartedly!

[bvar22]

50. President Obama may have done us a great favor.

Flushed with recent victories over Organized LABOR and the Grass Roots,
Convinced of his 3rd Way invincibility,
Urged on by the 1% and Wall Street Bankers,
blinded by visions of greatness,
he has reached out and firmly grabbed the 3rd Rail,
and awakened a Sleeping Giant.

May the people responsible for this foolish error spawned by Hubris and Greed,
ALL pay the prescribed political price
that has been etched in the Democratic Party cornerstone since FDR.


[font color=firebrick size=3][center]The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR. [/font][/center]
[/center]

[font size=4 color=firebrick]
Solidarity99![/font]

[Laelth]

51. Perhaps the Democratic Party has never really represented the people?

It is possible, after all, that ours is (and always has been) a nation of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich. No reason to be particularly disgusted with the Democratic Party if one assumes it has always played good cop/bad cop to advance the interests of the 1%.

More here: http://laelth.blogspot.com/2011/01/turning-american-ship-of-state.html

-Laelth

[Zorra]

54. The only solution is world revolution.

It's not just a slogan.

[L0oniX]

57. You forgot to add his "open and transparent government" and anti DC lobbiest business as usual...

load of hot campaign portapotty crap.

"My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government."

Yea ok ...tell that to Wikileaks and Bradly ....also many journalists are being intimidated and threatened. <--- heard this on an NPR interview with a journalist.

[radiclib]

59. K&R TIMES INFINITY!

In the past few years, this place that has championed progressive ideals since the stolen election of 2000 has become infested with people who think that the D in DU means unquestioning loyalty to party. It's a damn shame.

[im1013]

60. K&R!

Couldn't have said it better!

[Teamster Jeff]

61. K&R

[Phlem]

62. Perfect!

I've told people Obama's turned me into an Independent and of course you can play what's going on in your head. It's pretty accurate.

This isn't the first time I've said the Democrats have moved the right but what do you do when know one is listening?

Say it again I guess.

This is all political theater and we're all being played. There is no left or right, there is just greed and power.



-p

[JDPriestly]

63. K&R.

[hay rick]

64. Bleak.

True. K&R.

[eridani]

68. The only thing for it is for progressives to learn how to win more primaries

The Teahadists, after all, took over the Repukes in only a couple of cycles. To be sure, there is no progressive equivalent of the Koch brothers, but there is modern information technology and lots of shoe leather.

[Sekhmets Daughter]

71. The Democratic Party has become a party of mouth breathers....

How else to explain the way we ignored the stench coming from the rotting corpses of our principles and ideals?

[Carolina]

73. Bravo, Madhound, K&R

The only person in DC who consistently and vociferously speaks for the people is Independent Bernie Sanders.

The current Democratic Party and its titular head, Obama, the Grand Betrayer are worthless tools.

[Overseas]

75. K&R. Very well said from my perspective.

[CrispyQ]

77. I've gone from completely amazed to completely disgusted.

I wrote to my two weak dem senators & ok rep, twice this past week. Friday I told them that THEY better call the president & tell him to stop talking this chained CPI crap, or I was not going to show up at the polls in 14 or 16. The barely-ok senator is up in 14 & the crappy one is up in 16.

I also asked why no one is mentioning the progressive caucus budget, since we are, after all, Democrats & progressive, aren't we?

I feel really good that my correspondence is going to make a difference.

[MannyGoldstein]

81. K&R. Because its the plain truth.

For decades, some folks have watched in amazement as the Doormat Democrats enabled the Third Way at every turn.

"NAFTA will be fine! Bank deregulation will be fine!"

And here we are.

[Laelth]

85. Oh, and don't forget the classic, "We can fix it later."

None of the disastrous legislation to which liberals objected has been "fixed." Here we are, indeed.

-Laelth